natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
‡ compilation and documentation of resources made available by Daphne and other sources (web-based, human, publications, audiovisual, training methodologies and packages, etc.).
‡ vêljaande Daphne News pýhimýte elas edasi e-posti kaudu toimiva regulaarse Ÿhenduse abil kýigi nende organisatsioonidega, mis olid Daphnega koostûûd teinud, vahendades teavet uutest rahastatavatest projektidest, veebilehe uuendustest ja teistest teetêhistest.
If this were to be possible, it would also be necessary to reinforce partnerships, expand net-works and improve capacity, including through the continued exchange of information and perhaps s t a . , m o r e r e g u l a r « e l d v i s i t s i nffo t h e r Mffe m b e r S t a t e s , a n d mstu c h i m p r o v e d , m o r e t a r g e t e d conferences, workshops and other working meetings.
Projektide kaasrahastamine oli alati olnud vêhemalt 20 protsenti ja k o n t r o l l k Ÿ l a s t u s i kasutati rohkem selleks, et projekte elluviivad organisatsioonid otsiksid jêtkuvat rahastamist, et Daph-ne rahastamise abil algatatud tegevus saaks jêtkuda ka komisjoni toetuseta.
There were also new calls for projects that might develop evaluation indicators, support analysis of good practice and com-plete mapping and data collection exercises so that there would exist a comprehensive picture of violence in all its forms in Europe.
Výimaluse korral jagati ideid, kust výiks raha saada; siiski jêi ka rahastamise jêtkumine vêljakutseks.
Achieving this within the limits of project funding became a real challenge and, as the Daphne programme progressed and submissions did rise to the challenge posed by the Commission's encouragement to improve, budgets became severely squeezed and the possibility of failure or incomplete activity became a reality for some organisations.
Juba 2002. aastal hakkas komisjon mýtlema Daphne programmi tulevikule ja selle výimali-kule uuendamisele. Daphne seitsmeaastase kogemuse baasil tûûtati vêlja esialgsed ettepa-nekud, sealhulgas suurema rahastamise kohta, et saaks toetada suuremaid projekte, ja vahen-
‡ the Daphne website was upgraded so that there would be a long-term archive of all project reports;
Eesmêrgid ja prioriteedid dite kohta, mis výimaldaksid komisjonil aktiivselt tellida selliseid projekte, mis oma olemuselt on Ÿhendusele vajalikud, kuid mille kohta organisatsioonid ettepanekuid ei tee.
`The Daphne programme is acknowledged as an important multidisciplinary instrument in the campaign against violence and it has acquired international renown.'
¶Daphne programmi tunnustatakse vêgivallavastase kampaania olulise multidistsiplinaarse vahendina ja see on pêlvinud hea rahvusvahelise maine.•
Resolution of the European Parliament on the mid-term review of the Daphne programme 2000›03
Naiste ýiguste ja výrdsete výimaluste komitee a r u a n d e s t E u r o o p a Parlamendile Daphne programmi 2000›03 vahelêbivaatamise kohta
Exploring violence
Vêgivalla uurimine
Seven years of action, 303 projects funded, hundreds of organisations working and thousands of people touched by this work, and still Daphne has never de«ned`violence'.
Pêrast seitsmeaastast tegutsemist on rahastatud 303 projekti ning sajad organisatsioonid ja tuhanded inimesed on k Ÿ s i m u s e g a tegelenud, kuid Daphne ei ole ikka veel defineeri-nud vêgivalla mýistet.
This is not an oversight.
See ei ole hooletusviga.
From the outset, it was recognised that violence is not one single thing and that attempting to de«neitwouldonlylimitnotonlysubmissionsreceivedbut,impor-tantly, perception of what constituted violence and what did not.
Juba alguses mýisteti, et vêgivald ei ole Ÿhene nêhtus ja p Ÿ Ÿ e seda defineerida mitte ainult ei piiraks projektitaotlusi, vaid, mis veelgi olulisem, kitsen-daks Ÿldist tunnetust, mida pidada vêgivallaks ja mida mitte.
Instead, the Daphne initia-tive and programme sought to explore violence as understood by the people of Europe them-selves ̌ leaders, partners, participants and b e n e « c i a r i e s o f D a p h n e - f u n d e d a c t i o n s ̌ a n d t hffu s to map out the whole gamut of actions, structures, frameworks and attitudes that are `violence' in Europe.
