Joined: 04 Sep 2005
Posts: 289
Location: lost in love
Okay now for Bj's moment in the sun.
First let me say I love this topic, it's something to think about. Now, let me tell my story.
I grew up wearing girly dresses with as much lace and frills as possible and loving them. Every time I saw a new Barbie or baby doll I wanted it. I'd dress my dog in baby clothes and stroll her around the house. I sewed and cooked with my grandmother and loved every minute of it. But I was still a very strange child. The first thing I did with my Barbies when I got a new one was undress them. I still don't know why. During playtime I'd have two Barbies in one hand and a Ken doll (one of two vs. about fifty Barbies) all the way over in the other. Barbie and Ken might be married, but they couldn't share a bed... and Ken never kissed Barbie.... Barbie kissed Barbie... my Barbies shared a bed regularly, and come to think of it I always laid my Barbies together and threw Ken off to the side. In preschool my best friend was a little boy. As I grew, I played "doctor" with my female friends. I'd admire someone, most always a woman, in walmart or where ever we were and do just about anything to get her attention. Now I'm gay... I figure it's only natural. My mother loved me, I grew up in a very loving home. But I don't see how any nurturing could've changed how I was born. Just my opinion.
hugs,
bj _________________ You've jaded me and that's beautiful
*************
There is no such thing as normal
Mon Sep 11, 2006 6:47 pm
Sobu-Milkwo
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Posts: 61
Location: All over the world
BJ you are right, some people are born that way!
Hi BJ
I think everyone are agreed that homosexuality in most people is not a matter of personal choice, no more of a personal choice than heterosexuality, although there is something to be said for the compensation theory which may apply, or be one contributing factor, in some. So it is really for each person to work out their own case. But as I mentioned earlier, even more important than the mental gymnastics (which could be fun or anguishing), the real task is coming to terms with one's sexuality without the need to defend it in any way. No heterosexual walks the streets to announce that they are heterosexual. Sexuality is nothing to be ashamed or proud of. Sexuality just is. So the need to parade sexuality springs more from the insecurity and fear of being different from the majority. Several members of Mel have pointed out that the battle is within oneself, and when that is taken care of, the rest takes care of itself. One need not awaken the sleeping dogs of people's homophobia and prejudices by a compulsive need to out oneself. Discretion is the better part of valour. One need not invite useless battles, if one would like to conserve one's creative energy for other worthwhile tasks. Everyone has the right to their levels of consciousness, their own phobias and prejudices. Fighting for rights, against discrimination, for example the right to marry, etc, is quite different, and needs to be done.
Fortunately, as far as real loving relationships go, every person needs only one partner. Sexuality is only one part of a person's life, although a very important part. But it is vital to remember that one is first of all a human being with many facets, and needs, not just sexual. There are heterosexuals who choose celibacy quite consciously without feeling that they are asexual for that reason. The task is not to deny one's sexuality or sexual orientation. How one chooses to live it out is a strictly personal matter.
Your sharing about your Barbie games brought a sinister connection to my mind. I beg you earnestly not to see it as applying to you . But I wish to share my thoughts anyway, for anyone interested in the topic.
Pedophile attacks we read about in the press, are extremely rare events. Only a teeny weeny percentage of pedophiles go after children of strangers. Most pedophile monsters lurk in homes (members of the child's own family or close friends), completely out of reach of the law. The whole family system functions in a way that protects the pedophile and leaves the little child completely isolated and terrified and confused. To make matters worse, most victims of pedophilia develop a Stockholm like syndrome, where they protect the monster! The reason is simple: Pedophilia is a serious crime. The consequence of the family revealing it, affects the whole family. The family member involved could end up in jail, and the rest of the family must bear the shame and the consequences. With the result, even non-pedophilic adults become unwitting accomplices to the crime. They are simply protecting their own interests, even if it means an innocent, completely helpless child is being destroyed in the process. The family dynamics is one of denial, and looking the other way. Can you imagine being a little child caught up in such a situation? Only outside help can break the cycle, because most family members would hesitate to report the monster to the police. The tragedy of reporting too, is that the options left to the law to help the little children are limited. When the child is taken away from all it is familiar with, then it undergoes further trauma. It may be lucky to come into caring hands for the rest of its life, or it may not. Growing up in special homes, may not be the most wonderful experience. The law is always caught between the devil and the deep blue sea while trying to help such a child. But the legal stand is very clear, in case of crime, the criminal must be punished, and child protection agency is summoned to protect the victim with immediate effect. Healing for the child can begin only after it has been removed from the scene of the crime and there is no ongoing assault.
