|
|
Post by rational on Jul 24, 2013 23:31:03 GMT -5
CSA is only one kind of abuse that takes place in Meeting. There are other types of abuse and to say that the source is not the same for all sorts of abuse is ridiculous, to me. Perhaps CSA could be considered a "big giant" and exclusivity/unmarried ministry doctrine a "baby giant". But because the "baby giant" was not killed, it grew up into a "big giant". Verbal abuse, spiritual abuse, emotional abuse and immorality and sexual abuse are the brothers to CSA. All giants and all need killing. Better to kill them while they are young than when they get big and strong. In marketing there is a saying - "Sex Sells". I hate to say it but I agree with TS on this one. Sexual abuse is the minor part of abuse but the one that get the attention because anything of a sexual nature invokes more interest and more intense emotions. |
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jul 24, 2013 23:53:20 GMT -5
There is not a single problem with the handling of these kinds of cases that does not arise from the fact that the incident(s) was/were not reported to the legal authorities immediately.
|
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jul 24, 2013 23:56:15 GMT -5
CSA is only one kind of abuse that takes place in Meeting. There are other types of abuse and to say that the source is not the same for all sorts of abuse is ridiculous, to me. Perhaps CSA could be considered a "big giant" and exclusivity/unmarried ministry doctrine a "baby giant". But because the "baby giant" was not killed, it grew up into a "big giant". Verbal abuse, spiritual abuse, emotional abuse and immorality and sexual abuse are the brothers to CSA. All giants and all need killing. Better to kill them while they are young than when they get big and strong. In marketing there is a saying - "Sex Sells". I hate to say it but I agree with TS on this one. Sexual abuse is the minor part of abuse but the one that get the attention because anything of a sexual nature invokes more interest and more intense emotions. What an absurd notion!! Who other than some really sick pervert would find cases of CSA "more intriguing"? Furthermore - CSA is not primarily about sex -- it is about sick power. And people who find CSA exciting are as sick as the perpetrators. |
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jul 24, 2013 23:56:16 GMT -5
CSA is only one kind of abuse that takes place in Meeting. There are other types of abuse and to say that the source is not the same for all sorts of abuse is ridiculous, to me. Perhaps CSA could be considered a "big giant" and exclusivity/unmarried ministry doctrine a "baby giant". But because the "baby giant" was not killed, it grew up into a "big giant". Verbal abuse, spiritual abuse, emotional abuse and immorality and sexual abuse are the brothers to CSA. All giants and all need killing. Better to kill them while they are young than when they get big and strong. In marketing there is a saying - "Sex Sells". I hate to say it but I agree with TS on this one. Sexual abuse is the minor part of abuse but the one that get the attention because anything of a sexual nature invokes more interest and more intense emotions. That would be a heartless thing to say to child sexual abuse victims. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2013 0:16:14 GMT -5
In marketing there is a saying - "Sex Sells". I hate to say it but I agree with TS on this one. Sexual abuse is the minor part of abuse but the one that get the attention because anything of a sexual nature invokes more interest and more intense emotions. What an absurd notion!! Who other than some really sick pervert would find cases of CSA "more intriguing"? Furthermore - CSA is not primarily about sex -- it is about sick power. And people who find CSA exciting are as sick as the perpetrators. I agree with that assessment Bob. That was not one of rational's finest comments.....quite off the wall really. Why does it get the most attention? Because it is a crime against helpless children for one thing, it's not even close to an equal power situation so just in that alone, it's heinous. I think almost any one of us, if faced with the choice of one, would unquestionably choose to help a child facing CSA than an adult facing various kinds of abuse. A child has his/her whole life ahead of them and are always totally blameless in these crimes. The other is that we are now coming to understand just how acute the damages are, that they can effectively ruin a child's chances of having a normal, well adjusted life as an adult. For some people, it's severe enough to be a lifetime sentence of misery that would not have existed otherwise. Other abuses should not be forgotten and should be addressed. However, CSA is the most heinous of all the frequent crimes against children. |
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jul 25, 2013 0:23:23 GMT -5