Selle asemel p Ÿ Ÿ d s i d nii Daphne algatus kui ka programm uurida vêgivalda sellisena, nagu seda mýistavad eu-rooplased ise › Daphne toetatavate tegevuste juhid, partnerid, osalejad ja abisaajad ›, ja kaardistada kogu tegevuste, struktuuride, raamistike ja suhtumise gamma, mis iseloomus-tab vêgivalda Euroopas.
There is consequently no de«nitionofviolenceincludedinthedecision (10) establishing the Daphne programme 2000›03.
Sellest tulenevalt ei ole vêgivalla mýistet ka otsuses,10 mille alusel kehtestati Daphne prog-ramm 2000›03.
There is, however, a general statement indicating some of the implications of violence and relating it in particular to negative impact on health, since the legal base for the programme was within the ambit of public health.
Siiski on seal êra toodud Ÿldistus, mis viitab vêgivalla tagajêrgedele ja on eelkýige seotud selle negatiivse mýjuga tervisele, sest programmi ýiguslik alus on rahva-tervise valdkonnas.
The decision says:
Otsuses on ûeldud:
`Physical, sexual and psychological violence against children, young persons and women consti-tutes a breach of their right to life, safety, freedom, dignity and physical and emotional integrity and a serious threat to the physical and mental health of the victims of such violence; the e.ectsof such violence are so widespread throughout the Community as to constitute a major health scourge.
¶Kehaline, seksuaalne ja p s Ÿ h h o l o o g i l i n e vêgivald laste, noorte ja naiste vastu rikub nende ýigust elule, turvalisusele, vabadusele, vêêrikusele ning f Ÿ Ÿ s i l i s e l e ja emotsionaalsele puutu-matusele ning on vêgivallaohvrite f Ÿ Ÿ s i l i s e l e ja vaimsele tervisele týsiseks ohuks; vêgivald on Ÿhenduses nii laialt levinud, et kujutab endast týsist terviseprobleemi.
It is important to recognise the serious immediate and long-term implications for health, psycho-logical and social development, and for the equal opportunities of those concerned, that violence has for individuals, families and communities and the high social and economic costs to society as a whole.
On oluline teadvustada selle týsist, kohest ja pikemaajalist mýju asjaomaste isikute tervisele, vaimsele ja sotsiaalsele arengule ning výrdsetele výimalustele, mis vêgivallal on Ÿksikisiku-tele, perekondadele ja sotsiaalsetele gruppidele, ning suuri sotsiaalseid ja majanduslikke ku-lutusi Ÿhiskonnale kui tervikule.
According to the World Health Organisation's de«nition,healthisastateofcompletephysical,mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or in«rmity.'
Vastavalt Maailma Tervishoiuorganisatsiooni mýistele on tervis têielik f Ÿ Ÿ s i l i s e , vaimse ja sot-siaalse heaolu seisund, mitte ainult haiguse výi nýtruse puudumine.ƒ
In short, violence was seen as anything that impeded `complete physical, mental and social well-being' and a breach of the right to `life, safety, freedom, dignity and physical and emo-tional integrity'.
LŸhidalt, vêgivald on nêhtus, mis ei výimalda têielikku f Ÿ Ÿ s i l i s t , vaimset ja sotsiaalset heaolu ning rikub inimese ýigust elule, turvalisusele, vabadusele, vêêrikusele ning f Ÿ Ÿ s i - l i s e l e ja emotsionaalsele puutumatusele.
This very broad approach to violence allowed Daphne projects to explore in detail the many faces of violence and the speci«cnational,regionalandlocalformsitpre-dominantly takes.
Selline lai lêhenemine vêgivallale výimaldas Daphne projektidel uurida erinevaid vêgivallavorme ja selle eriomaseid rahvuslikke, regio-naalseid ning kohalikke valdavaid jooni.
This broad contextual statement has served to allow considerable ‹exibilityinapproachestoviolence taken by projects throughout the life of the Daphne programme.
Selline avarakontekstiline seisukoht on výimaldanud kogu Daphne programmi tegutse-mise jooksul mêrkimisvêêrset paindlikkust projektide suhtes.
Since 2000, projects have focused on areas of violence that are prevalent across the Member States of the EU (and often beyond) and therefore provide opportunities for transferring results, but that are also identi«edasbeingpriorityareasforactionintheprojectorganisations'ownlocalities/coun-tries.
