This is the problem that I had with the description of the recent John Jay College....

...report on the causes of abuse within the Catholic Church.

Something on the order of 90% of the abuse complaints involved sexual interaction by priests with males.  But the John Jay College report claims that the cause cannot be laid to homosexuality because priests had more males available to abuse than females.

Huh?

As Catholic Culture observes:

Second, the John Jay report offers the generalization that priests had more access to young men than to young women, and that difference would account for the prevalence of male victims. But that explanation is credible only if priests saw young men and young women as equally desirable sexual objects. In my line of work, I have more access to old magazines than to T-bone steaks. Still I never eat magazines, because I do not think of magazines as food. Yes, priests had more access to altar boys than to girls of a similar age. But that access would have been a determining factor only for priests who saw young men as potential sex objects. The John Jay report fails to provide an honest exploration of the role of homosexuality, and thus neglects another key factor in this scandal.

Yea, what up with that?