|
Post by Scott Ross on Mar 15, 2015 15:06:14 GMT -5
Sure thing. Figured that it might help some folks who seem to think there is some isolated alleged incident that has tarnished Leslie and led to his removal as overseer and subsequent removal as an active worker.
Same thing that happened with Ira. Too many facts from too many sources to disregard, plus most of what happened with Leslie was pretty public knowledge these last several years.
There are professing folks scattered around the world who keep in contact, and let each other know what is going on within the fellowship. They have a real concern about such matters, as they really care about the fellowship. There are quite a few senior workers who think that they rule their areas, rather than the fact that they are the servants of the church. When individuals lose 'their part' in meetings because they care enough to want to resolve issues within the church......it says a lot about the health of the church.
|
|
bulsi
Junior Member
WHAT WE DO IN LIFE ECHOES IN ETERNITY !
Posts: 197
|
Post by bulsi on Mar 15, 2015 15:06:34 GMT -5
My professing sister is in Ohio right now with the rest of my family. She has a friend in Indiana whose mother just died. Apparently, she is going up to Indiana today to meet Leslie White for lunch and she is also going to the funeral of her friend's mom. This is the same sister who told me how that a few years ago, Leslie White grabbed her and stuck his tongue down her throat in a passionate kiss and how she told him "you just fell off the pedestal I put you on." Well, apparently he didn't fall that far. I am just venting but I just can't believe how loyal "friends" stay to certain "workers" no matter what they do. It reminded me of the children who have reported sexual abuse by a worker and how their parents probably just shushed them and swept it under the rug. How incredibly infuriating and sad, this thought was to me. I actually did tell my mom "woo hoo. Lunch with Leslie White, the pervert who kisses whoever he wants as long as they profess." She just laughed and said "well, you know your sisters have always liked Leslie." Yeah, right. WHATEVER. XXXXX
Are you kidding me!!!! This can't be real.... Go figure if she goes for seconds is it a relationship or abuse?!!!
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Mar 15, 2015 15:15:59 GMT -5
My professing sister is in Ohio right now with the rest of my family. She has a friend in Indiana whose mother just died. Apparently, she is going up to Indiana today to meet Leslie White for lunch and she is also going to the funeral of her friend's mom. This is the same sister who told me how that a few years ago, Leslie White grabbed her and stuck his tongue down her throat in a passionate kiss and how she told him "you just fell off the pedestal I put you on." Well, apparently he didn't fall that far. I am just venting but I just can't believe how loyal "friends" stay to certain "workers" no matter what they do. It reminded me of the children who have reported sexual abuse by a worker and how their parents probably just shushed them and swept it under the rug. How incredibly infuriating and sad, this thought was to me. I actually did tell my mom "woo hoo. Lunch with Leslie White, the pervert who kisses whoever he wants as long as they profess." She just laughed and said "well, you know your sisters have always liked Leslie." Yeah, right. WHATEVER. XXXXX
Are you kidding me!!!! This can't be real.... Go figure if she goes for seconds is it a relationship or abuse?!!! My guess is relationship. Leslie seems to have had quite a few of them over the years.
|
|
bulsi
Junior Member
WHAT WE DO IN LIFE ECHOES IN ETERNITY !
Posts: 197
|
Post by bulsi on Mar 15, 2015 15:16:20 GMT -5
When individuals lose 'their part' in meetings.... Speaking of taking part is he even able to give part in meeting? ? or sit and be silent like many who do wrong and are made to feel second class?
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Mar 15, 2015 15:17:57 GMT -5
I believe Leslie is taking part in meetings. He just isn't a worker anymore. Much like Ira in that regard. Loss of place, but not of privilege.
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Mar 15, 2015 15:22:15 GMT -5
It is common practice to ease out those who have a past that catches up with them. While the senior workers can keep some things under wraps that they don't really want people to know about, once they become public knowledge, they are often forced to take action.