Alates 2000. aastast on pro-jektide pýhitêhelepanu olnud suunatud sellistele vêgivallavaldkondadele, mis peamiselt esinevad ELi liikmesriikides (ja mujalgi) ning výimaldavad seetýttu tulemuste edasiand-mist, kuid on mêêratletud prioriteetsete tegevusvaldkondadena projektorganisatsiooni piirkonnas/riigis.
This may well explain the continued support for Daphne from organisations working at community level and represents a signi«cantstepinbuildingabridgebetweencommunity-level priorities and issues of European importance.
Euroopa Parlamendi ja n÷ukogu otsus nr 293/2000/EÜ, 24. jaanuar 2000, laste-, noorte- ja naiste-vastase vägivalla vastu v÷itlemiseks kasutatavaid ennetusmeetmeid käsitleva ühenduse tegevusprogrammi (Daphne programm 2000«2003) vastuv÷tmise kohta.
Over the life of the Daphne programme, therefore, projects have been supported that have worked to protect from, and to prevent, these general areas of violence:
Kogu Daphne programmi tegevuse ajal on toetatud projekte, mille eesmêrk on kaitsta jêrg-miste vêgivallavormide eest ja neid ennetada:
‡ physical assault,
‡ f Ÿ Ÿ s i l i n e vêgivald;
‡ emotional and verbal abuse,
‡ emotsionaalne ja verbaalne vêgivald;
‡ exclusion and quasi-structural violence,
‡ týrjutus ja kvaasistruktuuriline vêgivald;
‡ coercion and exploitation,
‡ vêgivaldne sund ja ekspluateerimine;
‡ psychological violence,
‡ p s Ÿ h h o l o o g i l i n e vêgivald;
‡ gendered violence,
‡ sooline vêgivald;
‡ violent cultural practices.
‡ vêgivaldsed kultuuritavad.
A more detailed list of the forms of violence i d e n t i « e d i n E u r op e , a n d t h e g r o up s m o b i l i s e d t h r o u g h Daphne projects to combat them, can be found in Annex 1.
Lisas 1 on êra toodud Ÿksikasjalikumad Euroopas kindlaksmêêratud vêgivallavormide kirjel-dused ja Daphne projektide kaudu nendega výitlevad grupid.
What Europeans think about violence
Mida eurooplased vêgivallast arvavad
Although it soon became clear that the multi-faceted nature of violence was well re‹ectedinprojects submitted to and/or funded by Daphne, it was also obvious that conducting a Euro-barometer exercise to seek more input on Europeans' perceptions of violence would not only complement project activity but also serve as a base for attempting to track some trends in perceptions of violence over time.
Kuigi peagi sai selgeks, et vêgivalla paljutahulisus peegeldus Daphnele esitatud projektides piisavalt, ilmnes samuti, et eurooplaste vêgivallatunnetust mýýtva Eurobaromeetri uuringu lêbiviimine mitte ainult ei têienda projektitegevust, vaid on ka baasiks, mille alusel saab mêê-ratleda vêgivalla tunnetamise viiside arengut aja jooksul.
The disaggregated nature of the data in Eurobarometer studies also allows for some general conclusions to be drawn about how di.erentcountries,age groups and socioeconomic groups might also perceive violence, and their responses to it.
Eurobaromeetri killustatud uurin-guandmete pýhjal saab teha Ÿldisi jêreldusi, kuidas erinevad riigid, v a n u s e r Ÿ h m a d ning sot-siaalmajanduslikud grupid tunnetavad vêgivalda ja sellele reageerivad.
In 1999, therefore, the Daphne initiative cooperated with the Commission services on infor-mation, communication, culture and audiovisual media (Public Opinion Analysis Unit) in de-veloping and commissioning a two-pronged Eurobarometer to gauge public opinion on (i) violence against children, and (ii) domestic violence against women.
Seetýttu tegi Daphne algatus 1999. aastal koostûûd komisjoni teabe, kommunikatsiooni, kul-tuuri ja audiovisuaalse meedia talitusega (avaliku arvamuse a n a l Ÿ Ÿ s i Ÿksus) Eurobaromeetri kahte tahku uuriva avaliku arvamuse osas, mis kêsitlesid: i) vêgivalda laste vastu ja ii) kodust vêgivalda naiste vastu.
It was unfortunate that the survey on violence against women was limited to domestic violence only, since this meant that important subjects such as tra/ckingandextra-family(e.g.institutional)violencewerenot included.