What an absurd notion!! Who other than some really sick pervert would find cases of CSA "more intriguing"? Furthermore - CSA is not primarily about sex -- it is about sick power. And people who find CSA exciting are as sick as the perpetrators. I agree with that assessment Bob. That was not one of rational's finest comments.....quite off the wall really. Why does it get the most attention? Because it is a crime against helpless children for one thing, it's not even close to an equal power situation so just in that alone, it's heinous. I think almost any one of us, if faced with the choice of one, would unquestionably choose to help a child facing CSA than an adult facing various kinds of abuse. A child has his/her whole life ahead of them and are always totally blameless in these crimes. The other is that we are now coming to understand just how acute the damages are, that they can effectively ruin a child's chances of having a normal, well adjusted life as an adult. For some people, it's severe enough to be a lifetime sentence of misery that would not have existed otherwise. Other abuses should not be forgotten and should be addressed. However, CSA is the most heinous of all the frequent crimes against children. It is the epitome of an imbalance of power. |
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jul 25, 2013 0:24:56 GMT -5
What an absurd notion!! Who other than some really sick pervert would find cases of CSA "more intriguing"? Furthermore - CSA is not primarily about sex -- it is about sick power. And people who find CSA exciting are as sick as the perpetrators. I agree with that assessment Bob. That was not one of rational's finest comments.....quite off the wall really. Why does it get the most attention? Because it is a crime against helpless children for one thing, it's not even close to an equal power situation so just in that alone, it's heinous. I think almost any one of us, if faced with the choice of one, would unquestionably choose to help a child facing CSA than an adult facing various kinds of abuse. A child has his/her whole life ahead of them and are always totally blameless in these crimes. The other is that we are now coming to understand just how acute the damages are, that they can effectively ruin a child's chances of having a normal, well adjusted life as an adult. For some people, it's severe enough to be a lifetime sentence of misery that would not have existed otherwise. Other abuses should not be forgotten and should be addressed. However, CSA is the most heinous of all the frequent crimes against children. CSA messes with a child's sexuality before it has even developed. It loads the child with guilt that is not his/hers to bear. Its in a class of its own - it can't be realistically compared with any other abuse. CSA is about as evil as evil gets. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2013 3:35:11 GMT -5
In the main all forms of abuse spring out of a desire to control or have power over another. With sexual abuses there is obviously the clear addition of a lustful element.
I am with rational in that ALL forms of abuse need to be tackled, especially when there are in certain areas common elements and backgrounds. One example of this is spiritual abuse which certainly originates from power and control over others and is claimed to have links to other forms of abuse including physical abuse and csa. It makes sense to get at the heart of the problems.
However, there IS a difference between sexual abuses and other forms of abuse. Most forms of physical abuse and neglect, etc, have benign backgrounds in discipline, teaching and order, etc., e.g. parent chastising child, or teacher same with pupil. These were all very much accepted in the past and provided the punishment was light and no harm was caused to the child, it was regarded as good for the development of the child and was therefore good practice and common sense. Many forms of physical abuse and neglect stemmed from excessive use of these disciplinary measures, especially where the administer was weak and ineffective and his or her actions were having little effect, hence the increase in punishment through desperation etc. I know the whole matter is far more complex than this illustration and it would be difficult to interpret discipline into many forms or occasions of physical abuse or neglect, but the acceptable background in reasonable measure was there.
With sexual abuses there is no justification or excuse in disciplinary measures. They are about using power and control over an individual as an avenue to satisfy lust. Physical abuse and neglect may indeed be similar in that power and control are used as avenues for sadism but not sexual lust?
Ultimately all forms of abuse can and do produce similar effects on victims according to circumstances, nature of the victim, severity and duration of the acts, etc.
Again, many forms of physical abuse and neglect arise out of excessive disciplinary measures, which in former times were more socially acceptable provided they did not cross a certain threshold. They were considered justifiable and necessary. This has never been the case with sexual abuses.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2013 7:35:58 GMT -5
All forms of abuse hurt. Sexual abuse to me is the most hurtful. People will accept that you were physically or emotionally abuse but say you were sexually abused and you are then a very scary person to be around. People second guess you and treat you like you are lying. Why do they need proof of sexual abuse but accept that someone was physically or emotionally abused without proof? It takes so much more confidence to say I was sexually abused because you know YOUR CHARACTER is the one called into question.
