Inside the paedophile’s playbook — understanding grooming to keep children safer

Inside the paedophile’s playbook — understanding grooming to keep children safer

Many sexual predators confess to using a classic playbook to target, groom and abuse their victims, making them feel powerless and complicit. Understanding it is the key to keeping our children safer.

Warning: This op-ed includes details of sexual abuse against children.

In South Africa, 33.9% of girls and 36.8% of boys have been sexually abused. Although not all abusers are paedophiles, research cited by the Karolinska Institute indicates that paedophiles who target girls have about 25 victims in their lifetime, while those who target boys can have more than 200. Many of these cases go unreported, though, especially when children have been groomed.

In 2010, Oprah Winfrey spoke to four convicted paedophiles about grooming and abuse. They described how they selected their victims, identifying a specific need, either emotional, or because they could help them achieve a goal. They then created trust, isolating their victims, none of whom were strangers, using manipulation (both of the child and their caregivers) and gaslighting to make the child doubt their reality and establish control.

Thereafter, they sexualised the relationship. Beginning with intimacy, they established a “special” relationship, making the child feel seen and heard. Seemingly innocent touches progressed to “accidental” sexual contact, which they used to normalise boundary violations, and finally, more obvious sexual contact.

Using her own experience, Oprah explained how grooming makes a violent act pleasurable to the child, resulting in them feeling both confused and complicit. She described how the child’s body betrays them and how abusers reframe these experiences to make the child believe that if it felt good, it must have been their fault.

As Oprah attests, “sexual abuse changes who you are”.

One of the paedophiles confessed: “I killed who she could have been, I murdered a person. Just because she is still alive today, doesn’t take away from what I have done.”

Breaking down boundaries

Annemarie Gillmer has an intimate understanding of grooming. As someone who has spent her life riding horses, she describes it as the gradual process of breaking down a young horse’s boundaries, making it comfortable with contact so that you can ride it. Nonetheless, admitting that she was groomed from the age of 13 by a man 30 years her senior, a man who decades later she still calls “Oom” (an Afrikaans term of respect for an older man), is much harder. But it was so successful that it has taken her years to recognise that she wasn’t responsible for her own sexual assault and rape.

Annemarie, who recounted her experiences in an interview, began riding at the age of 11 and quickly showed promise. But to her disappointment, her horse was injured the following year and her plan B also fell through when her friend Niels* left home and she could no longer ride his family’s horses. So when Niels’ father, Oom Hendrie*, told her parents that Annemarie was very talented and he’d like to coach her, the family was delighted. Not only could she continue to ride, but Hendrie was a former Springbok rider in the discipline that Annemarie liked most, long-distance endurance riding.

Endurance riding requires three or more hours of training a day, and Hendrie proved very committed, spending hours alone with the little girl.

He also befriended her parents, meeting regularly and even inviting them over for braais to talk about Annemarie’s progress. When their long working hours made getting Annemarie to the stables a challenge, Hendrie offered to fetch her. He was even willing to collect her from school when she had extramurals, explaining that it was warranted because she had so much potential. He kept reinforcing how special Annemarie was and what a gift she had with horses.

Having made her feel significant, he slowly started to cross boundaries. Treating the 13-year-old like a friend, he began confiding in her about troubles in his marriage, problems at work and other adult challenges.

Unlike her previous riding coach, who had explained body position on the horse, Hendrie used touch to correct her riding posture. He’d often rest his hands on her legs, back and bottom to guide them into the right positions, sometimes accidentally (or so it seemed to her) touching her breasts as he did so. He was always apologetic when this happened, so she didn’t think much of it at the time.

After riding, he’d invite her to share a cooldrink with him and stay for a chat before he dropped her off at home. Before long, he began offering her beer instead.

Flattered

Flattered by his attentions and the adult treatment, Annemarie did what she could to help him, including providing intensive nursing to one of his horses suffering from paralysis. A grateful Hendrie responded with gifts, including a CD containing a Don Williams song, “You’re My Best Friend”. The note attached said, “You really are my best friend.”

The relationship became very important to Annemarie. Not only could she confide in Hendrie, but he also began buying her extravagant presents like a new saddle, riding gear and even a young foal. In the space of a year, he became the person she trusted most with every part of her life. When her parents expressed concern about the time they spent together, Hendrie assured them that it was necessary to train, strategise and care for the horses. Annemarie’s progress was evidence that the hard work was paying off.

Infatuated

Despite the enormous age difference, Annemarie soon became infatuated, believing his constant compliments that she was extraordinary and so mature for her age. Nonetheless, he bided his time, waiting until the month before she turned 15 before he kissed her for the first time.

From then it progressed quickly. He gave her another CD containing a song entitled, We Are One in a Million, and that became his slogan for them. The message was, “we are not like other people, we’re elite and different”.

The grooming of her parents was effective, too. When Annemarie was 15, they allowed her to go away for the weekend with Hendrie to stay with a farmer who bred endurance horses. On their arrival, Annemarie realised that the farmer and his wife weren’t there. When she questioned their absence, Hendrie told her that he had planned a romantic weekend for them. They shared a bed, and although there was no penetrative sex, Annemarie says they did “everything else”.

He told her that he couldn’t wait for her to turn 16 because then they could legally have sex, and he could think about leaving his wife and marrying her. But until then, they had to keep their relationship a secret because “no one would understand”.