One of the ways in which little children who are sexually abused give a clue is by the games they play with their dolls and by exhibiting sexualised behaviour completely out of context with their age and maturity. Experts say that when a little child expresses explicit sexual actions with their dolls, then it is either because they have seen porno films, seen adults engage in sex, or are being sexually abused. Little children do not understand when they are being sexually abused, although deep down they feel instinctively that something is wrong. In almost all cases, they are asked to remain silent, either with threats or bribe. So children don't speak out from fear. The suffering comes only when they grow up to understand the meaning of sexual abuse and the assault on their innocence and childhood.
So some tips for anyone interested in helping a child who is suspected of being sexually abused is: 1. Be a trustworthy person in that child's life. It is most crucial that the child has someone who does not abuse it. Care for that child and actively work towards restoring the self-esteem that is constantly eroded in sexual abuse, without referring to the abuse. The child must be constantly assured that is loved and lovable, no matter what. Try to find ways to spend time with the child and do pleasurable activities together. 2. Do not confront the child with your knowledge or suspicion of abuse. It is quite possible that the child would tell the abuser about it simply out of fear. Let the child confide when it is ready, in ways that it feels comfortable. The child must feel safe and protected for a long time before it will begin to reveal things in non-verbal ways. 3. Maintain a diary of every little exchange with the child. Look for a pattern that could be indicative of abuse. 4. Discuss concerns anonymously with a professional and get advice. 5. Always maintain contact with the child, and never let anyone surrounding the abuse suspect. The first thing that the abuse circle tries to do is cut off the child from outside contact. 6. Only after enough evidence has been gathered, should further steps be taken. What constitues enough evidence is something only a professional can say. 7. Be a trustworthy friend to that child no matter what happens. That is the life saving help anyone can offer a child, which has its whole world shattered. 8. Don't be surprised if the child loves the abuser. Children love because they can't help loving. Children love those they are dependent on. Recognition and healing of such a betrayal is a long journey, and one should never try to force the child. 9. Even if the child remains in the environment of abuse, for lack of proper evidence, it is possible to offer it help to recognise the situation. 10. Be a trustworthy friend to the child.
Why is it difficult to 'cure' a pedophile? 1. Pedophilia is not a crime of passion. The Pedophile is a cold blooded, calculative criminal. A pedophile does not have the excuse of sexual deprivation because paid sex is one possibility, the last resort is masturbation. Absolutely no excuse for abusing a child and destroying it. 2. Pedophilia is a crime involving abuse of power, abuse of trust. Ever heard of bullies suddenly waking up to their behaviour? 3. A pedophile's character is marked by lack of empathy for the child. How can any therapist 'teach' empathy? Consequence of lack of empathy, if it hurts somebody else, can be the only motivation to change behaviour. But it is no guarantee that the pedophile would think up ways not to get caught rather than stop the criminal behaviour. 4. Even pedophiles who were abused as children themselves, feel no empathy for the child, because they do not identify with the helpless child they were when they were abused. 5. Healing is possible only if the pedophile who was sexually abused, or even those who were not, can identify with the helplessness and consequence for the victim and feel enough compassion not to be the source of the destruction of an innocent child. In real life, it seems that it is too much to ask of a pedophile. They'd rather look for their next victim and invest all their energies in not getting caught, rather than go through the painful and life giving process of being healed.
Just food for thought.
Sobu _________________ Life is what we make of it. The power to shape our destiny with the choices we make is the greatest power we human beings have been endowed with - from God. May we let go of the past and create our lives anew every single day.
