|
|
 |
|
|
|
Reader's comments on this article Add a new comment on this article |  from Weeder
Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 22:33
(Agree/Disagree?)
I would like to hear what Seanswede has to say in his defense to this accusation. I have heard this story before too, but alittle differently. So mabye Sean should say his side of the story.
Is [removed by admin] really in a mental institution??
(reply to this comment)
| | | | | | | | | | from PopNFresh
Saturday, January 26, 2008 - 06:35
(Agree/Disagree?)
I'm not a current friend of Sean's but at one point I was and I can say that I have a pretty hard time believing this story simply based on ages mentioned and facts about Sean. I can't go into it further without voilating a confidence that was placed on me, so I know this post is pretty much useless. If the person (you know who you are) would like me to say what I know, I will gladly do so.
To jesusbabe, I really really believe your wife probably went through some very tragic stuff in the cult, and I hope she is able to come out of it a stronger person. I'm so sorry for what you and she are having to endure. I don't think she's making this stuff up at all, I just think it might be possible she's pinning the wrong person. Who knows? I wasn't there, and I'm not going to say with certainty that it didn't happen. But knowing what I know about Sean I have a very hard time thinking it was him.
(reply to this comment)
| from The real truth? or Libel?
Wednesday, January 23, 2008 - 04:25
(Agree/Disagree?)
In absence of affirmation of these allegations by the victim referred to I believe the admin could and perhaps should have gone even further and removed the article entirely, and I suggested as much.
TERMS
Note that the movingon.org terms of use, section B clause 3 states:
"Please do not post in any submission, material that you know or
reasonably should know to be false or materially misleading, or that is
libelous or defamatory. While we do not arbitrate disputes between
participants, we do not wish to see harm come to anyone through
defamation and we take complaints of this sort seriously.
If you believe something on this web site to be libelous, please
contact the administrators immediately and inform them of your
concerns. Please note that in order to be investigated the content must
be both untrue and posted as a statement of fact, not just an opinion.
If you believe content on here regarding you to meet this definition,
please specify the content in an email to the administrators and it
will be promptly investigated."
INGREDIENTS TO LIBEL (UK)
The material instantly raises questions in libel (actionable per se
without proof of damage)in that it communicates in a permanent and
visible form, defamatory words (Sean does not need to show that he has
been defamed) which "tend to lower a person in the eyes of right-
thinking members of society generally or make them shun or avoid that
person (Gatley para.31)". Note that it is unnecessary that the words
etc. used shoud cause the claimant to be actually shunned or avoided;
it is enough that they would normally be expected to have that effect
(HOUGH V LONDON EXPRESS [1940] 2 KB 507, 515).
Consequently it is irrelevant to the question of liability that no-one
believes the statement.
REFERENCE TO IDENTITY
The test seems to be whether the ordinary reader (etc.), having if
necessary special knowledge, would reasonably understand who the words
relate to(MORGAN V ODHAMS PRESS [1971] 1 WLR 1239, 1255)
Thus it is irrelevant that the article does not name or describe
seanswedes' specific identity in any way; it is enough that the "peg"
upon which his identification is hung lies outside the article
complained about, even if it mostly cannot be ascertained from
information within it (MORGAN, SUPRA; cf HAYWARD V THOMSPSON [1982] QB
47).
Consequently even if Sean did not have pictures up under his I.D.
(which he does) if the peg of identification can link back to him in
someway to someone, the material is libelous.
________________________________________________________________
Note that if the information is "substantially true" on objective
construction then "jesusbabee" will have justification, but in absence
of clarity in this matter it may be better to remove the article.
(reply to this comment)
|  From steam
Friday, January 25, 2008, 07:23
(Agree/Disagree?)
It is true that this is an accusation not made by the person to actually experiance it. However it is made by the husband of the sufferer. How do we know that, and further that the accusation is true? We do not. Nor would we know if someone claimed to be the direct sufferer. The fact is that as your own definition showed it is not libel if it is true and the 1/2 degree of seperation from the sufferer is the only issue at stake when deciding on whether it should be posted (the admin cannot tell if it is true and would have to remove the entire creeps section if there was stringent "proof" required for everything). If we had a denial from the accused I would be more inclined to favor a repeal. As we don't, on balance I would support the admins call on this. You made a very straightforward case on your point, why did you post anonymously? Is there an agenda?(reply to this comment) |
| | From vacuous
Saturday, February 02, 2008, 16:11
(Agree/Disagree?)