Their shared focus became the National competition, a prestigious event that they had both qualified for, scheduled for just after her 16th birthday. No one would have questioned Hendrie accompanying her to the three-day endurance ride as coach, chaperone and fellow competitor.

Just before the event, however, Annemarie’s horse was injured, and she was forced to withdraw. It could have been her reprieve. But, intent on being alone with her, Hendrie persuaded her parents that to gain experience, she should attend as part of his support team. He deceived them into believing that his wife would accompany them, and that Annemarie would stay with other female riders. Unknown to them, Annemarie and Hendrie spent the week together in a small caravan.

Rape

It was there that he first raped her. To celebrate, he bought her an event sweater and even gave her a belt buckle with the date of their “first time” engraved on it. Despite thinking she was in love, Annemarie remembers not enjoying the sex. But desperate to please him, and worried he’d think her immature, she concealed her distress.

Thereafter, he expected sex. They’d ride together, then he’d rape her, usually in his bakkie. Looking back, Annemarie recalls a photo taken at the time of a petite teen with braces on her teeth standing next to a man old enough to be her father, a man that she continued to call “Oom” even after they started having sex because, he said, it was how they would “keep their secret”.

It seems alien to her now, but she’s troubled by how convinced she was that they had a relationship. His grooming was so successful that despite the absurdity of the image, she still feels complicit.

Isolated and unable to confide in her parents or friends about what was happening in his bakkie, or the drives to the clinic for emergency contraceptives thereafter, Annemarie watched other children her age date and fall in love, envying the openness and celebratory nature of their relationships. But after the initial thrill of secrecy, accompanied by the conviction that she was loved and that she was the only one who understood him, the certainty that he wanted to start a new life with her began to ebb away, replaced by overwhelming loneliness and loss.

Then came the day when she knew she couldn’t continue. She vividly describes dissociating while they were having sex on the front seat of his bakkie, and the strange sensation of disconnecting from her body, emotionally absent and watching from a distance as he raped her.

Aggressive reaction

In tears, she told him that she wanted to “take a break from the physical stuff”. His reaction took her by surprise. She suddenly saw a side of him previously unimaginable. He was furious. Gone was the understanding and tender partner, replaced by a manipulative and controlling old man. He started yelling, telling her how ungrateful she was. He even threatened to take away her horse, although Annemarie had again qualified for the national competition. The warning was that he would ruin her life if she ended the relationship.

Suddenly scared of him, she capitulated. But a few months later, after she finally rode in the national championships and was awarded provincial colours, she returned his horse. Despite him maligning her to the riding community, calling her unappreciative and incapable of succeeding, she walked away, both from competitive riding and from Hendrie.

Trauma

What followed was years of depression, isolation, panic attacks, self-harm and suicide attempts. Desperate to be in control, she became a perfectionist, but covertly hurt herself, believing that she was a “slut” and deserved to be punished for seducing a married man. She didn’t understand how traumatised she was.

It was only years later when she described the relationship to a university roommate that she understood through her friend’s eyes that she had not consented to the sexual relationship with Hendrie, but had been groomed and raped.

Nonetheless, decades after the event, she still struggles to use those words.

She did, however, send Hendrie a letter a few years ago, confronting him about what he had done, hoping that he would confess or apologise. Instead, he was dismissive, telling her that “no one would ever believe her”. Realising that he had never truly cared was a further blow.

Compounding her pain is her deep regret that she didn’t speak up against him. Years after Annemarie left Hendrie, she made contact with the girl he’d started coaching immediately after her departure (he didn’t waste any time replacing her with another 13-year-old girl), and listened in horror as she described exactly the same grooming techniques, and how Hendrie had kissed her and touched her breasts.

Mercifully, the child’s parents felt uncomfortable and intervened before things progressed any further. But Annemarie wonders how many other girls he groomed and raped over the years, and if she could have stopped it by speaking up.

Nevertheless, she believed she had time. So she was distraught when she was sent a newspaper clipping announcing that Hendrie had died. She felt the loss viscerally, confronted by tributes lauding the contribution he’d made to endurance riding, and specifically his role in “training young riders”, knowing now that she would never have an opportunity to expose him or press charges.

Hendrie didn’t leave his wife and Annemarie doesn’t know if she knew about her or the other girls. But as with Bob Hewitt’s victims, others did seem to suspect. And when she told Hendrie’s son what had happened to her, Niels wasn’t surprised, confessing that his dad “always had young girls around”.

Only now, aged 43, witnessing her teenage daughter fall in love and begin dating, can Annemarie acknowledge that Hendrie stole her childhood innocence along with her abilities to trust others and her own judgment, to set healthy boundaries, and to see sex as an act of love rather than an act of power. She’s finally realising that she could never have been complicit.

Textbook formula

Annemarie’s story is textbook. Whether knowingly or unconsciously, groomers follow a formulaic process. For some, it is instinctual, but others confess to sharing and applying tips and tricks that they have learnt from fellow abusers, including on internet forums.

Hendrie weaponised Annemarie’s equestrian skill, potential and goals, using them against her. He isolated her and made her feel valued, confiding in her about his wife and other adult problems. He gave her gifts and told her that she was a favourite and different from other girls her age. He created a shared secret by allowing her to drink alcohol, used “accidental” touch to violate her boundaries and manipulated her by creating an illusion of a special relationship and shared future.