TS/Rat you sound like the workers and friends who told me that CSA is a big deal now because SEX is so pervasive in the "WORLD"!!!! Not part of human nature.
|
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 25, 2013 7:53:20 GMT -5
In marketing there is a saying - "Sex Sells". I hate to say it but I agree with TS on this one. Sexual abuse is the minor part of abuse but the one that get the attention because anything of a sexual nature invokes more interest and more intense emotions. What an absurd notion!! Who other than some really sick pervert would find cases of CSA "more intriguing"? Human beings. It is the same basic need people have to look at serious car accidents when they drive by. Why people read about the details of what happened to the three women who were held captive in Ohio. A man held 3 women captive for many years and physically, psychologically, emotionally, and sexually abused them regularly. While that does say what happened anyone who read about it, and it was a major news story, wanted ,and got, many more details than that. Why did journalists write about the details? Why do publishers put out 'special' editions covering these events? Because it sells. I don't recall saying it was about sex. But there are times when it is about sex which is why many states include phrases like "...for the purpose of gratifying his or her lust,..." in the statutes to cover the cases when the act is the result of biological urge.Do you find it exciting? Why do you think anyone finds it exciting? I think I said that it invokes more interest and intense emotion. I know that when dealing with adults who had abused children I had to struggle to control my feelings towards the criminals. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 25, 2013 7:54:33 GMT -5
I agree with that assessment Bob. That was not one of rational's finest comments.....quite off the wall really. Why does it get the most attention? Because it is a crime against helpless children for one thing, it's not even close to an equal power situation so just in that alone, it's heinous. I think almost any one of us, if faced with the choice of one, would unquestionably choose to help a child facing CSA than an adult facing various kinds of abuse. A child has his/her whole life ahead of them and are always totally blameless in these crimes. The other is that we are now coming to understand just how acute the damages are, that they can effectively ruin a child's chances of having a normal, well adjusted life as an adult. For some people, it's severe enough to be a lifetime sentence of misery that would not have existed otherwise. Other abuses should not be forgotten and should be addressed. However, CSA is the most heinous of all the frequent crimes against children. It is the epitome of an imbalance of power. And physical abuse is not? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2013 8:08:58 GMT -5
What an absurd notion!! Who other than some really sick pervert would find cases of CSA "more intriguing"? Human beings. It is the same basic need people have to look at serious car accidents when they drive by. Why people read about the details of what happened to the three women who were held captive in Ohio. A man held 3 women captive for many years and physically, psychologically, emotionally, and sexually abused them regularly. While that does say what happened anyone who read about it, and it was a major news story, wanted ,and got, many more details than that. Why did journalists write about the details? Why do publishers put out 'special' editions covering these events? Because it sells. I don't recall saying it was about sex. But there are times when it is about sex which is why many states include phrases like "...for the purpose of gratifying his or her lust,..." in the statutes to cover the cases when the act is the result of biological urge.Do you find it exciting? Why do you think anyone finds it exciting? I think I said that it invokes more interest and intense emotion. I know that when dealing with adults who had abused children I had to struggle to control my feelings towards the criminals. The intenseness of emotions on this subject should be your first clue as to why the emotional damages of CSA are significantly higher that for all other forms of abuses. The answer is right within yourself for this. However, it has nothing to do with "sex sells" and the titillation of sexual stories......maybe for some perverted people......but most people have the sense that this is the most heinous of crimes against children. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 25, 2013 8:12:12 GMT -5
All forms of abuse hurt. Sexual abuse to me is the most hurtful. People will accept that you were physically or emotionally abuse but say you were sexually abused and you are then a very scary person to be around. As I said, sexual things effect people on a much deeper level.Questioning a story does not imply disbelief.Good question. I can't imagine why anyone would not want the same level of proof of either.You are correct. The question is - Why is sexual abuse viewed so differently and judged so differently than physical abuse. Not speaking for TS, but when have I ever said anything that would imply that I thought CSA was not a big deal? Or that sex was more pervasive now than it ever was? I think it is a big deal even though it only represents about 10% of abuse cases. I do find the dismissive way people have when regarding the other 90% of abuse cases somewhat appalling. It is rare that any one type of abuse case stands alone in a situation. It is part of human nature and has been around since organisms were exchanging DNA. It was prevalent enough that it made its way into man's 'sacred" writings. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 25, 2013 8:36:16 GMT -5