In order to disgust you and be extra pedantic I would suggest that the movingon terms of use should not read "Please do not post in any submission, material that you know or reasonably should know to be false or materially misleading, OR that is libelous OR defamatory. While we do not arbitrate disputes between participants, we do not wish to see harm come to anyone through defamation..."
The connecting "or" means each portion is to be read disjunctively, which means that even by only posting something defamatory (something which "tends to lower a person in the eyes of right-thinking members of society generally or make them shun or avoid that person (Gatley para.31>>> meaning that truth is not contingent on defamation)", it would contravene the Terms of use.
While this is partly compensated for further on, where only false statements of fact are to be reported, the prohibition still stands and so it would be better modified to read "please do not post in any submission material that you know or reasonably know to be falsely defamatory and/or materially misleading and libelous".
As it stands now if a person would ask to take down "the real truth" because of the terms of use, the query would be valid.
(reply to this comment) |
| | From Jailbird
Saturday, February 02, 2008, 17:43
 (Agree/Disagree?)
I agree with the conclusion of your analysis.
In my view, the Terms of Use, can be distilled to mean as follows: "When we feel like sanctioning someone have the right to so. To support our decision we'll pull one of these vaugue rules out of our back pockets and apply it to the instance in question."
I've always been against censorship or sanctioning of speech and writing of any sort. My strong views in this regard are the by product of a youth where expressions of anger, opinion, etc., were supressed, wihch is very unhealthy to the human psyche. I think the trailer park is a good idea. I would rather people have the ability to vent what they feel regardless of the collateral damage, than not. The only caveat I'd put on that is if someone was stupid enough to try to negotiate criminal activities in a public forum, but even there, I believe in letting free speech play itself out.
One of the traffic patterns I've been studying not only on this site but others as well is how at a sub-conscious level it seems that many humans are very attracted to scandal, debate etc. ...
In other words, some beautiful articles which I believe have a great deal of intrensic human value, literary value, academic value etc., .. on this site, receive hardly any views and no comments. Whereas whenever a fight or some controversy breaks out, the view-count sky-rockets within a very short timespan.
Very interesting. ...
(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From Jesusbabee
Thursday, January 24, 2008, 03:21
(Agree/Disagree?)
would it not just be adequate to kindly request removal of the article? would that not be a more simplistic approach rather than to go on about terms and agreements? or is it not apparant that besides the obvious anger i hold for the content in which i have posted, that i am just as objective and understanding of the implications and backlash this and many other articles can create? i will be just as understanding and respectful to the wishes of admin as they have been in allowing the post in the first place.(reply to this comment) |
| | from scorpion
Monday, January 21, 2008 - 22:23
(Agree/Disagree?)
thats fuked up... is all i can say... there nothing lower than a fukin rapist! in jail the first ppl to get wacked is fukin rapists. im gathering that this story is true since i dont see any comments from seanswede contradicting the mans story or standing up for himself.
wtf is this shit?! this site if for ppl who have been in the family and gone through fuked up shit in their youth not for mental rapist piece of shits that contributed to the hell alot of ppl had to go through! fukin piece of shit ur fukin lower than a fukin cockaroach u pedophile retard fuck
(reply to this comment)
| From conan
Wednesday, January 23, 2008, 00:16
 (Agree/Disagree?)
It is not, nor has it ever been, nor will it ever be cool to spell 'fuck' as 'fuk'. If you somehow think that spelling it as such is not quite as uncouth, you have issues on a whole other level. Also, 'wack' and 'whack' are homophones, not different spellings of the same thing. Learn the difference. Also, your conjugation and sentence structure is pathetic. It should read: "In jail, the first people to get whacked ARE fucking rapists."
It's "the man's", not "the mans". Also, in the term 'piece of shit', the piece is the pluralized adjective while the noun shit is left singular. I.E. pieces of shit, not piece of shits. "Alot" is not a word. Neither is "cockaroach". The orthopterous insect you wish to name is a cockroach. The mispronunciation is probably in your head too.
