Was this just a backrub? part 2

At the same time that I posted yesterday's story and question below, I sent it to D in an e-mail. The substance of her answer agreed with all the responses I got here, but the tone was far more urgent. She wrote as follows:

Hosea, any court I've worked for would consider the behavior you describe as totally inappropriate -- wildly so -- and any lawyer with training in sexual matters would consider the request part of an attempt to groom the child for further sexualized behavior. That may ultimately be with the groomer, or with other partners the groomer arranges for the child. Hosea, you MUST intervene here and insist that all touching behaviors without clothes on (and I'd suggest that neither child or adult should appear without clothes in front of the other after eight or nine) -- particularly by the adult, but also for the child -- be avoided. Boundaries! It's not a matter of being a sexual prude -- I'm not -- but there is a world of research that suggests that family dynamics involving sexuality are highly charged in our society. Ask yourself -- if Son 2 talked about his behavior with his mother with friends or teachers (the teachers would be required by law to contact the authories. Absolutely. I would if a child told me what you described. I'd be fired in a heartbeat if this came out in court and it was clear I had not notified the authorities.), would he be ridiculed or feel embarrassed when he found that his friends had no such experiences? If the answer is yes -- and it is -- then it's inappropriate, and any court would consider it damaging to the child and want it to stop. Lotion? Come on, Hosea. I use it every day and have never asked a child to apply it. This isn't something done for her because she's ill, it's for low level sexual gratification, those "little grey areas" you once humorously mentioned, but there is nothing remotely funny about this behavior. By allowing it to be continue you can be held for 'neglect', for failing to stop something you knew was happening and should have known was harmful for the child. She could be charged with 'abuse' , the most serious charge, and risk losing her child. Scary? Yes. Professionally accurate? Yes again. Do something -- today -- and make it stick.

I think we have lots to discuss. Thank you for asking for my view. I realize I sound harsh, but if you could see my face and feel my hands touching yours with compassion, you'd realize that I saw a whole lot in the five years I was a GAL [Guardian ad litem], and nothing you describe is new to me. That said, I also know the consequences, and how difficult it is for the child to deal with the shame and confusion such blurred boundaries present. I have every reason to believe you will protect your children -- just do it.

Wow.

None of the comments I got yesterday were quite as intense, but everybody expressed discomfort with the story. This reassured me, because I felt discomfort too. That's why I asked the question. And here's what I did:

My very first reaction was not to know quite what to do, so I tried calling D -- even though it was an unexpected time, and a great essay on how not to get busted says never to call at unexpected times. But my call rolled directly into D’s voice mail, from which I deduced either that she was on the phone or that she had shut your phone off. However, I took seriously her injunction that this could not wait, and so I decided to wing it.

My next step was to take Son 2 for a walk. He asked "Am I in trouble?" and I assured him that he absolutely was not. But I asked him about lotioning Wife's front, and had he done this before? He said quite clearly that he had done it only once before last night (for a total of twice ever). The first time, it was at Wife's instigation or suggestion. The second time (that would have to mean last night) it was his idea, "Because I know that area builds up a lot of dead, dry skin, and lotion is the best way to get rid of dead skin." But why did I ask? I have to admit I stammered a bit while trying to figure out the right way to put it; but finally I just pointed out that a woman's breasts are part of the private areas of her body, and ....

Well, I got no farther than that and Son 2 shot ahead of me down the sidewalk. He was plainly either embarrassed or ashamed. When I caught up with him, he said "So I am in trouble!" And I had to take some time to explain to him that no, he wasn't in trouble. Yes, it was inappropriate for him to be lotioning Wife's breasts; yes, if he mentioned that to one of his friends or teachers, they would probably get upset. But no, that didn't mean that he was at fault! How could he be, if no-one had ever taught him that it was inappropriate? Could he explain the Pythagorean Theorem if nobody ever taught it to him? I just wanted to explain this to him now, so that he would understand and there wouldn't be an issue later. We ended up talking far longer about why I wasn't mad at him, than about why he shouldn't lotion Wife's breasts. But in the end, I think he understood both points.

Next, I went to talk to Wife. She was lying down, back in the bedroom. "So, did you and Son 2 have a nice walk?"

"Yes, we did. I was talking to Son 2 about lotioning your front last night."

Click. I could almost see and hear her defenses falling into place.

"So you told him all about why he's not supposed to do that?"

"No, I really didn't have to explain that at all. When I pointed out that breasts are a private part of the body, he understood immediately and was very embarrassed. Or ashamed. Most of what I had to explain to him was that it wasn't his fault."

Wife said very little to that, and indeed said almost nothing throughout the "discussion". I used the example of a daughter, and pointed out that if, hypothetically, we had a ten year old daughter who had been lotioning me when I was stark naked, all it would have taken is one phone call by Wife to make sure I never saw my children again. Of course Wife told me that her intentions had not been sexual. Rather than contradicting her (which would mean either telling her she was lying, or telling her she didn't understand her own motives -- and I didn't look forward to either of those discussions), I added simply that the intentions of a man being lotioned by his daughter might not start off sexual either ... but then suddenly instead of being 10 she's 14, and things spiral out of control. Wouldn't she be alarmed if I allowed a daughter to lotion me while I was naked?

She said that she didn't know ... that it was hard to put herself in that situation.

Privately I think that means just that she didn't want to accept the obvious implications, but I didn't say that. What I said was, "Are you sure? Don't you think you would actually say 'Hey, stop! I've been a victim of sexual abuse, so I know that it starts slow and subtle! I know that it starts with things that look like they might be innocent! But I also know that's not where it ends, and I'm not going to let my daughter suffer the same way I suffered!' Wouldn't you say that instead?"

She was resolutely silent to that question.

Since Wife was clearly not going to engage in the conversation, I just wrapped it up by repeating the basic idea why this behavior looks so inappropriate, and by reminding her that I had already explained it to Son 2. I hope this is enough. Knowing how embarrassed Son 2 gets at the slightest mention of romance or sex, I think it may be.

You know, I'm sure that in Wife's conscious mind, there was no sexual intention. But I think her conscious mind is not the whole story. For years, Wife has been very jealous of her relationship with Son 2; for years she has cultivated it, and I have always had a general unease that she has trouble knowing where to put the boundaries. (I mean, I think that boundaries have often been a problem for Wife in general; but I think the problem is more pronounced in her relationship with Son 2 than in almost any other.) Partly, this may be a result of her own sexual abuse when she was a girl ... what I have read suggests to me that those who were abused are often foggier on what is an appropriate boundary than those who were not. But I think another part of it is just that Wife is so desperately hungry for love (of all forms), but she can't bring herself to ask for (e.g.) physical love from me. So I think she is trying to fill that hunger with her children, who still love her unconditionally and from whom she is still willing to accept love. It's not a pretty situation, but I think that may be part of it.