Unlike mangochango being made sick by the comments of those looking/searching/inquiring for facts...these comments only sadden me. I realize that to post untrue comments or make untrue accusations against another the results can be damaging and life changing....hence the necessity to confirm or corroborate facts. But as was also posted...many times and in most instances, there are only two people who know the REAL facts and they are the perpetrator and victim. Because it happened to me, I was the victim. The facts were very real to me, but because I was only 9 years of age and he was a beloved brother worker, I felt I was at fault. I was ashamed and felt no one would ever believe me. So I remained quiet. It only happened once (but sadly there could have been other victims, we will never know). So the human psyche within me has fuzzied up the facts of the event, mellowed them so I could live with them. Did it really happen? Yes. Could I, would I ever be able to retrace, recreate exactly every detail of what happened? No. Do I want to? No. This man is now dead. By God's grace I have forgiven him, and by even greater heavenly grace I have also forgiven myself. There are only a very few with whom I've ever shared this information, now I'm sharing it with you. Thank you for being brave and so gracious. God bless you, I'm sure he has already. Admin |
|
|
|
Post by jondough on Jul 25, 2013 8:45:58 GMT -5
CSA is only one kind of abuse that takes place in Meeting. There are other types of abuse and to say that the source is not the same for all sorts of abuse is ridiculous, to me. Perhaps CSA could be considered a "big giant" and exclusivity/unmarried ministry doctrine a "baby giant". But because the "baby giant" was not killed, it grew up into a "big giant". Verbal abuse, spiritual abuse, emotional abuse and immorality and sexual abuse are the brothers to CSA. All giants and all need killing. Better to kill them while they are young than when they get big and strong. In marketing there is a saying - "Sex Sells". I hate to say it but I agree with TS on this one. Sexual abuse is the minor part of abuse but the one that get the attention because anything of a sexual nature invokes more interest and more intense emotions. I'm curious where this is coming from in your mind. "sexual abuse is the minor part of abuse". Minor? I can't even respond to this as it seems so absurd that I must not understand what you are trying to say. To compare it to a car accident, and that passers by want to look at it just isn't even close. I have wondered many times how detectives that deal with CSA, child porn, and things of that nature are able to even perform their jobs. I personally would not be able to look at such heinous photos, and evidence. This in no way is comparable to simple curiosity of passers-by looking on at an auto accident. Most people are emotional over CSA due to our extreme protective nature for an innocent child.....any child. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2013 9:17:16 GMT -5
In marketing there is a saying - "Sex Sells". I hate to say it but I agree with TS on this one. Sexual abuse is the minor part of abuse but the one that get the attention because anything of a sexual nature invokes more interest and more intense emotions. I'm curious where this is coming from in your mind. "sexual abuse is the minor part of abuse". Minor? I can't even respond to this as it seems so absurd that I must not understand what you are trying to say. To compare it to a car accident, and that passers by want to look at it just isn't even close. I have wondered many times how detectives that deal with CSA, child porn, and things of that nature are able to even perform their jobs. I personally would not be able to look at such heinous photos, and evidence. This in no way is comparable to simple curiosity of passers-by looking on at an auto accident. Most people are emotional over CSA due to our extreme protective nature for an innocent child.....any child. I don't want to answer for rational, but I think when he says "minor", he is referring to frequency. He contends that CSA is 10% of all abuses so is therefore a "minor part of abuse". On a numbers basis, there is truth to that. On a damage basis, it is so far wrong that it is not even on the charts. What he is saying something like this: "since murder is only 10% of all illegal offenses and the other 90% is Jaywalking, then murder is a minor part of illegal activity". That's what makes his statement absurd in spite of it being numerically correct. Ram and TS promote a similar idea. |
|
|
|
Post by quizzer on Jul 25, 2013 9:47:26 GMT -5