Obviously, "ur" is meant to be "you're" but as you're only using letters, it would be too pedantic of me to expect you to type it as "u'r", I'm sure. (reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | From fragiletiger
Tuesday, January 22, 2008, 02:05
(Agree/Disagree?)
Unfortunately in a lot of case's they are both 'ppl who have been in the family and gone through fuked up shit in their youth' and 'mental rapist piece of shits that contributed to the hell alot of ppl had to go through'.
Hence the whole issue, which has been raised, on this site more then once. So often the abused, become the abuser; but it adds another dimension, when they are still children, or as good as.
They where taught, that this was the way to act, their whole life, that it was God's will; how can we hold them accountable on the level, of what we know now?
And before the fuckwit below, starts accusing me and my sister, of tag-teaming to protect our Australian connections, this is an issue, which I have struggled with on a very personal level.
In fact I think I posted one of the previous articulus, there are so many layers and complicated emotions and issues, in these situations. Importantly, I think there is no right answer; different approaches will work for different people.
I would like to see, support for people working through, these issues, not ill-informed judgements.
(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | from Shaka
Friday, January 18, 2008 - 09:09
(Agree/Disagree?)
Dude, how old are you? I vaguely remember a Sean in my class at the Osaka school. I think I was 4 or something.
(reply to this comment)
| | | | from figaro
Friday, January 18, 2008 - 06:55
(Agree/Disagree?)
The odds of an eleven year old girl conceiving are very low, especially one whose diet was, no doubt, very poor (considering the fact that she was raised in TF) and what little food she did receive did not consist of hormone filled meat products. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying I don't believe you, I'm just saying that it was very unlikely and therefore very unfortunate, as if being raped at that age wasn't unfortunate enough. However, if a 11 girl was to conceive the odds of her miscarrying are rather high, especially considering the amount of stress and trauma that she was undoubtedly under.
I can not pretend to understand or imagine the pain she must feel, but I have been in YOUR situation before, and am still in one very similar. My exwife and best friend went through something not too different, except she was raped many times over the course of her youth, and has had 4 miscarriages, 2 of which were my child. I have seen very up close the psychological damage something like that causes and I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy. My heart goes out to both you and your wife, I hope you are able to over come this.
(reply to this comment)
| From Jesusbabee
Tuesday, January 22, 2008, 02:47
(Agree/Disagree?)
i know, she was all things considered, a pretty healthy child, my hearts out there, but im at the point where i feel im a broken man, and i still get moments of her saying being hospitalized as my fault, which leaves me in a blithering mess, as it all became too much when she seemed to create a whole new reality of herself, and started talking like shes enlightened and talk with her "guardian angels" but then there was also demonic entities, which she would scrub herself frantically with salt to protect herself......i dont know how many times ive thought of killing myself, but ive kinda given up on giving up if that makes any sense, but luckily i have dedicated myself to my beautiful daughter and soulmate, i hope my wife pulls out of it, when they stop the medication i am apparantly to blame because the medication clouds her "enlightened perception" and im possessed by the devil, so who knows, she may not want anything to do with me, and if that happens i really think ill head to sweden......(reply to this comment) |
| | From rainy
Tuesday, January 22, 2008, 02:55
(Agree/Disagree?)
That's no good; you're starting to take her delusions personally. I've been there. Life with a PTSD partner is a nightmare. But really try to distance your own mind from what's going on in hers. No point in both of you going mad. The hospitalisation and medication are necessary, and if you want to help, just don't let it in. Be matter-of-fact and stable about the whole thing. Easier said than done, I know. If all else fails just concentrate on your daughter and let the professionals take care of your wife. Just think of how vital your stability is to the little girl. And get some counselling for yourself.(reply to this comment) |
| | From Jesusbabee
Tuesday, January 22, 2008, 03:04
(Agree/Disagree?)
i know, i know its not real in so many ways, and it has been a nitemare, i just miss her so much it hurts, i started seeing a therapist and he says im severely conditioned, i apologise for everything excessivly, and leading up to this i was truly feeling guilty for the world of things she would accuse me of, i dont know how many times i day i mentally slap myself to hold it together, im just crying out for my best friend to come back its deafening, hey if your here could we chat in the chatroom???(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | From 3jinosos
Wednesday, January 23, 2008, 03:05
(Agree/Disagree?)
