I was writing a session earlier this week for a conference I will be speaking at – which explores online-facilitated child sexual abuse. It’s not an easy subject of course, but such an important one. With such topics, it’s always important to remind participants of some key facts; one of which is the simple fact that perpetrators can be female too.
This is always a theme that seems to provoke a reaction – and I can’t distance myself from that reaction either, as I too always find myself more shocked by a case of abuse perpetrated by a woman.
Why is this the case? The answer to that is too complex to thoroughly explore here, but possibly a mixture of society’s permeating myths about women being more nurturing or maternal; the idea that we hold men to a lower account than we do women – almost expecting abusive behaviour from men (which is both harmful and insulting to men and boys in general) and of course, the statistical truth – that men are far more likely to be perpetrators.
As mentioned above, this blogpost cannot possibly do that question justice however there is a lot we can learn about the Joynes case, notably around our ability to truly see boys – and particularly teenage boys – as victims, and children in need of protection.
Rebecca Joynes is a former teacher, convicted in 2024 of grooming two teenage boys and engaging in sexual activity with pupils while being in a position of trust.
Joynes joined a school through the Teach First recruitment scheme, teaching maths, and was found guilty of six counts of sexual activity with a child – including two counts while she was still in a trust position.
The case isn’t just another headline – it exposes critical weaknesses in how schools recruit, supervise, and think about abuse, especially when the abuse is perpetrated by a woman – and when teenage boys are groomed and abused.
Before we delve deeper into this harrowing case, it is important to note that in every social media post that reported this case at the time; there were a flurry of comments – from both men and women – along the lines of being jealous, admiring the boys, talking about the scenario as a sexual fantasy etc.
While we still have a long way to go, to say the least, in regard to dismantling the sexualisation of young girls – and particularly schoolgirls; these comments presented a stark reality that the boys were seen as having achieved something impressive, that they were heroes even.
It is deeply concerning that while we might hopefully spot the signs of grooming between a female pupil and a male teacher; many commenters did not see how the boys’ innocence and burgeoning sexual identity was preyed upon and manipulated.
It goes without saying that due to a mix of rushing hormones, puberty, body changes and that unique period where one may start to look like an adult but still be a child – teenagers are of course highly likely to develop crushes and infatuations.
It is for these reasons that it is vital however to recognise their vulnerability during this stage, wanting to protect them rather than to take advantage and pounce upon the opportunity for an “ego boost”.
The term “ego boost” relates to many of the media reports referring to the fact that Rebecca Joynes had recently come out of a 9-year relationship, when she was flattered by the boys’ attention.
While it can be helpful to try to comprehend a perpetrator’s motivations; the reports suggest that perhaps we can all relate to that feeling of needing a bit of attention when our ego has taken a bruising, or we have suffered heartbreak.
It is abhorrent however to suggest this can excuse her behaviour – that the boys were somehow a ‘rebound’ or a nice bit of flattery at a difficult time.
In fact, this kind of reporting almost paints Joynes as though she were the vulnerable one – rather than a grown adult grooming children as young as 15 years old. One media article provides a clip of a video of Joynes buying one of the boys a £300 designer belt as a gift. It is a textbook example of grooming – buying a child designer goods – and yet, still these harmful myths persist.
An additional shocking factor to the case was reading that one of the boys (referred to as “Boy A”) was groomed while Joynes was on bail after earlier allegations. The sense of audacity to continue to message children after having been arrested suggests even Joynes herself believed she was untouchable, or minimised her behaviour.
As mentioned earlier, there is a widespread societal assumption that abusers are male. When a female teacher like Joynes abuses male pupils, many people struggle to believe or take seriously what happened. The perception persists that male pupils should or do welcome attention, which is wrong.
Indeed, one of the children himself stated:
“I struggled to come to terms with my abuse, I was completely in denial.”
During the trial, he said he felt he had “betrayed someone I love and done wrong by giving evidence” but had since realised “the full extent” of the abuse and “tactics used”.
He said he was “coerced, controlled, manipulated, sexually abused, and mentally abused”, adding: “I will forever be Rebecca’s victim and forever linked to her through our child.”
This will remind many of us who work with children that victims of abuse will still have complex and conflicting feelings about their abuser – including perhaps lingering feelings of affection and connection. These are natural and normal and we, as professionals must be sensitive not to dismiss them.
Something else we can learn from this case and others is that female perpetrators are more likely to be excused or pitied (“she was lonely,” “she was emotionally vulnerable”) instead of being held fully accountable. Defences in Joynes’ trial included arguments around her break-up, pandemic loneliness, or that the sexual relationship with one boy started after some point when she was no longer in a school role – as though that lessens the harm caused.
Crucially, we must accept that many in education, child protection, and the wider public are less aware or wary of female perpetrators. This “blind spot” means some cases may go undetected or be dismissed longer. Victims – particularly male victims – may also feel greater shame, isolation, or fear that others won’t believe them.
We already know that boys are less likely to disclose abuse, neglect and exploitation, less likely to seek mental health support and yet, far more likely to end their lives by suicide. Toxic masculinity continues to seep into boys’ ideas of what it means to be a man and express their emotions and needs. These issues are very much linked, and we must learn lessons from this case in order to protect this and future generations of boys.
The Rebecca Joynes case is a painful reminder that abuse can happen in places we trust most. Schools and organisations that work with children must sharpen their safer recruitment practices, be alert to the warning signs, and dismantle harmful gender stereotypes that delay justice. Accepting that women can abuse children is not to erode feminist or protective values – it’s to ensure all children are equally safeguarded, and that no victim walks in silence because of who their abuser is.