Happens to quite a few senior workers actually. It can be a real mess for the other senior workers to try to have to take care of.
|
|
|
Post by matisse on Mar 15, 2015 15:26:06 GMT -5
Sure thing. Figured that it might help some folks who seem to think there is some isolated alleged incident that has tarnished Leslie and led to his removal as overseer and subsequent removal as an active worker. Same thing that happened with Ira. Too many facts from too many sources to disregard, plus most of what happened with Leslie was pretty public knowledge these last several years. There are professing folks scattered around the world who keep in contact, and let each other know what is going on within the fellowship. They have a real concern about such matters, as they really care about the fellowship. There are quite a few senior workers who think that they rule their areas, rather than the fact that they are the servants of the church. When individuals lose 'their part' in meetings because they care enough to want to resolve issues within the church......it says a lot about the health of the church. It's sad for me that BB has been so slow and unreliable. I really liked him as a kid (still do...or want to, anyway) and I would have hoped for him to have more of "a clue" than that....though now that I say it, I'm not sure why I would. As a brother worker in that culture, he would have no incentive to take what women have to say seriously.
|
|
bulsi
Junior Member
WHAT WE DO IN LIFE ECHOES IN ETERNITY !
Posts: 197
|
Post by bulsi on Mar 15, 2015 15:26:22 GMT -5
mmmmmmmm My sin ..... Being married to a divorced woman and this was my first marriage. I was told not to take part in the meeting this includes the bread and wine. After two years I quit going
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Mar 15, 2015 15:28:05 GMT -5
Funny how that works. Easy to punish people for their 'perceived' sins, while ignoring those of fellow workers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2015 15:45:20 GMT -5
Funny how that works. Easy to punish people for their 'perceived' sins, while ignoring those of fellow workers. Don't do as I do, do as I say, seems to be Hyporacy of double standards at its highest level.
|
|
|
Post by mdm on Mar 15, 2015 21:34:45 GMT -5
Here you go...... A transcript and timeline of an incident that took place AFTER the alleged rape, but prior to the rape allegations. The sister worker didn't know about this particular incident concerning Leslie when she came forward. Since there are some fairly prominent workers mentioned here, people could certainly contact them to verify the accurateness of this accounting. Mr. Jim Price Greetings Jim, We are writing to let you and those listed below know that our greatest concern is for the Kingdom, and keeping it pure and holy. These events have been so distressing for the past 8 months, that there are days when we just wish we could wake up and realize it was all a nightmare and over with. But, it continues, and for nearly 240 days, day and night, this horror has plagued our mind. We’ve prayed for an answer, and prayed for peace, and prayed for a resolution, and prayed that the workers we’ve spoken to (Bruce Shaw and Barry Barkley) would see how serious and devastating this event has been to the victim, to our family, and could be to the whole Family of God. XXXXX and I have lost sleep, night after night, for months. We’ve wept repeatedly, and feel it’s hopeless at times to think anyone will feel as distraught as we do over these events. .....
Thank you Scott for posting this letter and the rest. I hope that professing people reading here and who care about their church will indeed contact these workers and find out just why such a person was allowed to remain in the work.
|
|
|
Post by mdm on Mar 15, 2015 21:49:44 GMT -5
When individuals lose 'their part' in meetings.... Speaking of taking part is he even able to give part in meeting? ? or sit and be silent like many who do wrong and are made to feel second class? I am yet to hear of someone who has lost his place in the ministry over sexual immorality or abuse to lose his meeting privileges. Even those who have been convicted for Child Sexual Abuse continue to enjoy full meeting privileges. I would love to hear otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Mar 15, 2015 22:20:10 GMT -5
I think Sid Lee, was a worker who lost meeting privileges over "pornography " of some sort. His older brother , Stanley, was the overseer, and he was heartbroken over the ordeal. Imagine the "guts," that stanley had to deal with it, instead of total denial and covering. I think Sid went to some gospel meetings but dont think to fellowship mtgs.This was in manitoba and Saskatchewan. It was very sad for all involved. Please correct me if wrong info. Alvin
|
|
|
Post by rational on Mar 15, 2015 23:51:27 GMT -5
This has come up in the past. From the email and other information posted by Scott: I was made aware of this incident on January 14, 2009. XXX and I got together with the victim on April 3, 2009, from 5:00 to 10:00 p.m. and discussed in detail each and every question she was asked and the details regarding the incident. We were shocked and appalled at the questions.