Then, after he sexualised the relationship, he gaslit her, using Annemarie’s love for him against her. When she wanted to stop having sex, he controlled her, using her collective fears of his fury, that no one would believe her, that she might lose her opportunity to compete at the highest level in her sport, and that she would disappoint her parents. Moreover, when she finally had the courage to walk away, he replaced her instantly.

Annemarie cannot hold Hendrie accountable now. He died peacefully in his bed in the arms of his very young girlfriend, and she’s chosen not to name him out of respect for his family. But, she’s bravely telling her story in the hopes that with awareness, children and their parents will be able to recognise the signs of grooming and prevent harm. Her goal is to help other children avoid the pain and trauma that she endured, knowing this could ultimately change the trajectory of their lives. DM

*Not their real names

If you have experienced grooming or sexual assault and need assistance, please contact Childline on #116 or via their Online Counselling chatrooms.

First published in the Daily Maverick: 31.12.2025

Facing the unthinkable: Women who sexually abuse children

Facing the unthinkable: Women who sexually abuse children

In a 2008 study, 41% of boys who had been sexually abused reported that their perpetrator was a woman. No such stats exist for girls but research on female perpetrators shows that like boys, girls can be abused by female family members, educators, and even domestic workers. Secret, unacknowledged, and often unprosecuted, female perpetration against children is a huge unspoken crime.

When children attend our grooming awareness workshops, the first thing we ask is if they can identify a predator. They’re given images of people of different genders, races, ages, professions and socioeconomic groups to rank from “most likely to groom and sexually abuse children”, to “least likely”.  The goal is to demonstrate that they can’t identify predators based on outward appearances. It always results in lively debate, though, and their choices are instructive. 

When they give feedback about who they think is the most obvious predator, only a handful of children choose women, and then usually the woman who looks like she has lived a rough life, or the teacher because of her easy access to children. 

There is only one image that no child has ever chosen. It is the image of the gentle looking domestic worker cuddling a pre-schooler. This disbelief that women, and specifically the women closest to us, can be predators is one of the reasons that many operate with impunity.

It is also what kept Beth Amato quiet for decades. 

It has been 35 years since Beth was first abused. The daughter of a mother struggling with her mental health, whose work took her out of the home, often late at night, her parents outsourced care for their pre-school twins to their cherished nanny Florence*. 

Taking on the role that Beth’s mentally ill and overwrought mother could not manage, she became indispensable almost immediately, and an integral part of the family. Whatsapp messages written by Beth’s mother many years later identified Florence as her most trusted confidante, “the only person”, she stated, who “understood” her. 

The texts Beth’s mother sent to Florence after she left the family’s employment expressed how much she loved and missed her.

Beth also adored Florence when she was young but vividly remembers the moment when everything changed. It was a normal bath time until her nanny instructed her twin brother to get out of the bath. Leaving Beth in the bath, Florence dried and dressed him.  When the little boy finally left the room, her nanny began to fondle and rub Beth’s genitals. Despite only being five at the time, Beth remembers that she didn’t like it. 

Before she got out of the bath Florence told her not to tell anyone and that no one would believe her anyway. “It’s between us girls,” Florence said.

The abuse continued over a period of a year and then abruptly stopped. From that moment, Florence transferred her affections to Beth’s twin, cruelly isolating and rejecting the small girl. 

Despite her young age, Beth personalised the abuse, caught in shame and self-blame. Experiencing her body as an unsafe place, she developed an eating disorder in her teen years, trying to use her weight to create a barrier around her body, attempting to keep herself safe from unwanted sexual advances.  But her efforts were in vain and the early sexualisation led to further abuse, promiscuity but also the tormenting belief that no one would ever find her attractive. 

For years she concealed what had happened. At 19 when she finally disclosed the abuse to her beloved father, his response was: “Beth, a woman does not sexually abuse children.” Her dad was nonetheless supportive in later years. But Florence continued to work for Beth’s family for 12 years despite their full knowledge of what she had done. 

It took Beth much longer to tell her mom, and for good reason. When she finally did, her mother was incredulous, suggesting they call Florence in to hear her side of the story. Not wanting to confront the abuse with her abuser, Beth refused. But her mother’s enduring faith in Florence was confirmed by those devastating texts that she sent to her years after Beth first disclosed the abuse. 

Although Beth only discovered these texts after her mother’s untimely death, they corroborated the message Florence’s continued presence in her parent’s home had telegraphed. Florence had been right, her mother, the person most responsible for her care, safety and wellbeing, did not believe that Beth had been abused.

Her abuser continued to work for her parents until she retired when Beth was 31. She had been employed by Beth’s parents for 27 years. Twenty six of those years were after she first abused their daughter. To date, she has not been held accountable. 

Abuse at home

Like Beth, Martin Pelder’s abuse took place predominantly in the bath. Decades later, he can still describe his childhood bathroom in minute detail. From the blue fluffy towels and bath mat, to the Hitashi washing machine, the shape of the mirror, to the smell of the Colgate apple shampoo and the Lux soap.  

Most of all, he remembers the scratching sound that the latch made when his abuser used a coin or a key to open the door he had so carefully locked, the fear he felt, and running his bath water earlier and earlier to try to avoid being in the bath when she came home from work.  