Rainey, since you asked, I'll answer.
In the first instance yes, they are compound adjectives modifying the same noun. To know if you need to hyphenate adjectives, test it. Does it have the same meaning a full job or a time job? No it does not, so it needs to be hypenated. In the second instance, no. Full time is no longer a compound adjective. It has become a noun. This is one of the most common mistakes in English grammar. I see adjectives improperly hyphenated everywhere. (reply to this comment) |
| | from neez
Friday, January 18, 2008 - 01:35
(Agree/Disagree?)
I'm hoping you've sent him an email with at least a link to this article.
(reply to this comment)
| | | | From MovingOn Admin
Friday, January 18, 2008, 09:51
(Agree/Disagree?)
Please note that the publishing of private emails between users of this site is prohibited by the Terms of Use, which all participants have agreed to abide by on this web site.
"We ask that all participants respect the following code of conduct. The administrators will investigate any reported infringement and may monitor any submission, activity, and content associated with the web site in this regard. Content that violates this code of conduct will be deleted...
Please do not post in any submission, including public chat discussions, comments, articles, and images, personally identifiable information regarding another user, their families, or yourself on this website, ...Personally identifiable information is defined as:
...Confidential correspondence... This may include private emails, private instant messages, online chats, phone calls, etc. in which there was a reasonable expectation of privacy and the correspondent was not a public figure (spokesperson, representative, agent, leader, etc.)"
http://www.movingon.org/terms.asp
(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From watcher
Sunday, January 20, 2008, 21:48
(Agree/Disagree?)
The terms of use really don't mean anything. They just mean that you're subject to scrutiny and how the admins happen to feel. ... And what pressure they get from which gossip cirlces etc. ...
They've sanctioned/banned some people for "attacking others," in comments while at the same time allowing others to actually post articles that do just that. Allow some people to be harassed, slandered, defamed and attempt to protect others from every criticism. No consistency whatsoever. ...
From what I can see the admin structure is just a self-appointed moral police force, not dissimilar to what we grew up with, old habits die hard I suppose.
(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | From Jesusbabee
Tuesday, January 22, 2008, 02:59
(Agree/Disagree?)
hey i didnt even read the terms, so its my mistake for doing so, let them do as they wish, i can still be appreciative for this site being here in whatever form, as i found him here, and the people who are in a position to somewhat relate to events that happened in the same unthinkable world.....i wanted so bad to keep it together and probe for information but i had come home from one of the most terrible days, and i had to ventilate somehow as i couldnt stop crying and that upsets my daughter even more than she already is.(reply to this comment) |
| | From Anger is an honest emotion
Tuesday, January 22, 2008, 13:59
(Agree/Disagree?)
I think you have every right to express what you feel or think and vent your anger.
I believe that anger is an emotion that shouldn't be supressed or sanctioned in it's verbal or written form. You have the right to share, you have the right to vent, in MHO. I may be wrong.
Perhaps several months from now you'll feel the same or perhaps you'll feel differently, in my view it doesn't matter. Either way in my view you have a right to be heard.
I think the issue here is that this article could seem to attack or incriminate another site participant etc., which some believe is in violation of the Terms and Conditions, which, again I'll qualify, some believe, seem to be formulated on a "as-needed/desired" basis and then applied selectively.
The article body (not comments), clearly attacks another 2nd generation person, and makes criminal accusations against said target, which I have no problem with personally. However, there are those who point out, and I agree with them, that some people have been sanctioned for responding to attacks in posts, stating opinions which should always be taken as subjective, and would surely be sanctioned for posting an article which clearly attacks a 2nd generation person.
Let's take a hypothetical situation where instead of a male being attacked in an article body it was a woman attacking another woman, or a man airing grievences about a woman. Would it be allowed to stand without sanction? I don't know, and perhaps don't care.