The questions were as such: Did she ever have pleasure with her husband? How often did they have sex? Could her husband get an erection? Did he ejaculate? What did she do to excite him? Did she get him to masturbate? Did he think her body was attractive? Did he look at other women? In the times they did have sex, was he able to get her wet? These questions would be inappropriate between anyone but people with either an intimate or professional relationship, something that I do not think LW and/or the victim would claim. It seems clear that if this is what took place that LW was way out of line. On the other hand, what is the responsibility of the victim? These are clearly inappropriate questions. Yet not just one or two questions were answered but at least nine questions that touched on very intimate topics. If LW was in a delusional state and thought this line of questioning was actually beneficial there was no feedback that was recorded to indicate that the victim, at the time, thought the conversation was inappropriate. As related in an earlier post, people should not have to protect themselves against this type of inappropriate behavior. However, when it happens people need to at least make their rejection of what is happening known. Perhaps there are factors that I have overlooked.
|
|
logain
Junior Member
Posts: 66
|
Post by logain on Mar 16, 2015 0:00:18 GMT -5
I think Sid Lee, was a worker who lost meeting privileges over "pornography " of some sort. His older brother , Stanley, was the overseer, and he was heartbroken over the ordeal. Imagine the "guts," that stanley had to deal with it, instead of total denial and covering. I think Sid went to some gospel meetings but dont think to fellowship mtgs.This was in manitoba and Saskatchewan. It was very sad for all involved. Please correct me if wrong info. Alvin Don't know the full story but what I have heard about Syd Lee it was much worse than "pornography". There was a apparently a young girl in the Winnipeg area who was repeatedly sexually victimized. He was kicked out of the work but never faced any criminal charges that I know of. Before my time but my dad told me a little about it.
|
|
|
Post by matisse on Mar 16, 2015 9:15:23 GMT -5
This has come up in the past. From the email and other information posted by Scott: I was made aware of this incident on January 14, 2009. XXX and I got together with the victim on April 3, 2009, from 5:00 to 10:00 p.m. and discussed in detail each and every question she was asked and the details regarding the incident. We were shocked and appalled at the questions.
The questions were as such: Did she ever have pleasure with her husband? How often did they have sex? Could her husband get an erection? Did he ejaculate? What did she do to excite him? Did she get him to masturbate? Did he think her body was attractive? Did he look at other women? In the times they did have sex, was he able to get her wet? These questions would be inappropriate between anyone but people with either an intimate or professional relationship, something that I do not think LW and/or the victim would claim. It seems clear that if this is what took place that LW was way out of line. On the other hand, what is the responsibility of the victim? These are clearly inappropriate questions. Yet not just one or two questions were answered but at least nine questions that touched on very intimate topics. If LW was in a delusional state and thought this line of questioning was actually beneficial there was no feedback that was recorded to indicate that the victim, at the time, thought the conversation was inappropriate. As related in an earlier post, people should not have to protect themselves against this type of inappropriate behavior. However, when it happens people need to at least make their rejection of what is happening known. Perhaps there are factors that I have overlooked. I'd like to step back for a moment. Do you have any wisdom you would be willing to share about how to raise a girl to have a healthy self esteem and good interpersonal boundaries? How about wisdom on how to raise a healthy, self-respecting and respectful boy...also with strong interpersonal boundaries? We know that boys can be at risk as well.
|
|
|
Post by mdm on Mar 16, 2015 13:31:56 GMT -5
I think Sid Lee, was a worker who lost meeting privileges over "pornography " of some sort. His older brother , Stanley, was the overseer, and he was heartbroken over the ordeal. Imagine the "guts," that stanley had to deal with it, instead of total denial and covering. I think Sid went to some gospel meetings but dont think to fellowship mtgs.This was in manitoba and Saskatchewan. It was very sad for all involved. Please correct me if wrong info. Alvin Thanks, Alvin. It's good to hear that it's happened, even though not in recent history.