But somehow she always knew. Nor could he escape, because Martin’s abuser was his own mother.  

Martin, who has spoken extensively in public about his experiences, describes how she would push open the locked bathroom door and take off her shirt. She’d scrub his back with a rough cloth or brush until it was raw and close to bleeding, then scrub behind his ears, always saying the same thing, “we don’t want you to grow cabbages here”. These banal activities belied what always followed, the molestation, his mother washing and playing with his genitals, seemingly amused by his resultant erection.

The terrifying baths his mother gave him when he was eight or nine are forever etched in his memory. Vaguer are the memories of her curly head performing oral sex on him when he was about five or six.

The last time his mother, who also beat him physically, hurt him was when he was 18. By then he was six foot three inches tall but she still slapped him for visiting his father who was estranged from her. Although she weighed over 20kg more than him, Martin remembers picking her up, holding her at arm’s length and putting her down on the bed so she couldn’t hit him any more. 

She never tried to hurt him again. But it was her voice he heard in his head when at 16 he lined his motorbike up with a concrete bridge pylon. 

“You’ll mess it up,” her voice mocked. He imagined himself surviving but lying helpless and forever changed in hospital. In torment, he chose not to kill himself.  

Although he did not die that day, his mother’s abuse, which she has consistently denied, left him sexualised, aggressive and misogynistic, and triggered decades of abuse at the hands of other perpetrators, both female and male, and years of substance abuse at his own hands.

It even subsumed the joy when his baby daughter was born — at the time the highlight of his young and troubled life. Overwhelmed with love for her, he clearly remembers standing changing her nappy and hearing the devil on one shoulder telling him that he would put his fingers into her tiny vagina and assault her, even as the angel on the other told him he loved her and would never hurt her.  

Fearful that the angel was wrong, he withdrew emotionally from his much-anticipated child, just in case. 

In the decades that followed, Martin, like Beth, had to fight for his own healing. His mother, now 92, has never been held accountable for the abuse. 

The myth that only men abuse

Experts who have studied female sexual abusers of children believe that lack of consequence is probably the norm, despite the crime being far more prevalent than is commonly understood.

A 2008 South African study on the sexual abuse of boys found that of the almost 130,000 males surveyed, approximately 40% had been forced to have sex by the age of 18. Of those, 41% had been sexually abused by female perpetrators and 26% had been forced to have sex by both male and female perpetrators. 

There are no commensurate South African studies on girl victims of female perpetrators. The crimes are also frequently underreported because of shame, and because many in authority, like Beth’s dad, don’t believe that women can sexually abuse children. 

Nonetheless, the study belies the myth that only men abuse. Instead, it confirms global figures cited by one of the few South African academics to study female perpetrators, Dr Sherianne Kramer, which suggest that as many as one in four children are abused by female perpetrators. 

Kramer explains that we are reluctant to acknowledge female paedophilia, defined as sexual attraction to pre-pubescent children, or that women may have agency to act on those desires and the ability to operate independently, rather than as an accomplice to a man.  

The two biggest hinderances to recognition of these crimes are that women are generally seen as nurturing and maternal and therefore incapable of sexual transgression, especially against vulnerable children, and that because women don’t have a penis, they are seen as incapable of penetrative sexual abuse, and other forms of abuse are seen as “less serious”.

However, the South African Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and related matters Amendment Act, 2007) broadened the definition of rape to include unlawful and intentional penetration of the mouth, anus or genital organs with an object or any part of the body; and sexual assault to include any unwanted sexual act or behaviour including touching, groping, fondling, or any form of sexual coercion or intimidation. Sexual grooming is also a criminal offence.  

Both Beth and Martin’s stories graphically illustrate that their abusers used the role of nurturer as access to abuse them, and that even in the absence of genital penetration, the impact of the abuse on their lives was catastrophic. 

Kramer found that South African practitioners and the general populace are also reluctant to accept that female sexual offenders often prey on very young children. This reality has recently been highlighted in the horror case of Nada-Jane however, the four-year-old girl sexually assaulted and murdered, allegedly by her father’s partner and former pre-school teacher, Amber Lee Hughes. 

Hughes is currently on trial for the rape and murder of the child. According to National Prosecuting Authority spokesperson Phindi Mjonondwane: “The accused allegedly raped the deceased by inserting an unknown object in her private parts, it is also alleged that she drowned her… Her lifeless body was later found floating in the bathtub.”

‘Mrs Robinson’ narrative

While the general populace is more willing to acknowledge female predation on adolescent boys, the so-called “Mrs Robinson” narrative, many people believe it is the ultimate teenage boy’s fantasy. The result is that those victims who recognise that they’ve been abused and are brave enough to report it, often have the crime trivialised or the impact minimised.

This is particularly common with female teachers who victimise their pupils. 

It was evident in South Africa’s most notorious case of sexual abuse by a female teacher, former Bishop’s College History teacher and waterpolo coach Fiona Viotti. Viotti’s school found her guilty of sexual misconduct with five boys between 2013 and 2019 after she had sexual intercourse with the pupils and exposed them to pornographic images.  

Despite her having been in a position of power over the boys she abused, and her former school having reported her to the police and South African Council of Educators for investigation of the crimes, the response of the public ranged from salacious “atta boys” to an outpouring of sympathy for her.

