|
Post by SharonArnold on Mar 23, 2015 15:17:19 GMT -5
I would suggest that if you feel you need a gun to protect you from your spouse, don't get married. And if you feel you need a gun to protect you from sexual predators in any group - leave the group. I'm not wanting to be insensitive or dismissive, but this seems almost self-evident to me. Using a gun or biting off someone's tongue is something I could not even fathom doing. (Now, I am a female who has never even been remotely inappropriately approached from any direction, so if someone thinks I should recuse myself from the discussion, I have no problem with that.) And, having been part of the 2X2 group for almost 4 decades, I personally cannot imagine a situation where I would not have felt as safe with a brother worker as I did with one of my own brothers. That does not mean that I was not aware of creepy brother workers (I am not going to name names - but if you twisted my arm, I probably would). None of these were within my usual circle, though I knew of them at convention, flirting with members of my peer group. (And, yes, there was an element of responsibility with the women who responded to these kinds of flirtations.) I think this discussion is veering off on tangents, that effectively removes it from the real problems with the F&W group. I see at least one of these problems as "the unspoken rules", which would see a victim not reacting with as much power (aka clarity and determination) as they would if the predator was in a workplace or in a public place.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Mar 23, 2015 15:37:20 GMT -5
We can disagree on issues while staying respectful to each other. Maja, About The phrase: "don't worry your pretty little head"! "
You may not understand what that remark meant for some of us who are older. I don't know your age, but I had those kinds of statements and their equivalents made to me by men often when I was growing up. They were meant to say that I was too dumb to understand something that a man understood. He would think it was perfectly ok to say such a thing & that actually I should be pleased and all in a twitter because, -well, after all he did say my "little head" was " pretty" didn't he!
|
|
|
Post by SharonArnold on Mar 23, 2015 15:42:43 GMT -5
Maja, You may not understand what that remark meant for some of us who are older. I don't know your age, but I had those kinds of statements and their equivalents made to me by men often when I was growing up. They were meant to say that I was too dumb to understand something that a man understood. He would think it was perfectly ok to say such a thing & that actually I should be pleased and all in a twitter because, -well, after all he did say my "little head" was " pretty" didn't he!
Yeah, in the end, I would vote that you give him/them a break. It's not that women haven't had their own issues that they are growing past.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Mar 23, 2015 16:05:32 GMT -5
Yeah, in the end, I would vote that you give him/them a break.It's not that women haven't had their own issues that they are growing past. It is not about giving someone a break, -Jesse or anyone else.
My point was I don't think Maja understood what Matisse meant & that Maja went over board in accusing "Matisse and myself," of being derogatory and that we were using demeaning personal remarks.
|
|
|
Post by SharonArnold on Mar 23, 2015 16:09:38 GMT -5
Yeah, in the end, I would vote that you give him/them a break.It's not that women haven't had their own issues that they are growing past. It is not about giving someone a break, -Jesse or anyone else.
My point was I don't think Maja understood what Matisse meant & that Maja went over board in accusing "Matisse and myself," of being derogatory and that we were using demeaning personal remarks.
Fair enough.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Mar 23, 2015 16:23:07 GMT -5
I would suggest that if you feel you need a gun to protect you from your spouse, don't get married. And if you feel you need a gun to protect you from sexual predators in any group - leave the group. I'm not wanting to be insensitive or dismissive, but this seems almost self-evident to me. Using a gun or biting off someone's tongue is something I could not even fathom doing. (Now, I am a female who has never even been remotely inappropriately approached from any direction, so if someone thinks I should recuse myself from the discussion, I have no problem with that.) And, having been part of the 2X2 group for almost 4 decades, I personally cannot imagine a situation where I would not have felt as safe with a brother worker as I did with one of my own brothers. That does not mean that I was not aware of creepy brother workers (I am not going to name names - but if you twisted my arm, I probably would). None of these were within my usual circle, though I knew of them at convention, flirting with members of my peer group. (And, yes, there was an element of responsibility with the women who responded to these kinds of flirtations.) I think this discussion is veering off on tangents, that effectively removes it from the real problems with the F&W group. I see at least one of these problems as "the unspoken rules", which would see a victim not reacting with as much power (aka clarity and determination) as they would if the predator was in a workplace or in a public place. Yes, it's pretty ridiculous recommending women defend themselves against brother workers with a gun. It should result in some Berties. I think most workers and friends would agree that sexual predators should not remain on any staff of workers, but would most workers and friends say that openly?