|
|
|
Post by mdm on Mar 16, 2015 13:40:39 GMT -5
I think Sid Lee, was a worker who lost meeting privileges over "pornography " of some sort. His older brother , Stanley, was the overseer, and he was heartbroken over the ordeal. Imagine the "guts," that stanley had to deal with it, instead of total denial and covering. I think Sid went to some gospel meetings but dont think to fellowship mtgs.This was in manitoba and Saskatchewan. It was very sad for all involved. Please correct me if wrong info. Alvin Don't know the full story but what I have heard about Syd Lee it was much worse than "pornography". There was a apparently a young girl in the Winnipeg area who was repeatedly sexually victimized. He was kicked out of the work but never faced any criminal charges that I know of. Before my time but my dad told me a little about it. It seems that you are right: professing.proboards.com/post/489612
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Mar 16, 2015 14:50:05 GMT -5
This has come up in the past. From the email and other information posted by Scott: I was made aware of this incident on January 14, 2009. XXX and I got together with the victim on April 3, 2009, from 5:00 to 10:00 p.m. and discussed in detail each and every question she was asked and the details regarding the incident. We were shocked and appalled at the questions.
The questions were as such: Did she ever have pleasure with her husband? How often did they have sex? Could her husband get an erection? Did he ejaculate? What did she do to excite him? Did she get him to masturbate? Did he think her body was attractive? Did he look at other women? In the times they did have sex, was he able to get her wet? These questions would be inappropriate between anyone but people with either an intimate or professional relationship, something that I do not think LW and/or the victim would claim. It seems clear that if this is what took place that LW was way out of line. On the other hand, what is the responsibility of the victim? These are clearly inappropriate questions. Yet not just one or two questions were answered but at least nine questions that touched on very intimate topics. If LW was in a delusional state and thought this line of questioning was actually beneficial there was no feedback that was recorded to indicate that the victim, at the time, thought the conversation was inappropriate. As related in an earlier post, people should not have to protect themselves against this type of inappropriate behavior. However, when it happens people need to at least make their rejection of what is happening known. Perhaps there are factors that I have overlooked. I'd like to step back for a moment. Do you have any wisdom you would be willing to share about how to raise a girl to have a healthy self esteem and good interpersonal boundaries? How about wisdom on how to raise a healthy, self-respecting and respectful boy...also with strong interpersonal boundaries? We know that boys can be at risk as well. On the other hand, what is the responsibility of the victim? These are clearly inappropriate questions. Yet not just one or two questions were answered but at least nine questions that touched on very intimate topics.
Where do you see noted that she actually answered all those questions?
|
|
|
Post by SharonArnold on Mar 16, 2015 15:50:27 GMT -5
Don't know the full story but what I have heard about Syd Lee it was much worse than "pornography". There was a apparently a young girl in the Winnipeg area who was repeatedly sexually victimized. He was kicked out of the work but never faced any criminal charges that I know of. Before my time but my dad told me a little about it. It seems that you are right: professing.proboards.com/post/489612I just read through the majority of this thread. What a trip down memory lane. I personally knew most of the victims and perpetrators on this thread. I also regret that I am too busy aka "too selfish" to fully read or post here. The bottom line is (in the words of Maja Angelou) "You did then what you knew to do; now you know better, you do better". That permits us to leave the past behind, but gives more accountability for the future. It should also serve as warning to the upper 2X2 hierarchy. We're waiting. It's way past time to do what is right. (Hint: if this was a multiple choice exam "Protecting LW " is NOT one of the answers.) Even if he has stuff on you that would be marginally embarrassing.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Mar 16, 2015 17:24:48 GMT -5
I'd like to step back for a moment. Do you have any wisdom you would be willing to share about how to raise a girl to have a healthy self esteem and good interpersonal boundaries? How about wisdom on how to raise a healthy, self-respecting and respectful boy...also with strong interpersonal boundaries? We know that boys can be at risk as well. Back to when my children were young? I have no magic incantation that will do the above. However, we did strive to keep communication very open and non-judgmental. The children knew that they could approach us with anything and it would not be held against them. We often talked about what were appropriate boundaries - both physical and intellectual. We also taught them that they were responsible for their actions and therefore they needed to consider their actions in light of that fact. They knew they had the right to say "No". This is more important than it seems. It is also a burden on the parents who have to deal with children saying "No"! A lot of time spent in discussions where they would try to explain the logic of their choice. The tough part is sometimes they were right and mom and dad had to back down! It empowers the child. It might have been easier for us because there were no individuals in their lives that could be considered to have a higher moral ground. No workers, priests, etc. There were relatives but they did not seem to have any problem in speaking their mind and holding their own. I know my dad was often amazed at the thoughts his granddaughter would share. He often attributed it to our medical backgrounds. It also illustrates that there were no topics that were off limits. At times the discussions had to be postponed from the dinner table but all questions were answered as honestly and thoroughly as possible. Not sure if that answers your question. I think being involved in the children's lives, respecting them as individuals, and providing education when ever possible is what it takes.
