1) Being essentially forced (for practical purposes) to live in single family dwellings with private rooms as being in a situation which traditional mores and practices (e.g., as upheld in many ways by family and community) would not have been equipped to deal with.
2) The use of neuroweapons, i.e., use of bio- and neuro-effective segments of the electromagnetic spectrum, to suggest/force acts as being used for purposes to promote acts which would have specifically exploited the vulnerability mentioned in 1). (And that, without suggesting the necessity of neuroweapons to have been applied in order for a comparatively higher incidence to have occurred.)
Regarding 2), why would someone do that?
A) Potentially for pro-genocide purposes.
B) To promote rationale for comparatively lower financial supports on a per capita basis (e.g., for education) than are offered to other Canadian citizens.
C) To facilitate ongoing (and/or justify former) political disempowerment in terms of “the mainstream political process”.
D) Or, simply, as being among politically disempowered individuals and groups to perform involuntary experimentation upon with a high expectation of impunity.
Regarding 2) The question of how many related accusations, factual events and/or confessions were primarily originated from unknowingly forced and unknowingly involuntary statements, or were a manifestation of black and white thinking — e.g. where physical rape of a young child is often stated as being in some manner equivalent with voluntary or semi-voluntary sexual interaction (explicitly sanctioned against in the criminal code) between youth under the age of majority and a much-older adult — is likely to be of relevance.
Regarding 2) The question of the extent to which potential future leaders, potentially on a familial and/or community basis, would have been especially targeted in such a manner could also be raised.
Regarding 1) As differentiated from claims of genetic explanations regarding use of non-food mind influencing substances and in particular alcohol, the lack of pre-existing traditions and mores as promoted by family and community can also be mentioned.
Of course, it would be difficult for people in such a position to speak for themselves because they stand liable to be branded as rapists, pedophiles and addicts, which ‘everyone knows’ are basically deserving of eradication from the face of the earth (to the extent that the preceding use of quotation marks could itself be discrediting). It can also be noted that these intended beliefs in terms of such characteristics (being branded as rapists, pedophiles and addicts) are also widely attributed to the entire class of people who use substances which among other things are alternatives to synthetic pharmaceuticals and which (as do many prescription pharmaceuticals) have some thought- or emotion-altering effect.