Comments such as, “wish she was my teacher at school” and “where can I get extra lessons” along with Big Blue’s distasteful “Waterpolo Teacher’s Pet” T-shirts trivialised and ridiculed the boys’ experience as victims, while Facebook pages entitled “We stand with Fiona Viotti” and “Fiona Viotti is the greatest teacher ever” portrayed her as vulnerable, wronged and misunderstood.

Partly because of the public’s reaction, which compounded the harm to the boys involved, portraying them as instigators, benefactors or equally complicit, parents of the victims would not allow their names to be given to the police or for the South African Council of Educators to interview them.  The case could not proceed as a result.  

To date, Viotti hasn’t experienced any legal or criminal consequences for her actions.

But Viotti’s isn’t an isolated case. Female sexual predators are prevalent in South African schools. Commonly reported grooming behaviour includes accessing changing rooms, one-on-one time with children behind closed doors, physical boundary violations such as stroking, massaging, kissing and back rubs, private messaging, inappropriate attire, allowing pupils to access exam papers or use contraband to create a shared secret, sending naked or sexualised images or videos, and exposing children to pornography.

International examples

While most of these South African cases have yet to be prosecuted, cases from the US and the UK illustrate what can happen when we ignore female sexual predators. Few are as instructive and troubling as that of Mary Kay Letourneau.

Letourneau first met her victim Vili Fualaau when he was eight years old.  

Four years later, she began a sexual relationship with him. When she was arrested for felony second degree rape, she was already six months pregnant with Fualaau’s child. Her seven-and-a-half-year sentence was commuted to six months with three suspended provided she sever all ties with Fualaau. But, shortly after her release, she was re-arrested for continuing to have sex with him.  Her full sentence was reinstated and during her imprisonment she gave birth to a second child fathered by Fualaau.

After her second incarceration, she and Fualaau, by then an adult, applied to get the no-contact order revoked. The two married nine years after she first began abusing him.

Letourneau died from colon cancer aged 58. In an interview with 7News shortly before her death, journalist Matt Doran, who described their relationship as arguably the most extended case of child sexual abuse, asked them how it began. Letourneau insisted that at 12, Vili had “initiated the relationship”. She forced Fualaau to reluctantly state publicly that he had pursued her and seduced her. She took no responsibility for raping him despite being a teacher in authority over him, married with four children and 22 years his senior.  

The Letourneau case highlights a weakness in the US legal system also evident in South Africa. Fualaau’s abuser was sentenced for second degree rape because of Fualaau’s age and her supervisory role over him, not for rape. This legal negation of the crime’s impact is mirrored in South Africa where female predators are often prosecuted for consensual sex with a minor child (previously called statutory rape), rather than rape. This despite the Sexual Offences Act stating that consent is not possible if the victim is groomed, persuaded to give consent, or the victim of an abuse of power or authority.

Moreover, in South Africa, those found guilty of consensual sex with a minor child often receive a suspended sentence. And this, along with the disbelief that female sexual abuse is possible, and damaging, may be why Kramer’s studies and those of another researcher Dr Beba Papakyriakou revealed that only a small number of women offenders are arrested and incarcerated.  

Lifting the veil

Those who are arrested or who confess abuse in a therapeutic environment typically don’t see themselves as criminals, but as maternal, passive, vulnerable, victimised and innately virtuous. Offender studies confirm that female perpetrators rarely if ever believe that they have done something wrong.  When reflecting on the effect of their crime, they showed little or no empathy, focusing on the impact on themselves, not the victim.

None of the perpetrators the researchers interviewed believed that they were guilty of a crime. 

According to Papakyriakou, this is reinforced by the criminal justice system. While male offenders of child sexual abuse are identified when they are incarcerated, women are classified more broadly as “child abusers”.  This also means that programmes focused on behaviour change and restorative justice are not targeted towards sexual abuse.  

The offenders’ perspective that they are victims who have done nothing wrong, and the lack of targeted interventions for the handful of women who confess or are convicted and incarcerated could also explain why some female perpetrators reoffend.

Kramer and Papakyriakou’s research found that like male perpetrators, paedophilia in females and the sexual abuse of older children often results from trauma in early childhood, difficulties with intimacy and self-esteem, and control issues.

Female child molesters are virtually indistinguishable from the general population, but they share a high incidence of physical, sexual, and emotional abuse in their histories. Women for example, who abused children without male collusion were more likely to have been severely molested before the age of 10. The women’s relationships with their mothers were also found to be problematic, with physical and psychological abuse present in nearly all the relationships, resulting in poorer self-esteem. 

Crucially, Kramer highlighted the invisibility of female paedophiles because “society doesn’t expect females to commit this crime. A woman touching a child is more likely to be excused or rationalised or ignored than a man touching a child inappropriately.”

Papakyriakou concurs that the crime needs to be more broadly recognised, policed, prosecuted and therapeutically addressed if there is to be a meaningful impact on the incidence.

The starting point is the validation of the experience of victims, compilation of statistics to show how many boys and girls have been sexually abused by women, and high-level prosecutions, not for so-called lesser crimes such as consensual sex with a minor, but for rape, sexual grooming of a child, exposing a child to pornography, flashing (exposure or display of genital organs, anus or female breasts to children), and compelled self-sexual assault.   