|
|
|
Post by mdm on Mar 16, 2015 17:32:56 GMT -5
I just read through the majority of this thread. What a trip down memory lane. I personally knew most of the victims and perpetrators on this thread. I also regret that I am too busy aka "too selfish" to fully read or post here. The bottom line is (in the words of Maja Angelou) "You did then what you knew to do; now you know better, you do better". That permits us to leave the past behind, but gives more accountability for the future. It should also serve as warning to the upper 2X2 hierarchy. We're waiting. It's way past time to do what is right. (Hint: if this was a multiple choice exam "Protecting LW " is NOT one of the answers.) Even if he has stuff on you that would be marginally embarrassing. Except, most F&W don't care about any of this and prefer not to know. So, the 2x2 hierarchy has nothing to fear or to cause them to be more accountable within the fellowship.
|
|
|
Post by SharonArnold on Mar 16, 2015 17:53:50 GMT -5
I just read through the majority of this thread. What a trip down memory lane. I personally knew most of the victims and perpetrators on this thread. I also regret that I am too busy aka "too selfish" to fully read or post here. The bottom line is (in the words of Maja Angelou) "You did then what you knew to do; now you know better, you do better". That permits us to leave the past behind, but gives more accountability for the future. It should also serve as warning to the upper 2X2 hierarchy. We're waiting. It's way past time to do what is right. (Hint: if this was a multiple choice exam "Protecting LW " is NOT one of the answers.) Even if he has stuff on you that would be marginally embarrassing. Except, most F&W don't care about any of this and prefer not to know. So, the 2x2 hierarchy has nothing to fear or to cause them to be more accountable within the fellowship. Well, I think the "fellowship" itself has to become more accountable. That's both friends and workers. (I am very aware that you personally have done more than your share.) (One of my biggest struggles in my exiting days was my personal responsibility regarding wrongdoing within 2X2ism. Some people would consider that I took the coward's way out by voting with my feet.) If they (workers AND friends) continue down the present path, it is more than likely that there will be something happen that they have no power to keep from widespread public scrutiny. To my mind, they have a choice if they truly love the fellowship - stop ostriching now and seriously deal with these kinds of issues - or it will be forced upon them. (I have no personal investment either way.) Our world is changing. The days are coming to an end when things can be done in darkness and secrecy.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Mar 16, 2015 18:16:04 GMT -5
On the other hand, what is the responsibility of the victim? These are clearly inappropriate questions. Yet not just one or two questions were answered but at least nine questions that touched on very intimate topics.
Where do you see noted that she actually answered all those questions? No where does it say all of the questions were answered. Perhaps I read too much into the phrase: Upon hearing the details of this conversation, we were sickened, and made a phone call to one of the elders in the Chicago area.which I took as a conversation between the victim and LW. Generally a conversation is in two directions. That coupled with the fact that the people mentioned discussed the interaction between the victim and LW for 5 hours leads one to believe that LW was not just asking questions while the victim sat mute. That would have been a much shorter discussion than 5 hours. From a human standpoint - would there be a progression of questions had there been no answers to the questions asked? While it doesn't say in the information you provided, is it believed that this conversation and the questions just came up out of the blue and there was no response? LW walked into the woman's home and at some point asked "Can your husband get an erection?" There is no answer so the follow-up question is "Did he ejaculate?" Again no answer so, pushing on, the question is "What do you do to excite him?" It seems unlikely that if the questions LW asked went unanswered he would keep asking them. Especially since the questions listed seem to progress as thought there had been some feedback. There is no question that LW's questions were inappropriate. He was totally in the wrong. I am trying to understand why there were so many questions allowed to be asked. I am trying to imagine why the subject of marital sex would ever come up in the first place. Or was this an opportunity LW became aware of in the course of conversation and took advantage of it for his own personal reasons?