In the main all forms of abuse spring out of a desire to control or have power over another. With sexual abuses there is obviously the clear addition of a lustful element. I am with rational in that ALL forms of abuse need to be tackled, especially when there are in certain areas common elements and backgrounds. One example of this is spiritual abuse which certainly originates from power and control over others and is claimed to have links to other forms of abuse including physical abuse and csa. It makes sense to get at the heart of the problems. However, there IS a difference between sexual abuses and other forms of abuse. Most forms of physical abuse and neglect, etc, have benign backgrounds in discipline, teaching and order, etc., e.g. parent chastising child, or teacher same with pupil. These were all very much accepted in the past and provided the punishment was light and no harm was caused to the child, it was regarded as good for the development of the child and was therefore good practice and common sense. Many forms of physical abuse and neglect stemmed from excessive use of these disciplinary measures, especially where the administer was weak and ineffective and his or her actions were having little effect, hence the increase in punishment through desperation etc. I know the whole matter is far more complex than this illustration and it would be difficult to interpret discipline into many forms or occasions of physical abuse or neglect, but the acceptable background in reasonable measure was there. With sexual abuses there is no justification or excuse in disciplinary measures. They are about using power and control over an individual as an avenue to satisfy lust. Physical abuse and neglect may indeed be similar in that power and control are used as avenues for sadism but not sexual lust? Ultimately all forms of abuse can and do produce similar effects on victims according to circumstances, nature of the victim, severity and duration of the acts, etc. Again, many forms of physical abuse and neglect arise out of excessive disciplinary measures, which in former times were more socially acceptable provided they did not cross a certain threshold. They were considered justifiable and necessary. This has never been the case with sexual abuses. ram, perhaps you or someone else with experience in law enforcement could answer this: what is to be hoped for stopping CSA by chemical castration, such as in the case of PG? To me, PG is more about being in control of others, dominating them, making them submissive to him so that he can exploit them. This is more about a mental head-game than anything, so why pretend it's about sexual urges? |
|
|
|
Post by ts on Jul 25, 2013 9:52:45 GMT -5
CSA is only one kind of abuse that takes place in Meeting. There are other types of abuse and to say that the source is not the same for all sorts of abuse is ridiculous, to me. Perhaps CSA could be considered a "big giant" and exclusivity/unmarried ministry doctrine a "baby giant". But because the "baby giant" was not killed, it grew up into a "big giant". Verbal abuse, spiritual abuse, emotional abuse and immorality and sexual abuse are the brothers to CSA. All giants and all need killing. Better to kill them while they are young than when they get big and strong. In marketing there is a saying - "Sex Sells". I hate to say it but I agree with TS on this one. Sexual abuse is the minor part of abuse but the one that get the attention because anything of a sexual nature invokes more interest and more intense emotions. I don't think that sexual abuse is minor. I think it is major and affects people the rest of their lives in profound ways. I don't think it is necessarily more than other types of abuse, though. I am saying that there is an underlying deception that sets the stage for all types of abuse and cover up in the Meetings. I don't think it is a matter of "sex sells". I think it is a matter of how appalling sexual abuse is that it gets attention. The shame and guilt that is associated with sexual abuse is immense. It is secret and covered up by the leadership and shameful to the victim, who, in turn, tends to keep it covered up. It is equally appalling to blame the victim for covering up the sexual abuse the same as you would blame the perpetrator(or his buddies) for covering it up simply because he/she did not report it. That is heaping more shame and guilt on top of shame and guilt. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 25, 2013 9:56:10 GMT -5
The intenseness of emotions on this subject should be your first clue as to why the emotional damages of CSA are significantly higher that for all other forms of abuses. The answer is right within yourself for this. Are the emotional damages higher? I have found that a child who has been sexually fondled by an adult they trusted and a child who has been physically abused by an adult they trusted have much in common regarding emotional damage - the loss of trust in someone who is supposed to be caring for you. I don't recall saying it was a form of titillation. But it has everything to do with "sex sells" and what piques people's interest. The stigma of sexual abuse has more to do with the view of society and what children have been taught than the act itself. That, coupled with the reaction of people when they learn of the incident, lead the victim to reach the conclusions they do. But those conclusions are not all that different from those reached by a child who has been raised by parents who continually tell the child how worthless they are. |
|
|
|
Post by ts on Jul 25, 2013 10:03:40 GMT -5
All forms of abuse hurt. Sexual abuse to me is the most hurtful. People will accept that you were physically or emotionally abuse but say you were sexually abused and you are then a very scary person to be around. People second guess you and treat you like you are lying. Why do they need proof of sexual abuse but accept that someone was physically or emotionally abused without proof? It takes so much more confidence to say I was sexually abused because you know YOUR CHARACTER is the one called into question. TS/Rat you sound like the workers and friends who told me that CSA is a big deal now because SEX is so pervasive in the "WORLD"!!!! Not part of human nature. Don't include me in what Rational thinks just because he "agreed" with what I said and then said something completely off the wall. I don't agree with Rational. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2013 10:07:55 GMT -5
