From: dnelson@grind.isca.uiowa.edu (David Nelson,8,3548486,3548486)
Subject: Re: TIRED
Originator: dnelson@grind
Organization: Iowa Computer Aided Engineering Network, University of Iowa
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 02:34:55 GMT

From article <C02Fux.9KK@twwells.com>, by anon-1280@twwells.com (MelancholyChild):
> hal@netcom.com (Hal Wine) writes:
> 
>>In article <C018MC.5Jo@twwells.com> anon-1317@twwells.com writes:
> 
>>> i informed a friend about the child
>>> abuse in this country- about my own
>>> and about the other kinds-- i think
>>> he was shocked-- so i apoligized to
>>> him--  what for?

In an ideal world, there would be no taboo against talking about
incest and abuse.  But this isn't an ideal world, and society sends us
*many* messages in various ways that say "shut up."  I have found
myself wanting to apologize for being so "rude" as to mention the
topic in "polite conversation."  So, in other words, I felt guilty for
telling the truth, even though I know that abuse thrives on secrecy.

>>Why should he be shocked?  From the stats I've seen, child sexual
>>abuse rates are unfortunately consistant throughout the industrialized
>>world.  (I wish it were otherwise.)  This *isn't* an American problem.
>>If anything, we're on the leading edge of acknowledging the abuse and
>>developing treatment programs.

> It *is* shocking, and nobody wants to hear about it.

But it wouldn't be any more shocking than mentioning something like
mental illness or pneumonia if it weren't for the taboo against
*talking* about incest.

> I don't mean to pick on Canada, heaven knows that the USA has horrendous
> problems too, but Canadian laws seem to be very easy-going with respect
> to child molesters. At least, the sentences seem far too light in many
>...

My question, as one could infer from my past comments, is what good
does it do except to satisfy others' need for justice?  I want the
damage done to me to be acknowledged as being serious; in that light,
a heavier sentence certainly makes such a statement.  But whether a
perp spends 4 or 40 years in prison seems to me to be totally
irrelevant as far as stopping further abuse goes.  So what if he goes
to prison and is anally raped etc.?  Will that by itself change him?
Will it keep him from abusing children in the future?   I want to see
society respond in a manner that is effective in (1) acknowledging the
injury done to the victims, (2) facilitating the healing of the
victims, (3) stopping further abuse.

Severe punishment for such abuse tends to put further pressure on the
victims not to report, especially when the perp is a family member.

Do the laws include a mechanism for the rehabilitation of the perps?
(As I've said before, if they're unwilling to change, then they may as
well rot in jail.)


>>> and when will society really see the 
>>> difference-- when will people start seeing
>>> us as surviors and not victims or the ones
>>> to blame-- 
> 
>>I think this is starting.  I know people are more willing to talk
>>about it, because survivors *have* been talking about it.  Laws are
>>changing.

> Slowly, yes.

>>> when will people start saying-- "something
>>> must be done- we have a problem here"-- when
>>> pigs fly?

>>Granted, we need this shouted from every street corner by hoards of
>>outraged citizenry.  But, I think I can hear at least a whisper from
>>many corners.

> You know what I hear? I hear "oh no, not another abuse story." I see
> a backlash coming, big time. I think people are getting more sick of
> hearing about sexual abuse than becoming outraged. I overheard a 
> conversation about the many priests who are finally being confronted
> by their victims, and one guy said "shit, there aren't that many
> priests in the Catholic church, I wish these people would just shut
> up." I had to restrain myself from screaming at him.
> ....
> I personally don't feel the situation is going to get past the 
> "whisper" stage, and the only shouting I can imagine is from
> people who are weary of hearing about it shouting to the victims
> to put a lid on it. I see more scepticism (sp?) and less understanding
> coming. That's pretty cynical, but that's how I see it.

If one examines society's behavior, one finds that the taboo against
*talking* about incest if far stronger than the taboo against *doing*
it.  Society effectively blames the victims by all the forms of
backlash against talking about incest.  In other words, from the time
a person begins to break the silence, I expect the backlash - it's
part of the deal.  We, as survivors, are stuck with the role of being
social pioneers.  It's just a part of the package called "Breakingthe
Silence."


> My own SO, who loves me and supports me, has said things that make
> me cringe. He brought up the McMartin Day Care case to me once. Because
> of that case, he automatically disbelieves Day Care abuse stories. I
> didn't(don't) know enough about the McMartin case to argue with him.
> He supported the Foxfire guy (Wigginton?) and, even when I told him
> that the guy had been convicted, said "hmmm" as if he thought it was
> a frame or something. He doesn't believe that there are any MPs on asar.
> I think he thinks that the women yelling "sexual harrassment" at these
> US Senators are going overboard (I know that he absolutely refuses to
> believe that Inouye...sorry, I don't know how to spell it...the senator
> from Hawaii, is guilty of all the sexual harassment claims made against
> him.) The thing is, my SO is a wonderful, sensitive, caring and supportive
> man. If *he* has trouble beliving this stuff, then I can imagine the rest
> of society's viewpoint.

Excuse me if this is offensive to you, but he doesn't fit into my
definition of "supportive" whatsoever.  If he invalidates others'
abuse, then he is by implication invalidating yours.  I tend to avoid
people with these attitudes and denial.  
Newsgroups: alt.sexual.abuse.recovery