Tue Sep 12, 2006 2:51 am
beautifullyjaded
Joined: 04 Sep 2005
Posts: 289
Location: lost in love
Okay, I'm just going to say this because I feel the need at this moment in time. I was not abused, sexually, as a child. I didn't walk in on anyone having sex, as a child. I did not see porn as a child. I lead a rather sheltered life, as a child. I just played with my Barbies differently. I was a curious child, I suppose. I never really took Ken's clothes off, I didn't care. Meanwhile, what makes you such an expert? I do realize that sexually abused children show signs of abuse by how they play with their toys, but just because a child matches two Barbie dolls together doesn't mean that child has been abused or has had any exposure to lesbianism whatsoever, as was my case. I'm not saying not to question if everything in a young child's life is about sex, but I am saying not to jump the gun because a developing child is curious and matches two Barbie dolls instead of Barbie and Ken. Talk to the child, play with the child, but don't go calling social services because omg the kid's dolls are gay! Sex never crossed my mind, I didn't even know about it, but growing up in a home where there was nothing wrong with the human body and where adult men and women didn't share a bed, unless related or married it's only natural not to have Barbie and Ken sharing a bed, or to have one of my Barbies running around in her underwear when Ken wasn't around. That's what I did. My mom didn't, she was very insecure about her body, but I've always hated clothes and chose not to wear them as often as possible. And if my Barbies weren't wearing clothes, it was probably because I got sidetracked. I was a kid with a very high IQ and an attention span of zero, these things happened. So please, don't assume you know everything. You don't.
regards,
bj _________________ You've jaded me and that's beautiful
*************
There is no such thing as normal
Tue Sep 12, 2006 3:19 am
Sobu-Milkwo
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Posts: 61
Location: All over the world
BJ please read my post again!
Hi BJ
You are sounding very upset, as if I meant that your playing with dolls was a sign of sexual abuse. I wonder why . Please read my post again, begging you not to take this as applying to you. I was discussing the issue in general. I don't think I ever implied that the first thing one ought to do when one sees a child playing with a doll taking off its clothes, is to inform the criminal police. You will understand that I was using your remarks to launch into a general discussion, if you were to read my post again.
I do agree it is perfectly normal for little children to have no sense of shame about being naked. Shame about nakedness is a learnt social behaviour. Think of tribes that wore little or no clothes and had to be taught lessons in modesty by Christian missionaries for instance. There are still tribes today that do not follow the rules of modesty as prescribed by most societies in the world.
As to being an expert: I'm not one personally but I have read books and discussed this topic with experts. By the way I was responding to the title of this thread 'Intellectual Debate' and the title of this thread 'Nature vs Nurture'. I was not trying to be judgemental or play the expert. You know your life best, and I doubt if I was trying to take your place in interpreting it. Even if your childhood were not picture perfect, it would be revealed only to you, not anyone else. My apologies for upsetting you by launching into elaboration of a topic that is obviously a sensitive and difficult one, even for experts to deal with! As mentioned several times in this thread and elsewhere, the proof of the pudding is a happy, well adjusted you, comfortable about your sexuality, and having no emotional issues as an adult, for which you have no explanation or remedy.
By way of clarification: I am not a member of the legal profession or the police force. Although I have read some books on psychology, I'm not a psychologist. I just happen to be interested in some topics more than others, that is all. I join in a discussion or pass on some information, if I feel the urge to contribute my two cents worth.
Sobu _________________ Life is what we make of it. The power to shape our destiny with the choices we make is the greatest power we human beings have been endowed with - from God. May we let go of the past and create our lives anew every single day.
Tue Sep 12, 2006 3:29 am
beautifullyjaded
Joined: 04 Sep 2005
Posts: 289
Location: lost in love
Sobu, I'd love to chat sometime. Psych interests me as well, and I feel we'd have a very interesting conversation.
Drop me a line,
bj _________________ You've jaded me and that's beautiful
*************
There is no such thing as normal
Wed Sep 13, 2006 11:51 pm
Flapdoodle-fox
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 42
Location: up North (ish), UK
Sobu
I felt compelled to write a few comments to your lengthy post about child sexual abuse which I feel are inaccurate. You gave the impression that family members when they know about the abuse do not act, that is inaccurate and a false representation of many parents (and other relatives) who have as soon as they have become aware themselves, informed the appropriate Agencies.