For this to occur, authorities and society need to accept that women can be victims and perpetrators, that a penis is not a prerequisite for sexual assault, and most importantly, that the consequences of sexual assault are the same for the victim whether the perpetrator is male or female.  

Until we do, schools, sports facilities, communities and country clubs will be strewn with victims of these undisclosed crimes, and sexual abuse by women will continue to be the hidden backstory behind many children’s eating disorders, substance abuse, misogyny, promiscuity, teen pregnancy, violence and even suicide.

It’s time to lift the veil of secrecy and challenge the myth that women can’t sexually abuse children, and to include prevention of female perpetration in our safeguarding strategies.  Failing that, our violence prevention strategies will be incomplete and women will continue to sexually abuse children with impunity. 

First published in the Daily Maverick: 03.06.2025

*Not her real name.

Secrecy, initiation, grooming and the ‘Parktown Boys way’

Secrecy, initiation, grooming and the ‘Parktown Boys way’

One of the most significant events of the 2018 ‘16 Days of Activism for No Violence Against Women and Children’ was the sentencing of Collan Rex, the abuser of 23 Parktown Boys’ pupils between the ages of 13 and 16, to an apt 23 years in prison. But as welcome as the sentence was, there is much about the case that is still troubling for child protection activists. Particularly concerning are the failure of the abuser and the structures that supported him to acknowledge the impact of the abuse, and the role of the school and its traditions in allowing Rex to flourish. As the 2019 school year begins, holding all parties accountable is critical, not only for the boys’ healing, but also to prevent future incidents of abuse.

Listen to this article: BeyondWords

The noise that the wooden stands made when hundreds of boys in black blazers and boaters stamped out the rousing school anthem Arise, Arise, Parktown whenever their team played rugby is an enduring memory from my childhood. Fast forward to rugby season 2018, and another generation of Parktown Boys was chanting their anthem. But this time the response of their biggest rivals, King Edwards and Jeppe Boys, was to chant back, taunting them, calling them “gay”, “homos” and “faggots”.

It was an ugly consequence of the sexual abuse scandal involving the school’s water polo coach that has kept Parktown Boys in the news. It may be one of the reasons why in September 2018, Parktown’s School Governing Body (SGB) declined an interview on SABC news to talk about testimony given by Collan Rex in his own defence, stating that they were hoping that the story would “quieten down” if they didn’t speak. Child protection activists disagree. They maintain that the story needs to remain in the public domain, not, as some might assume to the detriment of the boys, but for two important reasons.

The first is that while Parktown Boys has been in the spotlight because of the case, the practices and structures that led to this predator not just surviving, but thriving, are common to many boys’ schools, even to co-ed schools with strong traditions. In his pivotal report on the Parktown Boys abuse case, veteran activist Luke Lamprecht explained how the purpose, culture and structure of boy’s schools enable and sometimes tacitly condone abuse. He drew the troubling conclusion that although the focus is currently on Parktown Boys, these factors are present in most traditional boy’s schools.

The boys chanting “faggots” at those rugby matches could also be in danger if practices of initiation, institutional rigidity and the culture of secrecy exist in their schools, and aren’t addressed. Secondly, although Parktown Boys would understandably like to argue that the current scandal is linked exclusively to one individual and his deviant practices, reports from child protection activists belie this. And despite admirable measures from the school to protect boys going forwards, failure to address the long-term nature of the problems facilitate a culture where predators can thrive.

In his report, Lamprecht explains how traditionally, boys’ schools were designed to produce boys ready for military service. The resultant patriarchal and misogynistic structures are programmed for obedience and secrecy. Schools form boys into an “elite” that needs to be protected from outsiders, often through a code of silence: in the case of Parktown Boys: “what happens at Parktown, stays at Parktown”. It is a culture that is maintained by teachers and older boys, who have often been subjected to the same rituals and practices in the past, and who have internalised the code. In many cases, teachers at Parktown Boys chose not to respond to boys’ reports of physical and sexual abuse despite Section 110 of the Children’s Amendment Act and the Sexual Offences Act making it compulsory for them to report it.

In addition, older boys perpetuate the culture through the age-old practice of “fagging”. Fagging was defined in the 1800s by the then headmaster of Rugby School “as the power given by the authorities of the school to (the oldest boys), to be exercised over younger boys… reminiscent of the relationship between squire and knight in the Middle Ages.” In Parktown Boys, it can be clearly seen in the “old pot, new pot” system. The fag system is reinforced through initiation practices, which can range from relatively benign pranks to protracted patterns of behaviour that rise to the level of abuse or criminal misconduct. Initiation may include physical or psychological abuse, nudity or even sexual assault.

The most extreme version is hazing which can involve severe aggression and sexual perversion, both of which have been identified at Parktown Boys, especially on sports camps and in the hostel. Add to that the total institution found in a hostel environment, where boys’ lives are controlled and regulated in every way, and it is easy to see how boys could be induced into acts that violated their own boundaries. Total institutions also provide a unique environment for perpetrators to hide abuse. In Rex’s case, he had unfettered access to the boys he abused and absolute power to control them and make them compliant.

According to Lamprecht, two of the most important prerequisites for abuse to occur are for the abuser to avoid external inhibitors like possible legal implications, and to overcome the inhibitions of the child, sometimes done through force, but usually through the processes of grooming and gaslighting. In addition, the culture of secrecy, which Lamprecht describes as the “power of abuse”, shortens the activity of grooming because it is all bracketed within the initiation process and “what happens at Parktown, stays at Parktown”.