The intenseness of emotions on this subject should be your first clue as to why the emotional damages of CSA are significantly higher that for all other forms of abuses. The answer is right within yourself for this. Are the emotional damages higher? I have found that a child who has been sexually fondled by an adult they trusted and a child who has been physically abused by an adult they trusted have much in common regarding emotional damage - the loss of trust in someone who is supposed to be caring for you. Physical abuse results in emotional damages, there is no doubt about that. In fact, that is the primary problem with physical abuse, not the bruises which heal, but the emotional damages which linger. There are definitely similarities in the emotional damages in all forms of abuse as they all tap into much the same thing: shame and devastation of one's sense and control of self.....or "destruction of the soul" as I would put it. [/quote] If you are not talking about titillation, then saying "sex sells" is the wrong phrase to use. Marketing companies use the phrase "sex sells" all the time and are always referring to titillation. That explains the bad reaction you got from your post. Again, verbal abuse is damaging, especially when it refers to the worthlessness of the child, and it also taps into the same place in the psyche as other forms of abuse. Regardless, CSA is the most heinous and damaging of them all which is why it gets the focus, not because "sex sells". |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2013 10:09:26 GMT -5
All forms of abuse hurt. Sexual abuse to me is the most hurtful. People will accept that you were physically or emotionally abuse but say you were sexually abused and you are then a very scary person to be around. People second guess you and treat you like you are lying. Why do they need proof of sexual abuse but accept that someone was physically or emotionally abused without proof? It takes so much more confidence to say I was sexually abused because you know YOUR CHARACTER is the one called into question. TS/Rat you sound like the workers and friends who told me that CSA is a big deal now because SEX is so pervasive in the "WORLD"!!!! Not part of human nature. Don't include me in what Rational thinks just because he "agreed" with what I said and then said something completely off the wall. I don't agree with Rational. I thought I saw a post in which you were promoting the same thing as rational.....effectively saying that all forms of abuse were on the same level as CSA. Correct me if I understood it wrongly. |
|
|
|
Post by ts on Jul 25, 2013 10:22:55 GMT -5
Don't include me in what Rational thinks just because he "agreed" with what I said and then said something completely off the wall. I don't agree with Rational. I thought I saw a post in which you were promoting the same thing as rational.....effectively saying that all forms of abuse were on the same level as CSA. Correct me if I understood it wrongly. Rational just said that CSA is a minor abuse. I don't think he meant that it was "abuse of a minor" as that would be redundant. I disagree with that. I also disagree with the notion that it only gets more attention because of the adage "sex sells". That is ridiculous. My statement that Rational "agreed" with has to do with CSA being an outgrowth of underlying doctrines in the Meetings. The exclusivity and power structure of the Meetings sets the stage for many types of abuses. The abuses are like Goliath and his brothers. They should have been killed in their infancy when it would have been easy. Address the power structure and the doctrine and be ruthless with those who want to keep the status quo and the abuse problems will go away. Try to fight the giants as they stand and you will only be putting new patches on old garments. To answer your question, I do not think that all types of abuse are the same. I think they have the same source, ultimately. They thrive in the same environment. So they are the same in some regards. But not equal in how they affect an individual. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2013 10:33:29 GMT -5
I thought I saw a post in which you were promoting the same thing as rational.....effectively saying that all forms of abuse were on the same level as CSA. Correct me if I understood it wrongly. Rational just said that CSA is a minor abuse. I don't think he meant that it was "abuse of a minor" as that would be redundant. I disagree with that. I also disagree with the notion that it only gets more attention because of the adage "sex sells". That is ridiculous. My statement that Rational "agreed" with has to do with CSA being an outgrowth of underlying doctrines in the Meetings. The exclusivity and power structure of the Meetings sets the stage for many types of abuses. The abuses are like Goliath and his brothers. They should have been killed in their infancy when it would have been easy. Address the power structure and the doctrine and be ruthless with those who want to keep the status quo and the abuse problems will go away. Try to fight the giants as they stand and you will only be putting new patches on old garments. To answer your question, I do not think that all types of abuse are the same. I think they have the same source, ultimately. They thrive in the same environment. So they are the same in some regards. But not equal in how they affect an individual. I think most of your comments are sound. By the word "outgrowth", if you see Meeting doctrines as a "cause" of CSA, I would disagree quite strongly with that, and I think rational would too. CSA is a crime of a criminal against a child, simple as that. When we discuss CSA in a 2x2 context, we are often discussing the "environment" which you mention in which there are certain characteristics where people become more vulnerable to offense than in a non-2x2 setting. I think we all want to see a more protective environment (including doctrinal examination) in the 2x2 setting in which children will be safe. Obviously we want to see all children in the world safe too, but that goes beyond our primary scope of influence and capabilities. Let's fix our own house first, then we can help our neighbours is the idea. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 25, 2013 11:07:54 GMT -5
I'm curious where this is coming from in your mind. "sexual abuse is the minor part of abuse". It is estimated that of abuse children suffer about 10% of that is sexual abuse. The other 90% is other forms of abuse. Yes, 1 out of 10 is the minor part. Perhaps now you can respond. You list CSA and "things of that nature". Do you think images of physical abuse are different?Really? In both cases there are details that people want to know even though they do not know the victims. The car accident was an example of how events that are revolting still capture the interest of humans. From movies depicting the brutalization of humans to people selling the uncensored photos of victims of automobile accidents, people want to see. It is much like pornography. Most people claim they are against it. Yet an x-rated movie rental store can make a living in most towns (or could before the internet). And pornography was found scribbled on the walls of Pompeii. As someone who is often asked to help repair/clean computers that have viruses/spyware/trojans it is always interesting to hear people explain, often before the work even starts, why there "might" be some inappropriate images on their computer. Is it because they are evil? No, it is because they are human.But they are not interested in protecting an innocent child, any child, from other forms of abuse? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2013 11:08:02 GMT -5
In the main all forms of abuse spring out of a desire to control or have power over another. With sexual abuses there is obviously the clear addition of a lustful element. I am with rational in that ALL forms of abuse need to be tackled, especially when there are in certain areas common elements and backgrounds. One example of this is spiritual abuse which certainly originates from power and control over others and is claimed to have links to other forms of abuse including physical abuse and csa. It makes sense to get at the heart of the problems. However, there IS a difference between sexual abuses and other forms of abuse. Most forms of physical abuse and neglect, etc, have benign backgrounds in discipline, teaching and order, etc., e.g. parent chastising child, or teacher same with pupil. These were all very much accepted in the past and provided the punishment was light and no harm was caused to the child, it was regarded as good for the development of the child and was therefore good practice and common sense. Many forms of physical abuse and neglect stemmed from excessive use of these disciplinary measures, especially where the administer was weak and ineffective and his or her actions were having little effect, hence the increase in punishment through desperation etc. I know the whole matter is far more complex than this illustration and it would be difficult to interpret discipline into many forms or occasions of physical abuse or neglect, but the acceptable background in reasonable measure was there. With sexual abuses there is no justification or excuse in disciplinary measures. They are about using power and control over an individual as an avenue to satisfy lust. Physical abuse and neglect may indeed be similar in that power and control are used as avenues for sadism but not sexual lust? Ultimately all forms of abuse can and do produce similar effects on victims according to circumstances, nature of the victim, severity and duration of the acts, etc. Again, many forms of physical abuse and neglect arise out of excessive disciplinary measures, which in former times were more socially acceptable provided they did not cross a certain threshold. They were considered justifiable and necessary. This has never been the case with sexual abuses. ram, perhaps you or someone else with experience in law enforcement could answer this: what is to be hoped for stopping CSA by chemical castration, such as in the case of PG? To me, PG is more about being in control of others, dominating them, making them submissive to him so that he can exploit them. This is more about a mental head-game than anything, so why pretend it's about sexual urges? Kwizzer, over here chemical castration would be attacked by the human rights lobby and wouldn't pass go. It's a non-starter. On a personal basis I would consider it, or at least protecting the public by locking up the perp until such time as they were no longer a threat. To be quite honest I haven't given it a huge amount of thought. I have many times thought that the b------- should hang, and yes unanesthetized castration, but these occasions were driven by my emotions and reactions. In reality physical abuse and neglect can and do produce results very much the same as csa. It's all down to individual circumstances and yes the other forms