If you have done some reading around this subject I am surprised that you opened with the question why is it difficult to cure a paedophile? if you read the literature then you will realise that this is not the approach professionals have to working with this group of offenders.
It is always useful to stimulate discussion and encourage debate around this issue as secrecy is a huge feature of the offences however it is unhelpful when inaccurate somewhat 'panic' reactions are eschewed.
I mean no offense whatsoever by this post and hope you will take it in the spirit it is intended. Perhaps you should think about why you have seized upon this one issue from someone elses reply and made suggestions to BJ that were not apparent to me anyway??
just an extra observation
regards
Flap
Tue Oct 03, 2006 10:03 pm
Sobu-Milkwo
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Posts: 61
Location: All over the world
No offence whatsoever Flap!
Hi Flap
I take no offence whatsoever to your post. Each one is entitled to their opinion - that holds good for me just as for you. I respect not only your right to your perspective, but your perspective itself, even if I may not agree with it, while at the same time wishing your perspective rather than mine were the truth.
As to false representation of adults who take the appropriate action, I do not speak about them. I applaud them. But unfortunately, they represent only a very small minority. I speak about the vast majority who do not act as they should. You would never know about the vast majority who do not act in the best interests of the child. But professionals dealing with victims of child abuse would know more about the silent majority, as their patients share with them the horror stories of being trapped in that situation as children.
This thread is an intellectual discussion and not a conversation between any two parties, and as such and as I understand the concept of intellectual discussions, anyone is free to contribute their two cents worth, joining in at any point they choose, using any comment as a springboard.
I do not defend my opinion as the ultimate truth. But I do defend it as my perspective.
I understand that you view the whole topic from a different perspective from me. Perfectly legitimate. I thought I made it clear somewhere that we are all conditioned beings, seeing the world through our own unique biography.
My involvement with the topic stems from personal experience. I once tried to help a little girl I suspected was being abused. That is how I ended up getting first hand experience on the complications associated with the issue and information from all sorts of professionals - psychologists and psychiatrists specialised in the area of dealing with victims of child abuse, a paediatric professor with 30 years experience in the matter, who had been threatened by some parents and needed police protection, child protection agency, and criminal police. I had approached as many members of the family that the child had close relationships with first, and know from personal experience the reaction of the family, the denial, the need for cover-up, the make believe that nothing happened, asking me to mind my own business and keep out of their family affairs. Because I loved the girl I wanted for her sake, nothing to hurt her family as well, while I wanted to put an end to any further abuse. It worked or at least I hope it did. The abusive person was put on notice, so was the family, so that they would have no excuse for looking the other way while the helpless girl remained trapped. The whole thing could have spun completely out of control for the little girl and her family. Charges could have been brought based on suspicion. The criminal police said that it was their business to find the evidence. Based on advice I had got from professionals, I did everything in my power to stop it from getting that far. I do not want to go into the details of how the criminal police got involved in the matter, without me having anything to do with it, nor the details of how I went about the situation.
So I speak from a little more than just a casual interest in the topic.
My perception of the issue is based on what I have read, my discussion with professionals and my experience, so far. If there is more recent research out there about the healing effect of therapy for pedophiles, and more data about non-abusive members of the family, who do act to protect children who are abused, I'm more than willing to revise my opinion. But I have to read the statistics myself, and hear from people who deal with the victims rather than those who sympathise with the perpertrators of the crime. It is definitely in everyone's interest if pedophilia were as easily curable as a simple throat infection. But it is, if a cure were possible, in the very least, more like curing drug/sex addiction.
Sobu _________________ Life is what we make of it. The power to shape our destiny with the choices we make is the greatest power we human beings have been endowed with - from God. May we let go of the past and create our lives anew every single day.
Wed Oct 04, 2006 3:56 am
Flapdoodle-fox
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 42
Location: up North (ish), UK
Sobu,
thanks for your reply, my point in respect of the 'curing' of this type of offender was simply that this approach is not the way professionals deal with the issue. To suggest that there is a 'cure' for sexual offending makes it sounds as if it is a disease thus out of the person's control and that is not how it is viewed - a simple point, an educative point.
You alluded that by making this simple point that it showed some sympathy with the perpetrator and I take strong offense to this as stated working with this group of offenders is not about therapy for them per se but about a reduction of risk.