Kahjuks piirdus uurimus naistevastase vêgivalla kohta ainult koduse vêgivallaga, jêttes kýrvale sellised olulised teemad nagu inimkaubandus ja perevêline vêgivald (nt hooldus- ja kinnipidamisasutustes).
The survey on violence against children covered physical punishment, psychological punish-ment, sexual abuse, physical cruelty and psychological cruelty, although it also sought to «ndout whether Europeans did, in fact, consider all these to constitute `violence' and whether there were di.erencesinthisamongagegroupsandcountries.Itaskedquestionsaboutpo-tential perpetrators: father, mother, stepfather/mother's partner, stepmother/father's partner, brother, sister, other relative, teacher, child-minder, another child, stranger.
Uuringust lastevastase vêgivalla kohta ilmnesid sellised nêhtused nagu f Ÿ Ÿ s i l i n e karistamine, p s Ÿ h h o l o o g i l i n e karistamine, seksuaalne vêêrkohtlemine, f Ÿ Ÿ s i l i n e julmus ja p s Ÿ h h o l o o g i l i n e julmus, kuigi p Ÿ Ÿ t i ka uurida, kas eurooplased pidasid selliseid nêhtusi vêgivallaks ja kas selles suhtes oli teatavaid erinevusi v a n u s e r Ÿ h m a d e výi riikide vahel. Esitati k Ÿ s i m u s , kes výiks olla vêgivalla toimepanija: isa, ema, výýrasisa / ema elukaaslane, výýrasema / isa elukaaslane, vend, ýde, muu sugulane, ýpetaja, hooldaja, teine laps, výýras.
It also looked at how people heard about violence against children, what they thought were the main causes of violence against children, who they thought should intervene, what they knew about laws in their country, and thoughts they had on what could be done to reduce violence against
PŸŸti vêlja selgitada, kuidas inimesed olid kuulnud vêgivallast laste vastu, mis nende arvates oli lastevastase vêgivalla peamiseks pýhjuseks, kes nende arvates peaks sekkuma, mida nad teadsid oma riigi seadus-test ja mida nende arvates tuli teha lastevastase vêgivalla vêhendamiseks.
A brief history of Daphne children. There was also a question on whether the EU should be involved in combating vio-lence against children.
A brief history of Daphne seda, kui týsised on eurooplaste arvates eespool de«neeritudviisnaistevastasekodusevêgi-valla liiki ( p s Ÿ h h o l o o g i l i n e , f Ÿ Ÿ s i l i n e ja seksuaalne vêgivald, vêgivallaga êhvardamine ning vabaduse piiramine).
There was an important question regarding the relationship between violence and `circumstances', in order to gauge whether violence was tolerated in certain circumstances (this question was subsumed into other questions in the children's survey).
Oli toodud ka Ÿks oluline k Ÿ s i m u s , mis puudutas vêgivalla ja ¶asjaoludeƒ seost, et mýýta, mil mêêral peetakse vêgivalda teatud tingimustes ýigustatuks (antud k Ÿ s i m u s sisaldus ka lastevastase vêgivalla uuringus).
There was also a question that aimed to give some idea of the prevalence of domestic violence by asking respondents whether they themselves knew of someone who had been a victim or perpetra-tor of domestic violence, and where they knew this person (at work, in own family, among friends, etc.).
Veel Ÿks k Ÿ s i m u s uuris koduse vêgivalla levikut: kas vastajad teavad kedagi, kes on koduse vêgivalla ohver výi toimepanija, ja kust nad seda inimest teavad (tûûkaaslane, oma perekonnast, sýprade hulgast, tuttav jne).
Some interesting insights were gained through the two surveys.
Mainitud kaks uurimust andsid mýned huvitavad tulemused:
‡ Most Europeans thought that violence against children was `very common' or `fairly com-mon' (77 % total) and only 1 % had never heard of violence against children.
‡ paljud eurooplased arvasid, et lastevastane vêgivald on ¶vêga levinudƒ výi ¶Ÿsna levinudƒ (77% vastanuist); ainult 1% polnud midagi kuulnud lastevastasest vêgivallast;
‡ A majority of Europeans, although slightly fewer, thought that domestic violence against women was `very common' or `fairly common' (74 % total) but 4 % had never heard of it.
‡ paljud eurooplased (eelnevast veidi vêhem) pidasid naistevastast vêgivalda ¶vêga levinuksƒ výi ¶Ÿsna levinuksƒ (74% vastanuist), kuid 4% polnud sellest midagi kuulnud;
‡ In both cases, sexual violence topped the list of what was considered serious: more than 97 % of respondents considered sexual abuse of children to be a form of violence, and 90 % of Europeans considered sexual violence against women to be `very serious'.