|
|
|
Post by SharonArnold on Mar 16, 2015 18:27:02 GMT -5
I'd like to step back for a moment. Do you have any wisdom you would be willing to share about how to raise a girl to have a healthy self esteem and good interpersonal boundaries? How about wisdom on how to raise a healthy, self-respecting and respectful boy...also with strong interpersonal boundaries? We know that boys can be at risk as well. Back to when my children were young? I have no magic incantation that will do the above. However, we did strive to keep communication very open and non-judgmental. The children knew that they could approach us with anything and it would not be held against them. We often talked about what were appropriate boundaries - both physical and intellectual. We also taught them that they were responsible for their actions and therefore they needed to consider their actions in light of that fact. They knew they had the right to say "No". This is more important than it seems. It is also a burden on the parents who have to deal with children saying "No"! A lot of time spent in discussions where they would try to explain the logic of their choice. The tough part is sometimes they were right and mom and dad had to back down! It empowers the child. It might have been easier for us because there were no individuals in their lives that could be considered to have a higher moral ground. No workers, priests, etc. There were relatives but they did not seem to have any problem in speaking their mind and holding their own. I know my dad was often amazed at the thoughts his granddaughter would share. He often attributed it to our medical backgrounds. It also illustrates that there were no topics that were off limits. At times the discussions had to be postponed from the dinner table but all questions were answered as honestly and thoroughly as possible. Not sure if that answers your question. I think being involved in the children's lives, respecting them as individuals, and providing education when ever possible is what it takes. As a person who I consider was well predator-proofed for my time and generation, I would agree with much of this. The ability to say “No” is huge. Even for cases where the parent says “Go give Great-Aunt Mary a hug.” And the child says “I don’t want to give her a hug; she smells.” This should be okay, with no repercussions for the child. My mother did not even make me shake hands with people that I did not want to. This had to be embarrassing for her at times. When I was ~5 years old, my mother almost died and spent many weeks in hospital. My paternal grandmother came and looked after us during this interval. There was an incident where I was taking a bath, and she (very innocently) came in and picked up a wash cloth to ‘help’. I sent her packing out of the bathroom, informing her in no uncertain terms that I was able to “do it myself”. I do not know from where I got the confidence or the sense of certainty that I was entitled to do this. Some years after my mother’s death, I learned that my mother was likely exposed to a worker predator when she was 12 – 13 years old, though I never heard this from her. But, still, it might have been enough to influence what she taught me. Workers were never on a pedestal in our home. Still, when I was in grade 2, a classmate was abused by an adult in my home town. When I was 15 years old, a chum of mine was abused within 2X2ism. I knew of both events at the time they happened, but I did not have the knowledge, vocabulary, or the resources to approach a responsible adult. Both predators would have had equal access to me. Perhaps I was just lucky, but I might have had a certain self confidence that did not make me an easy target. When I watch so many in the baby boomer generation raise their children, without mishap, I would agree that giving them individual attention, being involved in their lives, giving them respect and an education is SO important. Our daughters are in their 20`s now, but my husband and I are still amazed at some of the things they freely share with us. We would have never shared as much with our parents.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Mar 16, 2015 22:26:29 GMT -5
This has come up in the past. From the email and other information posted by Scott: I was made aware of this incident on January 14, 2009. XXX and I got together with the victim on April 3, 2009, from 5:00 to 10:00 p.m. and discussed in detail each and every question she was asked and the details regarding the incident. We were shocked and appalled at the questions.