|
|
|
Post by SharonArnold on Mar 23, 2015 16:33:05 GMT -5
Yes, it's pretty ridiculous recommending women defend themselves against brother workers with a gun. It should result in some Berties. I think most workers and friends would agree that sexual predators should not remain on any staff of workers, but would most workers and friends say that openly? Yeah, I think that's the issue, right here, right now. I personally know many current members who think this. We're still working on the "sayin" part. The problem with the ones who have this kind of clarity in their thinking is that they have already moved themselves to the "periphery" over countless other issues, so it's easy for the rank-and-file to dismiss them. I still do not know the best way to actually effect change. Maybe time for the 2X2's to join the twitter-verse? (You know it's going to happen.)
|
|
|
Post by snow on Mar 23, 2015 17:15:49 GMT -5
It seems to me that if the solution is for all women to carry guns at conventions and preps, then 'good' men aren't stepping up to say something is dreadfully wrong with this picture. It amazes me it's a suggestion really. Times have sure changed within the group or I was totally oblivious to what was going on while in the group. That is a distinct possibility of course, I was young (17) when I no longer had anything to do with the group anymore. And, I was stupid enough to get myself in a situation where I was raped when I left home at 17, so yes, I guess it was a distinct possibility I was just altogether too naive to know this was going on in the group.
|
|
|
Post by mdm on Mar 23, 2015 18:49:24 GMT -5
We can disagree on issues while staying respectful to each other. Maja, About The phrase: "don't worry your pretty little head"! "
You may not understand what that remark meant for some of us who are older. I don't know your age, but I had those kinds of statements and their equivalents made to me by men often when I was growing up. They were meant to say that I was too dumb to understand something that a man understood. He would think it was perfectly ok to say such a thing & that actually I should be pleased and all in a twitter because, -well, after all he did say my "little head" was " pretty" didn't he!
I see what you mean. Blame it not on difference in age, but on the fact that I was not raised in the US and that English is not my first language, plus on not always reading carefully and being slow at times. (Proof that being multi-lingual and having lived on different continents doesn't mean much, at least not in my case ) I am sorry if I over-reacted.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Mar 23, 2015 18:59:46 GMT -5
Maja, About The phrase: "don't worry your pretty little head"! "
You may not understand what that remark meant for some of us who are older. I don't know your age, but I had those kinds of statements and their equivalents made to me by men often when I was growing up. They were meant to say that I was too dumb to understand something that a man understood. He would think it was perfectly ok to say such a thing & that actually I should be pleased and all in a twitter because, -well, after all he did say my "little head" was " pretty" didn't he!
I see what you mean. Blame it not on difference in age, but on the fact that I was not raised in the US and that English is not my first language, plus on not always reading carefully and being slow at times. (Proof that being multi-lingual and having lived on different continents doesn't mean much ) If Jesse doesn't mind it, neither do I. Ah! That does explain it! Thank you! Now I understand. It is my error for assuming that you would understand what we meant!
Actually, I envy your ability to communicate in a different language.
|
|
|
Post by mdm on Mar 23, 2015 19:03:03 GMT -5
I see what you mean. Blame it not on difference in age, but on the fact that I was not raised in the US and that English is not my first language, plus on not always reading carefully and being slow at times. (Proof that being multi-lingual and having lived on different continents doesn't mean much ) If Jesse doesn't mind it, neither do I. Ah! That does explain it! Thank you! Now I understand. It is my error for assuming that you would understand what we meant!