I reiterate my point about families and am aware that there are many parents out there who would be horrified with the suggestion that if they knew about any abuse to their child that they would become an 'accomplice; to that crime as you state, albeit an 'unwitting' one. Whilst there are no doubt examples of parent's failure to protect (your own example given included) to suggest that this is the prevalent response is I believe misleading. Whilst the crime is notoriously under reported where the cases have been reported it is most commonly done by a member of the family or friend that the child has confided in.
I could go on but have chosen these 2 points to comment on in an attempt to limit myself, but the area is extremely complicated and whilst I don't feel I have done it justice in my limited reply I am purposefully refraining.
regards
Flap
Wed Oct 04, 2006 6:14 pm
Sobu-Milkwo
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Posts: 61
Location: All over the world
Better carry on the discussion with real experts Flap
Flap you wrote: ‘
in respect of the 'curing' of this type of offender was simply that this approach is not the way professionals deal with the issue. To suggest that there is a 'cure' for sexual offending makes it sounds as if it is a disease thus out of the person's control and that is not how it is viewed - a simple point, an educative point
.'
I do not know how professionals deal with pedophiles because I have not had discussions with professionals who deal with them, although I do know about the general steps followed in some forms of therapy, irrespective of the diagnosis. It is common knowledge that no matter what method or approach is being used with pedophiles, it has had very little success rate, simply because no therapist can teach empathy. Sure, the therapist can help a pedophile to gain insight into their behaviour, teach skills to deal with pathological urges. But whether or not the client chooses to use them is beyond the control of the therapist.
Definition of disease:
• Alcoholism is defined as a disease now, although it once used to be defined as a weakness in character. No one becomes an alcoholic overnight. There are a series of personal choices involved before someone becomes an alcoholic and reaches a point of losing control. In other words, the alcoholic develops a conditioned reflex of grabbing a bottle, only at a later stage. That conditioned reflex has developed as a result of many many choices over which the alcoholic had control in the beginning. Only at a later stage does the body convert its metabolic processes to become dependent on alcohol. Some say alcoholism has to do with the genes, because very often children of alcoholics become alcoholics themselves. But there is a flaw to that theory, because some children of alcoholics abstain totally from alcohol simply because they have seen it ruin their families. A conscious choice to abstain from alcohol is made. The truth about alcoholism running in families has more to do with imitating behaviour and imbibing family patterns of responding to stress. When alcoholics join AA, they make a conscious decision to get well, and act on it. The healing comes as a result of acting on that conscious choice. An alcoholic does not gain the ability to make a conscious choice after the disease has been dealt with. The choice is made first, the healing comes later.
Using your definition of disease – that it has to completely out of the person’s control – where does alcoholism fit?
• Adult onset Type II diabetes is clearly a disease. Yet diabetes has a lot to do with poor choices in diet and lack of exercise. Diabetes in the early stages can be controlled with proper diet and exercise alone.
Using your definition of disease – that it has to be completely out of the person’s control – can diabetes be defined as a disease at all, considering that it is entirely within the patient’s control to make the right choices in diet and regular exercise?
• To a psychiatrist, a homicidal psychopath is a mentally ill person, an illness that manifests itself in criminal behaviour. But unlike a psychotic person, who is not in touch with reality, a psychopath is fully aware of the consequences of his actions and makes elaborate preparations for cover-up before the crime. It is the logic of the psychopath that is insane and he feels no empathy, no guilt, no remorse. But as far the criminal police is concerned, he is a criminal offender. Working at reduction of risk is the best a psychiatrist can do. But we know from real life, that reduction of risk to the victims works best by keeping the homicidal psychopath locked up for life. Therapy to heal a homicidal psychopath has not had great levels of success.
Using your definition of disease – it has to be completely out of the person’s control – where does a homicidal psychopath fit? The insane logic seems out of control, although no psychopath is born with that logic, and logic is developed over time, nor does a psychopath do anything without careful controlled planning, all within his control.