The questions were as such: Did she ever have pleasure with her husband? How often did they have sex? Could her husband get an erection? Did he ejaculate? What did she do to excite him? Did she get him to masturbate? Did he think her body was attractive? Did he look at other women? In the times they did have sex, was he able to get her wet? These questions would be inappropriate between anyone but people with either an intimate or professional relationship, something that I do not think LW and/or the victim would claim. It seems clear that if this is what took place that LW was way out of line. On the other hand, what is the responsibility of the victim? These are clearly inappropriate questions. Yet not just one or two questions were answered but at least nine questions that touched on very intimate topics. If LW was in a delusional state and thought this line of questioning was actually beneficial there was no feedback that was recorded to indicate that the victim, at the time, thought the conversation was inappropriate. As related in an earlier post, people should not have to protect themselves against this type of inappropriate behavior. However, when it happens people need to at least make their rejection of what is happening known. Perhaps there are factors that I have overlooked. I'd like to step back for a moment. Do you have any wisdom you would be willing to share about how to raise a girl to have a healthy self esteem and good interpersonal boundaries? How about wisdom on how to raise a healthy, self-respecting and respectful boy...also with strong interpersonal boundaries? We know that boys can be at risk as well. I wonder about the same things Rational pointed out. It seems to me there were a lot of common sense interpersonal boundaries crossed by both parties. How does a married woman end up in so intimate a setting she can be asked those questions by a man who is not her husband? There's a LOT of this story being left untold. How was the meet-up arranged? It had to be at least somewhat mutually agreed to. Where was the husband? Like Rational points out there were lots common sense stopping points along the road to and during a conversation that includes those questions. Expecting or trusting the other person to be responsible for all the boundaries isn't always so realistic and it certainly isn't a safe place to put one's self. This is where the proactive individual responsibility to be wise as a serpent comes in. That's what I tried to teach our daughters - and probably sounded somewhat misogynistic in the process. Proactively being wise as a serpent is a way to "trust but verify" and can go a long way to prevent harm to one's self. It can help prevent others from harming themselves too.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Mar 16, 2015 22:41:35 GMT -5
I'd like to step back for a moment. Do you have any wisdom you would be willing to share about how to raise a girl to have a healthy self esteem and good interpersonal boundaries? How about wisdom on how to raise a healthy, self-respecting and respectful boy...also with strong interpersonal boundaries? We know that boys can be at risk as well. I wonder about the same things Rational pointed out. It seems to me there were a lot of common sense interpersonal boundaries crossed by both parties. How does a married woman end up in so intimate a setting she can be asked those questions by a man who is not her husband? There's a LOT of this story being left untold. How was the meet-up arranged? It had to be at least somewhat mutually agreed to. Where was the husband? Like Rational points out there were lots common sense stopping points along the road to and during a conversation that includes those questions. Expecting or trusting the other person to be responsible for all the boundaries isn't always so realistic and it certainly isn't a safe place to put one's self. This is where the proactive individual responsibility to be wise as a serpent comes in. That's what I tried to teach our daughters - and probably sounded somewhat misogynistic in the process. Proactively being wise as a serpent is a way to "trust but verify" and can go a long way to prevent harm to one's self. It can help prevent others from harming themselves too. What you and Rational are saying about the conversation being bizarre and how did she let it go so far, I would agree it does seem that way looking at it from our standpoint. But if you have been unfortunate enough to be raised by a father, unlike you and Rational, that always demeaned women, made them think that they had no worth and in a confrontation their thoughts weren't important, I can see how it got that far. She may have been in a state of shock that he would ask those questions but also 'programmed' to think that she had to answer based on who he was. She might not have been able to trust her gut instinct that it was inappropriate because of her preconditioning and who he was, his status. I'm not saying this is the case, but I know it certainly could have happened that way. I know I have to fight with myself to believe in my instincts because I was always told I was wrong, I didn't really feel that way, I didn't know what I was talking about etc. You begin to doubt yourself and your ability to know what is right if it happened to you all during your childhood. Maybe that's what happened? After she had a chance to think about it she was able to realize just how wrong it was but at the time was incapable of doing anything about it because of self doubt. It truly is a powerful phenomenon.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Mar 16, 2015 23:15:21 GMT -5
There is more we don't know than we do, which forces a bunch of speculation. I don't know if that helps at all. Since reading about this a couple years ago I've wondered where the husband fits in. It would be so sad if the dad and/or husband was like the father you describe. Better to become an old maid than hook up with a man like that. But we don't know if that is the case or not. That's why it is hard to pass judgment on the situation - there is way too much we don't know.
|
|