Actually, I envy your ability to communicate in a different language.
I can't promise it won't happen again, so feel free to correct me any time
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Mar 23, 2015 22:56:25 GMT -5
Ah! That does explain it! Thank you! Now I understand. It is my error for assuming that you would understand what we meant!
Actually, I envy your ability to communicate in a different language.
I can't promise it won't happen again, so feel free to correct me any time I'll keep an eye on you! and with No charge!
|
|
|
Post by emy on Mar 23, 2015 23:40:18 GMT -5
Yes, it's pretty ridiculous recommending women defend themselves against brother workers with a gun. It should result in some Berties. I think most workers and friends would agree that sexual predators should not remain on any staff of workers, but would most workers and friends say that openly?Yes
|
|
|
Post by rational on Mar 23, 2015 23:50:55 GMT -5
I would suggest that if you feel you need a gun to protect you from your spouse, don't get married. By the time you learn of the need for a gun you may have already been married for a time. If the group does not take action, I agree.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Mar 24, 2015 3:58:12 GMT -5
I would suggest that if you feel you need a gun to protect you from your spouse, don't get married. By the time you learn of the need for a gun you may have already been married for a time. If you think you need a gun, get out of the marriage.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Mar 24, 2015 3:59:06 GMT -5
Yes, it's pretty ridiculous recommending women defend themselves against brother workers with a gun. It should result in some Berties. I think most workers and friends would agree that sexual predators should not remain on any staff of workers, but would most workers and friends say that openly?Yes What forum?
|
|
|
Post by mdm on Mar 24, 2015 9:17:21 GMT -5
I'm not wanting to be insensitive or dismissive, but this seems almost self-evident to me. Using a gun or biting off someone's tongue is something I could not even fathom doing. (Now, I am a female who has never even been remotely inappropriately approached from any direction, so if someone thinks I should recuse myself from the discussion, I have no problem with that.) And, having been part of the 2X2 group for almost 4 decades, I personally cannot imagine a situation where I would not have felt as safe with a brother worker as I did with one of my own brothers. That does not mean that I was not aware of creepy brother workers (I am not going to name names - but if you twisted my arm, I probably would). None of these were within my usual circle, though I knew of them at convention, flirting with members of my peer group. (And, yes, there was an element of responsibility with the women who responded to these kinds of flirtations.) I think this discussion is veering off on tangents, that effectively removes it from the real problems with the F&W group. I see at least one of these problems as "the unspoken rules", which would see a victim not reacting with as much power (aka clarity and determination) as they would if the predator was in a workplace or in a public place. Yes, it's pretty ridiculous recommending women defend themselves against brother workers with a gun. It should result in some Berties. I think most workers and friends would agree that sexual predators should not remain on any staff of workers, but would most workers and friends say that openly? I am not even sure that most f&w's would agree that sexual predators should not be in the work, based for example on being told that LW was not dismissed from the work after earlier complaints because many would have objected to that, and that many objected to IH being removed from the work. Another issue is that many f&w's tend to dismiss reports of abuse as cases of consensual immorality, seduction, vengeance of a rejected woman, part of a conspiracy ("someone is using her"), the woman being "troubled" or "crazy," and of course a liar. Or they simply don't want to deal with it and expose it out of fear of "doing damage to the kingdom" or "destroying the man." Several of these explanations we heard personally when we inquired about the subject of this thread from workers and from one elder (not ours). These are good people who in theory abhor abuse of any kind, but in practice excuse it or dismiss it as something else. So, how do you get these "good guys" (and gals) to stand up and speak up against abuse when faced with real live cases of it, if they keep dismissing it as something else? How do you transfer theory into practice?... Edit: I have to add one more reason for not dismissing LW from the work sooner: that some of the things he did (touching, kissing, complimenting a woman on her looks) are "normal behaviors that people engage in all the time." Aparently, the fact that these behaviors are only normal in committed and consensual romantic relationships between people who are not engaged in another relationship or committed to celibacy is completely lost on overseers.