There are several chronic diseases which have no cure, and is at best kept under control once it develops, but yet could have been prevented by means of careful healthy choices. HIV/AIDS is one glaring example, most of which is transmitted through unsafe sexual practices, shared needles etc. A minority of course cannot be blamed, for instance children of HIV positive mothers, those who get infected after blood transfusion, and health professionals through needle stick injuries or other accidents.
You wrote: ‘
You alluded that by making this simple point that it showed some sympathy with the perpetrator and I take strong offence to this as stated working with this group of offenders is not about therapy for them per se but about a reduction of risk
.’
I was expressing my preference to getting the opinion of therapists dealing with victims about the silence in families, rather than from therapists who deal with pedophiles. Statistics from therapists who deal with pedophiles could be biased, simply because a pedophile goes into therapy only when they are forced by the law. In such situations, one would expect that somebody had reported the pedophile first, before they were forced to enter therapy. So a therapist dealing with pedophiles, could, I repeat could, draw the conclusion that all/most cases of pedophilia get reported.
I did not assume you were a therapist working with pedophiles. Even if you were, I would expect you as therapist to have sympathy for your client, which is not the same as condoning criminal behaviour. A pedophile is a pathetic creature, no doubt and probably has a history of childhood sexual abuse, and hence needs sympathy for that reason. But they are also infantile monsters without empathy for their victims and should be held accountable for their actions. It is the hard task of a therapist to balance the two feelings and work with a pedophile, for without sympathy for a client, a therapist can achieve nothing at all. All human beings, no matter what crime they have committed, are worthy of human dignity. Nobody should be robbed of that, and humiliated unnecessarily, even while they are being held accountable for their actions, and made to pay for the crime. To have the crime exposed, and being locked up as punishment is humiliation enough.
However in my post, I was not discussing therapy for the pedophile at all. I stated merely what I had been told were the reasons for the poor rate of success.
As for you taking strong offence: I don’t even understand where the offence stems from, since we were merely putting forth and defending our respective point of view on a topic. I don’t take offence that you don’t agree with me, and I can do very little about the fact that you choose to take offence that I have a different perspective from yours. We must simply agree to disagree, that is all.
You wrote: ‘
I reiterate my point about families and am aware that there are many parents out there who would be horrified with the suggestion that if they knew about any abuse to their child that they would become an 'accomplice; to that crime as you state, albeit an 'unwitting' one. Whilst there are no doubt examples of parent's failure to protect (your own example given included) to suggest that this is the prevalent response is I believe misleading. Whilst the crime is notoriously under reported where the cases have been reported it is most commonly done by a member of the family or friend that the child has confided in.
I could go on but have chosen these 2 points to comment on in an attempt to limit myself, but the area is extremely complicated and whilst I don't feel I have done it justice in my limited reply I am purposefully refraining.’
I have no doubt in my mind that families would be horrified to be accused of not doing enough to protect children who are abused. The vital question is, however does such horror stem from parents who would never abuse their children in the first place, or from parents who are actually abusing their children or covering it up. My conclusion is that such horror stems from people who are not abusers or accomplices. Having said that, one must not rule out the possibility that an abuser would say the correct lines as a means of cover-up. After all deception, lies, and hypocrisy is all part of the armour or disguise used by a pedophile. But we have yet to hear from parents who are abusers or accomplices and honest about it. It is human nature to deny the dark sides of one's personality. It is not uncommon for a criminal to admit to a crime only after much evidence has been presented, very often not even then. The denial is so deeply ingrained. That is why the issue of pedophilia is so complex and needs the expertise of those who are used to dealing with people with a criminal mindset.
You do admit there are examples of parents who do not protect their children, and you also admit that the crime is notoriously under reported. How could the horror reaction on the one hand and the neglect and the notorious under reporting on the other, co-exist?