Grooming occurs when the offender overcomes the child’s resistance by making the child their “favourite”, giving them special treatment, isolating one or a small group, and gradually using boundary and taboo violations to blur a normal caring relationship into one that meets the offender’s sexual needs. Grooming is also premised on the sharing of secrets, often illicit drinking, drugs or the use of pornography. These are usually introduced or permitted by the abuser, followed by the promise that, “I won’t tell anyone, it will be our little secret”. The little secret then shifts to include a bigger secret, namely the abuse. Both aspects of grooming make the child feel a sense of responsibility for the abuse, resulting in guilt and shame, and become a barrier to purposeful disclosure.

The script of Rex’s abuse is textbook. He was only slightly older than the boys he abused, and therefore potentially “cool”. He was ostensibly a peer, with the mentality of a teen. But he had authority over the boys, a sports coach and junior hostel master with the power to make favourites in the hostel and the swimming pool, access to introduce illicit behaviour, and the physical strength to subdue them.

Add to that Rex’s use of gaslightingwhich Lamprecht defines as “manipulation of someone by psychological means into doubting their own sanity”, and Rex’s denial (in particular his denial of the impact of the abuse, something he clearly communicated to the boys, and evident in them referring to his behaviour as the “Rex way”), and it is easy to see why the boys’ testimony may have seemed uncertain at times.

During the trial, the boys testified how Rex’s behaviour overstepped boundaries including introducing pornography and adult content such as Fifty shades of Grey, drugs, and even a stripper being brought to school. Rex justified pulling down boys’ costumes and rubbing up against boys in the pool as being “just part of the sport”. It is particularly telling that one of the boys reported his abuse to a teacher, but only much later because he “wasn’t sure”. This evidence should have been interpreted as classic indicators of grooming and gaslighting, but it wasn’t. Instead, the magistrate dismissed the boys’ evidence as not credible, much to their deep distress given that they had risked everything to testify. The legal system’s choice not to interpret their testimony in the context of grooming and gaslighting was evidence of how effective Rex’s abuse was.

For his part, Rex admitted to the content of the charges against him, but he did not plead guilty. Instead, he minimised the impact of the abuse by blaming the water polo culture for his actions. His contention was that the touching of genitals was a necessary part of the sport. In addition, he attributed his abusive ways to his own experience of being molested at the school, using what psychologists refer to as the “vampire myth” to effectively claim that the “Rex way” and the “Parktown way” were the same.

But according to Rees Mann from the Male Survivors of Sexual Abuse, the argument that all abusers go on to abuse others is incorrect. Mann questions why we believe it of abused men but not of abused women. Lamprecht contends that the vampire myth arose from very limited studies of incarcerated sexual offenders who had the motive to blame their behaviour on prior abuse, and in many cases, no evidence to support it. But the vampire myth not only takes away the agency of the abused, but it also implies that boys cannot be simply viewed as vulnerable victims, instead they become “abusers in waiting”.

Interestingly, the magistrate did not accept this as a defence in mitigation of sentencing and held Rex completely responsible for his actions, sentencing him to 144 counts of sexual assault and 12 counts of common assault. But, crucially, the ruling does not clear the school of culpability. What is clear from extensive studies of the school is that Rex did not form Parktown Boys, he was formed by the school. Instead of excusing his crimes, his history of abuse widens the list of those culpable for his actions to include his own abusers, and more importantly, the school that produced him, and chose not to vet him appropriately.

It is no coincidence that the last major scandal at Parktown Boys occurred in 2009, the year that Rex entered the school. It involved Grade 11 learners from the hostel who were seriously assaulted during an initiation ritual. The initiation took place at night, apparently unsupervised by staff but educators were very clearly complicit. Labelled a rite of passage, whose stated goal was to make the Grade 11s earn the privilege of having a kettle, the victims were taken out of their beds at night, physically beaten with bats and clubs and had Deep Heat rubbed into their genitals. In response, Pene Kimber, the mother of one of the Grade 11 boys who was assaulted in this ritual, pressed charges against the Grade 12 boys involved. What is significant according to Lamprecht is that although the assault was both sexual and physical, only the physical was publicly emphasised, and the school obtained a civil settlement which included a non-disclosure agreement. And troublingly, the case prompted staff, management and Old Boys to close ranks around the perpetrators and the school traditions.

High-profile arguments for the right of the school to continue initiations and “it happened to us and look how well we turned out, so what is wrong with you”, dominated the narrative, and the family who made the allegations public were subjected to ridicule and death threats. The upshot was that although the school had a significant opportunity to transform its culture in 2009, it actively resisted change. The ethos of secrets, initiation and violence was still prevalent when Collan Rex entered the school, with devastating results. Some may even argue that it worsened as a knee-jerk response to the Kimber case.

Peter Harris, who presented the Harris, Nupen, Molebatsi report, commissioned by the Gauteng Department of Education in response to parent outrage about how the abuse of the “Parktown Boys 23” occurred, confirms this belief: “Unfortunately, since 2009, initiation practices that involved quite severe assaults have taken place and…there have been allegations of severe initiation practices taking place at various camps on various occasions and in various sporting teams over the years”.