|
|
|
Post by mdm on Mar 24, 2015 9:37:26 GMT -5
Yes, it's pretty ridiculous recommending women defend themselves against brother workers with a gun. It should result in some Berties. I think most workers and friends would agree that sexual predators should not remain on any staff of workers, but would most workers and friends say that openly?Yes When we talked to one (European) brother worker about sexual abuse, he told us that he is not free to talk about those issues with ANYBODY in the ministry. He said that "it is not safe." He himself would and does say openly what he thinks, but only when asked and only when he himself is a witness. He does not get involved if he wasn't a 1st hand witness. And even for reporting what he has witnessed himself and for answering questions honestly (he made a point to us that he does not speak his mind on these things unless asked to as it wouldn't be received well), he has "payed the price." Not only that, but "every day" he fears that he will be dismissed from the work because of his honesty. Of course, he believes that to lose his place in the ministry would mean a spiritual failure, so he must be in a very hard place. And, he believes that in spite of all the problems, one has to be in the Fellowship in order to have salvation (not that all who are in the Fellowship will obtain salvation, especially not all overseers), so he kindly keeps trying to get us to come back. Sorry, I got carried away there... The main point is that even if most f&w's would agree that sexual predators should not remain in the work, they would not dare to say that openly, except maybe when theoretical questions are asked - not when it comes to real cases of abuse.
|
|
|
Post by mdm on Mar 24, 2015 9:51:41 GMT -5
Emy, Jesse and anybody else who may think I am exaggerating or making things up, please talk to overseers about this particular case and verify for yourselves whether I am making things up. You have a lot of information about it given by Scott, so you know where to start. Ask them yourselves why LW was not removed from the work after the 1st of 2nd or 3rd complaint against him.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2015 10:50:56 GMT -5
When we talked to one (European) brother worker about sexual abuse, he told us that he is not free to talk about those issues with ANYBODY in the ministry. He said that "it is not safe." He himself would and does say openly what he thinks, but only when asked and only when he himself is a witness. He does not get involved if he wasn't a 1st hand witness. And even for reporting what he has witnessed himself and for answering questions honestly (he made a point to us that he does not speak his mind on these things unless asked to as it wouldn't be received well), he has "payed the price." Not only that, but "every day" he fears that he will be dismissed from the work because of his honesty. Of course, he believes that to lose his place in the ministry would mean a spiritual failure, so he must be in a very hard place. And, he believes that in spite of all the problems, one has to be in the Fellowship in order to have salvation (not that all who are in the Fellowship will obtain salvation, especially not all overseers), so he kindly keeps trying to get us to come back. Sorry, I gut carried away there... The main point is that even if most f&w's would agree that sexual predators should not remain in the work, they would not dare to say that openly, except maybe when theoretical questions are asked - not when it comes to real cases of abuse. Well there should be a way to put them to the test and see who really have honest hearts. I really don't think that a majority of folks in the fellowship would condone such behaviour in the fellowship. Perhaps those in authority should test them with a secret ballot in every country where the fellowship exists, and settle the matter by majority decision.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2015 11:18:27 GMT -5
Partaker, anyone who has even the least thought of conducting affairs openly and honestly with any imput given those not in power are not in touch with 2&2 ministry mentality. All of such flows from the top down, with absolutely none to the people below top worker status. None, and furthermore, most lower workers long for that top worker ranking, selling out their younger worker idealism to obtain it.
In my lifetime, I have personally witnessed this happening, and in every instance found it very sad to observe. Kind, even loving younger workers becoming arrogant authoritarians firmly in control of the bag and those they openly believe beneath them.