‡ mýlemas k Ÿ s i t l u s e s oli týsiste probleemide loetelu tipus seksuaalvêgivald: enam kui 97% vastanuist pidas laste seksuaalset vêêrkohtlemist vêgivallavormiks ja 90% eurooplastest pidas naistevastast seksuaalvêgivalda ¶vêga týsiseksƒ ilminguks;
‡ There was a serious misconception about perpetrators of violence against children: Euro-peans mistakenly believed that it is strangers who are most likely to in‹ictviolenceonchildren (74 %) although in fact most violence is in‹ictedonchildrenbyfamily,friendsorpeople they know.
‡ lastevastase vêgivalla toimepanijate suhtes ilmnes týsine valearusaam: eurooplased arva-sid ekslikult, et výýrad inimesed on peamisteks lastevastase vêgivalla pýhjustajateks (74%), kuigi tegelikult on need peamiselt pereliikmed, sýbrad výi tuttavad inimesed;
‡ Europeans consider that physical or psychological violence in‹ictedonchildrenbyteach-ers is a form of violence (75 %), and 59 % regard physical punishment by parents as an act of violence.
‡ eurooplased arvavad, et lastevastane f Ÿ Ÿ s i l i n e výi p s Ÿ h h o l o o g i l i n e vêgivald ýpetajate poolt on vêgivalla vorm (75%); 59% peavad seda, kui vanemad oma lapsi kehaliselt karis-tavad, samuti vêgivallaks;
‡ Europeans in general believe that physical or psychological cruelty in‹ictedbyotherchil-dren is also a form of violence (88 % and 85 % respectively), although interestingly this response is highly disaggregated by age, with young people being more accepting of peer violence than older people.
‡ Ÿldiselt arvavad eurooplased, et teiste laste f Ÿ Ÿ s i l i n e ja p s Ÿ h h o l o o g i l i n e julmus on Ÿks vê-givallavormidest (vastavalt 88% ja 85%), kuigi palju sýltub vastaja vanusest, kusjuures noo-remad aktsepteerivad omasuguste vêgivalda rohkem kui vanemad;
`Young people have normalised and grown accustomed to violence and the values associated with it.
¶Noored inimesed on harjunud vêgivalla ja sellega seotud vêêrtustega.
Violence is present on an habitual, daily and generalised basis.
Vêgivald eksisteerib harjumuslikul, igapêevasel ja Ÿldistatud tasemel.
It is assumed to be in-evitable and, generally speaking, we are not aware of the problems it causes.
Seda peetakse vêltimatuks ja Ÿldiselt me ei tea, mis seda pýhjustab.
From the groups' analysis, a certain permissiveness and social acceptance is inferred and they do not seem to be very informed about the negative consequences of acts of violence, although they are identi«edas problematic„ Violence serves as a mechanism for dialogue between equals.
Gruppide kêitumise lêhemal a n a l Ÿ Ÿ s i m i s e l jêreldub teatav lubatavus ja sotsiaalne aktsepteerimine ning tundub, et need inimesed ei tea, milliseid negatiivseid jêrel-meid vêgivallaaktid kaasa toovad, kuigi neid tunnistatakse problemaatilisteks „ Výrdsete puhul on vêgivald Ÿks dialoogi vormidest.
Adolescents form their own code with a di.erentlanguage,aslangthatispartoftheritesofpassage,offorms of behaviour and attitudes that lead them to the adult stage.
Noorukid loovad oma suhtlemismudeli koos erineva keele, rituaalse slêngi, kêitumisviisi ja suhtumisega, mis saadab neid têiskasvanuks saamiseni.
Violence thus becomes an irrational process that builds identity by operating within a circle of recognition between the members of the group.' [Project 99/055/C]
Vêgivald muutub sellega seoses irratsionaalseks tegutsemiseks, mis loob identiteeti ja toimib Ÿksteist hêsti tundva grupi piires.ƒ [Projekt 99/055/C]
‡ Europeans «nditdi/cultto imaginethatchildrenmightbe violenttowardstheirsiblings,but recognise violence by `another child' as frequently occurring.