of abuse easily outstrip the number of instances of csa (referring to reported cases overall). However in many cases it is the perceptions that csa generates which escalates its degree way above the other forms of abuse as emotions comes into play. Make no mistake I am in NO WAY playing down the seriousness of csa or its devastating effects upon victims which can be enormous. Rather, for the purpose of the uninitiated I am attempting to raise the profile of the other, more numerous forms of abuse to the same level of seriousness and devastation where they belong! However, I am aware that the major focus of these various debates on this board is the workers and csa. They are far less likely to be involved in physical abuse. They are also very much, and far moreso involved in spiritual abuse which has been linked to other forms of abuse. In considering abuses by the workers, csa is the main abuse coming to light. More recently spiritual abuse, which is widespread throughout the fellowship, not just the workers is at last becoming recognised. These are the two abuse issues which in the main pertain to our focus group. There will be cases of physical, emotional, csa, spiritual abuse amongst the members of the fellowship. There are testimonies elsewhere which show this, but it is the workers upon whom the focus is. |
|
|
|
Post by ts on Jul 25, 2013 11:09:04 GMT -5
Rational just said that CSA is a minor abuse. I don't think he meant that it was "abuse of a minor" as that would be redundant. I disagree with that. I also disagree with the notion that it only gets more attention because of the adage "sex sells". That is ridiculous. My statement that Rational "agreed" with has to do with CSA being an outgrowth of underlying doctrines in the Meetings. The exclusivity and power structure of the Meetings sets the stage for many types of abuses. The abuses are like Goliath and his brothers. They should have been killed in their infancy when it would have been easy. Address the power structure and the doctrine and be ruthless with those who want to keep the status quo and the abuse problems will go away. Try to fight the giants as they stand and you will only be putting new patches on old garments. To answer your question, I do not think that all types of abuse are the same. I think they have the same source, ultimately. They thrive in the same environment. So they are the same in some regards. But not equal in how they affect an individual. I think most of your comments are sound. By the word "outgrowth", if you see Meeting doctrines as a "cause" of CSA, I would disagree quite strongly with that, and I think rational would too. CSA is a crime of a criminal against a child, simple as that. When we discuss CSA in a 2x2 context, we are often discussing the "environment" which you mention in which there are certain characteristics where people become more vulnerable to offense than in a non-2x2 setting. I think we all want to see a more protective environment (including doctrinal examination) in the 2x2 setting in which children will be safe. Obviously we want to see all children in the world safe too, but that goes beyond our primary scope of influence and capabilities. Let's fix our own house first, then we can help our neighbours is the idea. Yes, what you are saying is what I mean. Perhaps "outgrowth" is not the right word to use. I do believe that the 2x2 doctrine fosters abuses of all sorts. I do not think they have an explicit doctrine of abuse. However, I do think it is inevitable that there will be abuses given the exclusivity doctrine and power structure of the Work. That is where I get the words "outgrowth" and "cause" but perhaps that is not the best choice of words. I will have to give it more thought. I do tend to see the spirits/entities involved whereas others look at "psychological" or social aspects that put quotation marks around "demons". I take the quotation marks off of demons. False doctrine invites all sorts of spiritual elements that are not conducive to good ministry. False doctrine invites demonic influences that escalate and affect all parts of the ministry. The resulting sexual immorality and abuses invite more demonic influences. That is why I tend to put the focus on what I feel is the root cause rather than managing the symptoms. A demon would much rather be managed than cast out. There is a lot of management of the CSA problem in the Meetings but very little spiritual warfare going on. Another result of false teaching and lack of understanding about what is actually happening in the spirit world. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 25, 2013 11:32:14 GMT -5
If you are not talking about titillation, then saying "sex sells" is the wrong phrase to use. Marketing companies use the phrase "sex sells" all the time and are always referring to titillation. That explains the bad reaction you got from your post. It has little to do with titillation. It is reaching out to what is a basic biological drive. Buy this new car and you too can win the woman of your dreams. No titillation. As Vance Packard (perhaps in The Hidden Persuaders) pointed out - you advertise the convertible with the blond in the passenger seat and the customer walks out with the sedan and his wife as the passenger. But the hook was set, their attention was grabbed, with the idea. Again, not titillation. (just to be sure - TITILLATE transitive verb - to excite pleasurably, arouse by stimulation.) Given that 4 children, on average, die every day in the US from abuse it is difficult to see sexual abuse as "..most heinous and damaging...". |
|