Guess every one can hold to idealistic dreams, which rarely, if ever, become reality.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2015 11:33:35 GMT -5
Partaker, anyone who has even the least thought of conducting affairs openly and honestly with any imput given those not in power are not in touch with 2&2 ministry mentality. All of such flows from the top down, with absolutely none to the people below top worker status. None, and furthermore, most lower workers long for that top worker ranking, selling out their younger worker idealism to obtain it.
In my lifetime, I have personally witnessed this happening, and in every instance found it very sad to observe. Kind, even loving younger workers becoming arrogant authoritarians firmly in control of the bag and those they openly believe beneath them.
Guess every one can hold to idealistic dreams, which rarely, if ever, become reality. Dennis, you know that I have great respect for you and your opinions, you have gone through it all so I do appreciate your opinions; what you have written here seems to depict a "no hope of a solution situation." Make it Look like the TMB is rotten to the core; :-[that is so sad. Is this a reality of the "TMB?" Surely this sort of thing is not a true representation consistent with God's Kingdom - earthly power struggles for positions void of humility?
|
|
|
Post by emy on Mar 24, 2015 15:00:12 GMT -5
Different perspective, I would say. The objection would come because they didn't believe they were predators, rather than they DO believe predators can remain in the work. When nearly all of the predator stories come from someone who is no longer in the fellowship, it's too easy to discount them. I realize some people know the stories from professing victims, but they are most often hearsay (by the time I hear them) so what to think? "The other side" doesn't seem to come out even as hearsay.
I confess that I hear stories that have the ring of truth, but also hear ones that I could possibly doubt, but would never accuse a victim of not being honest.
|
|
|
Post by mdm on Mar 24, 2015 22:22:43 GMT -5
Different perspective, I would say. The objection would come because they didn't believe they were predators, rather than they DO believe predators can remain in the work. When nearly all of the predator stories come from someone who is no longer in the fellowship, it's too easy to discount them. I realize some people know the stories from professing victims, but they are most often hearsay (by the time I hear them) so what to think? "The other side" doesn't seem to come out even as hearsay. I confess that I hear stories that have the ring of truth, but also hear ones that I could possibly doubt, but would never accuse a victim of not being honest. We were told that one reason why LW was not removed from the work sooner is because many would have objected to it, as in - they would have objected to it even though they were made aware of accusations against him. Of course, as I've pointed out before, there is a problem also of abuse and predatory behavior being systematically dismissed as something else and not being seen for what it is. I am aware of one accusation from a non-professing person; the rest were from professing women and sister workers. If you are referring to the folks whose account Scott posted, they were all professing at the time (the alleged victim and the couple who wrote the letter). The issue was never whether they were believed, but whether the offences warranted removal from the work. The reason why the sister worker who pressed charges against him is maligned so much is that she went public with her accusation. You don't have to go by hearsay. You can check these things for yourself if you wish just like I did.
|
|
|
Post by reallyandtruly on Mar 24, 2015 22:45:26 GMT -5
Yes, it's pretty ridiculous recommending women defend themselves against brother workers with a gun. It should result in some Berties. I think most workers and friends would agree that sexual predators should not remain on any staff of workers, but would most workers and friends say that openly?Apparently the overseer in NZ has taken that stand so I would say he is definately saying that.
|
|
|
Post by emy on Mar 24, 2015 23:38:45 GMT -5
Apparently the overseer in NZ has taken that stand so I would say he is definately saying that. Another messed up quote. This comment is from Reallyandtruly.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Mar 25, 2015 0:00:42 GMT -5
Yes, it's pretty ridiculous recommending women defend themselves against brother workers with a gun. It should result in some Berties. I think most workers and friends would agree that sexual predators should not remain on any staff of workers, but would most workers and friends say that openly? Apparently the overseer in NZ has taken that stand so I would say he is definately saying that. I think the above was how it was meant to be Emy.
|
|
|
Post by mdm on Mar 25, 2015 10:57:29 GMT -5
Apparently the overseer in NZ has taken that stand so I would say he is definately saying that. I am not aware of the NZ overseer making a stand on adult sexual abuse, only on CSA.
|
|