‡ eurooplastel on raske ette kujutada, et lapsed výivad olla vêgivaldsed oma ýe výi venna vastu, kuid mûûnavad, et sageli esineb vêgivaldsust ¶mýne teise lapseƒ poolt;
`An issue that arose for the project team was that of the ``backlash'' in Ireland.
¶Iirimaa projekti meeskonna ees seisis keeruline probleem.
A hostile environ-ment exists within Irish society to explore violence within the home and in young peoples' lives. At present there is a group of men's groups who organise together to destruct the work of many groups in Ireland who work in the area of violence.
Iiri Ÿhiskonnas eksisteerib vaenulik keskkond, mis ei lase peres ja noorte hulgas aset leidvat vêgivalda uurida. âks meestegrupp on organiseerunud ja takistab Iiri tûûgruppide vêgivallavastast tegevust.
Their agenda also attacks women's freedom of choice.
Nad r Ÿ n d a v a d ka naiste valikuvabadust.
The media gives considerable coverage to this group who, as well as attacking wom-en's groups and their supporters, have also challenged the government by taking a court case against them in relation to the one programme that the government has introduced in schools for boys called `'Exploring masculinities''.
Meedia rêêgib mêrkimisvêêrselt selle grupi tegevusest, kes r Ÿ n d a b naisliikumist ja selle toetajaid, ning nad on algatanud ka kohtuasja valitsuse vastu seoses programmiga ¶Mis on mehelikkusƒ, mille valitsus viis koolide ýppekavasse poiste tarvis.
The project operated within this environment.' [Project 99/044/WC]
Projekt toimis sellises kesk-konnas.ƒ [Projekt 99/044/WC]
‡ There were strong feelings that perpetrators of violence against children and domestic violence against women should be punished (94 % and 95 %) but little knowledge of exist-ing laws.
‡ valitses k Ÿ l l veendumus, et laste- ja naistevastaste koduste vêgivallategude toimepanijaid tuleks karistada (94% ja 95%), kuid ei tuntud seadusi;
‡ The majority of Europeans believed that laws should be more stringently enforced (91 % in both surveys) and there was strong support for the notion that the EU itself should be involved in combating violence against children (72 % `de«nitely')andagainstwomen(67 %).
‡ enamus eurooplastest oli seisukohal, et seadusi tuleks rangemalt rakendada (mýlemas uuringus 91%), ning toetati seda, et EL peaks ise osalema výitluses laste- (72% ¶kindlaltƒ poolt) ja naistevastase vêgivalla (67%) vastu.
What was clear from the Eurobarometer is that there is a high level of general awareness about violence in Europe and a strong feeling that it is a social phenomenon that is not acceptable.
Eurobaromeetrist selgus, et Euroopas eksisteerivast vêgivallast ollakse suures osas teadlikud ja et seda sotsiaalset nêhtust ei peeta kindlasti aktsepteeritavaks.
There was also endorsement of the notion that violence is a multi-faceted phenomenon that has di.erentformsandtriggers,andthattheperpetratorsofviolencearealsodiverse.
Mûûndi ka seda, et vêgivald on oma olemuselt eripalgeline nêhtus, eri vormide ja kêivitusteguritega, ning et ka vêgival-latsejad on erinevad.
There were also worrying signs, however, that the younger the European, the higher the lev-el of violence tolerated, suggesting that tolerance of violence may be increasing and that it may be becoming `normalised'.
Siiski ilmnesid êrevust tekitavad mêrgid: mida noorem eurooplane, seda suurem on tema vêgivallataluvus, mis têhendab, et tolerantsus vêgivalla suhtes výib nêidata kasvutendentsi, mida varsti výidakse hakata ¶normaalseksƒ pidama.
There are serious questions unanswered about why this is so (in more speci«careas,forexamplesexualabuseofchildren,thereareindicationsthatmasspublic awareness campaigns may in fact contribute to such `normalisation' and provide a context for the self-justi«cationprocessthatabusersgothrough).Whateverthereasons,thisclearly remains a major challenge for Europe.
Selle pýhjuste kohta on veel palju ebasel-ge (konkreetsemates valdkondades, nêiteks laste seksuaalse vêêrkohtlemise puhul ilmneb isegi, et massilised avalikkuse teadlikkust týstvad kampaaniad výivad arusaamu sama moodi ¶normaliseeridaƒ ja seelêbi anda vêêrkohtlejaile pýhjust eneseýigustuseks). Sýltumata pýh-justest jêêb see Euroopale Ÿheks peamiseks vêljakutseks.