When considering accountability for this case, it is also crucial to acknowledge that when Rex’s abuse was accidentally uncovered by a boy viewing security footage of the hostel common room in the hope of finding lost water polo caps, the school again tried to use a civil case to cover it up.

Nor are these the only instances of abuse in the school’s history. The South African Male Survivors of Sexual Abuse has a sexual abuse case from the school dating back as far as 1969. But the inception of the sexual abuse at Parktown is widely believed to be the late 1980s when the hostel was opened. The implication is that some of the boys who were proudly chanting on the stands when I was a child were already being molested. In his report, Harris detailed a long history of abuse. Practices included “sexually predatory behaviour” by senior pupils against junior pupils, a culture of assault and sexual assault under the guise of “initiation practices” and “profoundly shocking” utterances made by teachers in the presence of pupils.

“While it is a problem at most schools, it would appear that this has become a generational practice at Parktown Boys,” Harris said.

In 2006, a boy was badly assaulted in a prefect’s assembly. His mother reported the abuse to the school and the department, and was informed by the department that she was trying to destroy the school. Tragically, her son didn’t ever recover from the abuse, and he took his own life in December 2017. According to Harris, some of the most troubling incidents they uncovered involved sexually predatory behaviour by senior pupils against junior pupils in 2014 and 2015, and the lashing of a boy during a water polo camp as recently as 2017.

And it isn’t just the long history of hidden physical and sexual abuse at Parktown Boys that is troubling. In an interview on 702, Eusebius McKaiser presented a cogent concern that there has not been a sufficient apology or full disclosure from Parktown Boy’s management, and in its absence, there are a number of lingering worries about the abuse.

One of the most critical questions is why Rex was employed in the first place. Lamprecht’s report indicated that Rex had a history of being abused and being abusive. When he was at the school, his peers, who apparently all knew about his abusive behaviour, warned younger boys to be careful when they were with him because he was “touchy and possibly gay”. He also reportedly went to the younger boys’ rooms, and as he got older and wielded more power and authority (as was set up in the school and hostel system), he began to demonstrate many of the actions that led to the abuse of the 23 boys when he later became an assistant hostel master.

Also, while Rex was at high school, one younger boy told his peer that Rex often lay on his bed and touched him inappropriately on his private parts in the guise of wrestling. He would later get a “joke award” for this as an assistant master when the boys began to refer to his behaviour as “the Rex way”. But given that this conduct was already so evident when he was a pupil, it is hard to see how the school could have missed his abusive tendencies. School management would surely have reviewed his history prior to recruiting him. But even if they did overlook it, it appears that he made little attempt to hide his behaviour when he was an assistant master. The question of culpability becomes an important one. How did the responsible adults in the hostel and the school miss the abuse? Or did they note it and just turn a blind eye?

The Harris Nupen Molebatsi report indicates that as with historical abuse, some educators at the school were aware of what was occurring, and failed to report it, and some enabled it. Others mocked the boys for telling their stories and for their “perceived weakness”. The boys were infantilised for expressing their pain and labelled as “cry babies”, and victims were humiliated, insulted and warned that “snitches get stitches and fall into ditches”. Allegations against staff articulated in the report include condoning and encouraging initiation practices on sports tours, and bringing alcohol and even a stripper on to school property.

Harris noted that “it is quite conceivable that certain of the initiation practices, the code of silence, as well as certain of the assaults perpetrated by senior boys on junior boys may well have taken place with the tacit if not complicit consent of certain staff members, who themselves, when they were boys at the school, suffered a similar fate”. Concerningly, at the inception of the 2019 school year and more than four months after the reading of the report (it has still not been released), parents of the school allege that some of the educators named in the report remain at the school, while others continue to be employed in other schools.

Nonetheless, the school and the Gauteng Department of Education have taken some commendable steps to make the boys safer, especially in the hostel. The hostel is under new management and the school has increased the number of security cameras in common places, introduced the Guardian app to allow boys to report bullying and abuse anonymously, and the proper evaluation and psychological assessment of staff members at recruitment.

Initiation practices have also been banned, with the school focusing on older learners earning respect rather than demanding it. But the practices are hard to eliminate, and the school has an ongoing challenge of policing culture, especially in an environment where some old boys and teachers condone initiation. There also remains the question of who will be the first generation of Grade 12s to say, “it was done to us, but we won’t do it to anyone else”.

The parents of the “Parktown Boys 23” argue that despite Rex’s sentence, the lack of acknowledgement of culpability from the perpetrator and the school remains a barrier to healing. They also contend that the changes are “too little, too late” for their boys, many of whom suffered tertiary trauma through testifying, and the appallingly slow and inept Department of Social Development process of gathering evidence to ascertain the impact of Rex’s crimes. Several of these boys remain depressed, detached and on suicide watch.

Nonetheless, these parents continue to fight for the class of 2019, especially the new Grade 8 intake, and all the boys whose lives will be impacted one way or another by Parktown Boys. In the end, nothing short of an end to initiation, cadets, the code of secrecy and the toxic masculinity it produces will effect a change in culture. If Parktown Boys and the other boy’s schools like it don’t make the changes required, more predators like Rex will thrive, and the boys produced by the system will not become proud old boys, but rather, broken men. DM


First published in the Daily Maverick: 07.01.2019

To cite please use the author’s name, the year of publication, the title of the article, name of publication, date of publication.