No child who is abused remains without trauma. There are telltale signs for those who care to look for them. If the family is vigilant enough, the child, even while it lives in a world of terror and isolation, reveals its distress in non-verbal ways to people it is really close to and trusts. It is because of denial, rationalisation and fear, and in some cases ignorance, that the family fails to notice or heed the subtle signs. Hence there is notorious under reporting. It is utopic to expect families to report their own to the police as a natural reaction. I do agree that non-abusive members of the family need support and guidance to deal with the issue. I know there are even organisations set up to help them anonymously. A non-abusive member of the family who suspects abuse is given moral support and guidance to confirm the abuse first. The victim could be taken to the professionals for tests and therapy anonymously, and to deal with the problem within the family setting, without involving the child protection agency or the criminal police. In the case I mentioned, the family could have made a decision to let the motherless child live with the grandmother, who was like a mother to her, with a family ban on the abuser and the little girl spending time alone together , and keeping close watch when the abuser was around. The little girl could have been sent for therapy anonymously. All would have remained in the family, without ruining the family reputation, at the same time protecting the little child, without depriving it of the sense of belonging, which would be inevitable if the law maker got involved, with AVO extending to the whole family. I was told that law enforcement would not allow the child to stay with anyone to whom the abuser had access. I do not believe for a moment that the mindset of the abuser has changed. It is realistic to assume that he views the child merely as an object to satisfy his perverse needs, but I do hope for the child's sake that fear motivates him from living out his pathological urges. I'm still disgusted and furious with the family that they did not reach a decision to offer the child a more protected environment within the larger family and away from the abuser. Getting the law to intervene would have meant taking the child away from everything it knows and loves and is familiar with and connected to. But as everyone knows that the legal instance must of necessity go through a long winded process, which could traumatise the child even more, before it could make its decision.
Flap, I do not wish to extend this discussion to an exercise in empty mental gymnastics between us. It tends to become an emotionally charged issue for me knowing that the crime is notoriously under reported. I firmly believe that no one who has experienced a child's distress first hand as I did, would fail to have a permanent and deep seated sense of horror about the issue . I am content to rely on the opinions of experts who have lots of first hand experience in this matter. If you have points of disagreements about it, which you obviously do, you are better off discussing with those experts – like the child protection agency, the criminal police, the psychologists and psychiatrists who deal with victims. You’d get much more out of a discussion with them than continuing a discussion with me. I’m only stating second hand opinions, and I have only one personal experience in helping, or rather trying to help.
Sobu _________________ Life is what we make of it. The power to shape our destiny with the choices we make is the greatest power we human beings have been endowed with - from God. May we let go of the past and create our lives anew every single day.
Last edited by Sobu-Milkwo on Tue Oct 10, 2006 11:23 am; edited 2 times in total
Thu Oct 05, 2006 2:06 am
Flapdoodle-fox
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 42
Location: up North (ish), UK
Sobu,
For the record, I have never given any 'definition of disease' anywhere in my posts to the issues you raised.
With respect, I agree that it is pointless to continue this exchange as communication between us is not happening on the same wave length and I am struggling with some of your interpretations (as you may be with me)
so lets call it a day
regards
Flap
Thu Oct 05, 2006 6:17 pm
RespectfulMale
Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 8
Both nature and nurture likely play into it but can work independently of each other. One may oppose or work in concert with the other.
There are certainly research papers that would suggest that things happen inutero. (E.g. Hormones, chemical changes and exposure etc)
If you look at the basic heterosexual relationship and offspring that become heterosexual most qualified medical professionals would agree that you learn how to be your gender from your same gender parent and how to trust, love and develop relationships with the opposite gender from the opposite gender parent. But what about a a young girl being very feminine, being abused by a male and still turning out to be heterosexual. Nurture can take the form of therapy, ones understanding and most importantly the unconditional love understanding and support of a spouse. Nurture can be a positive or negative force in our development. I believe it can be the deciding factor in someone who begins as bisexual whether or not they even considered it an option or gave it a moments thought as a child.
If nature plays a big role here (and I think it does) I my question would be how many of us are hardwired gay, straight, bisexual, transgendered etc and then what role does nurture help our hinder our abilities to accept and fit into that role and then those that are hardwired bisexual what role did nurture play in the chioce we made. I believe we are hardwired in one of several ways and then nurture is what makes us choose if we have a choice and cope when we don’t.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Gallery
FAQ
Profile PM's 
. Please read my post again, begging you not to take this as applying to you. I was discussing the issue in general. I don't think I ever implied that the first thing one ought to do when one sees a child playing with a doll taking off its clothes, is to inform the criminal police. You will understand that I was using your remarks to launch into a general discussion, if you were to read my post again.
