Euphemistic reframing of abuse as atypical can enable institutional inaction.

Evidence

When questioned about why a priest who forced an altar boy to have oral and anal sex was not removed from the parish ministry, Lynn displayed striking indifference to the abused child (Warner, 2012a). He provided the odd justification that the abusing priest was also having sex with a woman, so he was “not a pure pedophile” (Warner, 2012b). The willful disregard for victimized minors in this tragedy is further shown in priests’ justifications for not reporting the sexual crimes to law-enforcement officials. Church lawyers told them they did not have to because they were not legally obligated to do so or because the statute of limitations had expired (Rogers, 2012). — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement, 498

Categorization

• XREF: The ‘not a pure pedophile’ rationalization is a memorable instance of euphemistic labeling — connects to Bandura’s earlier discussion of moral justification and advantageoust comparison mechanisms. — connects to: Power induces cognitive dissonance that makes its own abuse unreal to victims — Mark Fisher, Ghosts of My Life: Writings on…, 210; Academic objectification tolerates abuse as long as the mind functions — bell hooks, Teaching to Transgress: Education as…, 45
• SEED: The ‘not a pure pedophile’ defense is a shocking, quote-ready entry point for an article on how institutions construct partial-victim hierarchies to rationalize inaction.