It's my view that you have the right to be heard. T&Cs their creation(s) and application(s) notwithstanding. I hope that giving your emotions a voice, and expressing them will help you deal with your trauma. I understand the carnage that these crimes against innocents, causes in adult life. May you find peace. (reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | From vix
Monday, January 21, 2008, 00:19
 (Agree/Disagree?)
Also, as far as I could tell the terms of use came into being as a direct result of that whole debacle, and anything that occured previous to that doesn't really count.
People who get pissy about admin's decisions should really just fuck off and start their own website, and until they do I really don't think they should complain too much about how this one is run.
I hope you're well, Andy. Let's start a personal exchange here, since email is so hard and all.
(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | From Jesusbabee
Tuesday, January 22, 2008, 23:47
(Agree/Disagree?)
i was under the impression he did frequent, i sent him a mail asking him to have a look at , and im sure he did.....it just boiled my blood when he refered to it as "getting in trouble" and it wasnt scheduled at all, neither had they ever been, as far as i know, allbeit only a presumption, she told me he found her alone walking through the home and cornered her, and although it was by no means consenual, as she was always considered a troublemaker, she was too scared and intimidated by his size, and for many years on, through the gossip circle it was apparantly said that many people heard about the "trouble" they got into, and sean apparantly said that she "wanted" to do it.........and would laugh and whisper to his friends about it which im sure you can imagine made and already unthinkable act even worse....(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From Your opinion
Tuesday, January 22, 2008, 13:30
(Agree/Disagree?)
You should qualify your statement with "It is my opinion that no favoritism is being displayed."
Because that is your opinion and what you believe, does not make it so.
Why the agro? No one is engaging in personal attack here.
We're not allowed to have an opinion about the way this site is run or our perception of it? We're not allowed to share an opinion, which does not make it so, but just what we believe, without being called a "Nameless Shameless Coward", which if I remember correctly was used to deflect very personal attacks on a named individual, which is not the case here.
As for needing to use one's real name, if you're in with the Admins, I'm sure they'll give up whatever info you need or want on participants, or even delete comments, or silence patricipants altogether. Pursue that track if civil debate is too civil for you.
(reply to this comment) |
| | From AndyH
Tuesday, January 22, 2008, 14:11
(Agree/Disagree?)
I never said you weren't allowed, I merely countered with my opinion.
I know your real name, you've made it pretty obvious. I'm not "in with admin" and even if I was, I highly doubt they would violate their own privacy policy. Again, you are making a very outlandish statement with absolutely nothing to back it up. If I am showing "agro" it is because this is a personal pet peeve of mine. What kind of civil debate can we have when you just pull stuff out of your ass?
I have asked admin to delete someone else comments in the past. They told me they couldn't, but would ask the author to remove them if I wanted, and they did not tell me who the author was, despite my burning curiousity. I think it's a lot easier to believe that admin is out to get you than just admit that you were being a prick.
I'm going to leave this alone, because it doesn't seem like it's going anywhere. I wish you the best. If you're ever going to get better, you're going to have to start being honest with yourself. (reply to this comment) |
| | From getting better
Tuesday, January 22, 2008, 15:01
(Agree/Disagree?)
I don't think admins are out to get me or anyone else. I'm the first one to admit that I can be a prick. Thank you for your well wishes.
Like others who have posted here I do believe there is favoritsm at work, there is probably nepotism at work, and there's probably sexism at work. It would be difficult for any system husbanded by humans not to have those forces at work, we're all influenced by our beliefs, feelings, predjudices and experiences.
My statements aren't very outlandish, and they are not just mine. Unless you think I'm notyetdrunk and cheeks & whoever else all in one. There's plenty to substantiate my opinion, which is just that. But I suppose it's a lot easier to believe that I'm just a prick, than to evaluate the possibility, that it's an opinion which may or may not have merit.
(reply to this comment) |
| | From rainy
Tuesday, January 22, 2008, 17:29
(Agree/Disagree?)
"difficult for any system husbanded by humans not to have those forces at work"? Remember, Jules is a woman. A courageous, intelligent, brave, free-thinking, independent woman. The members of the site are predominantly free-thinking, courageous, intelligent survivors. Have a little faith in us!(reply to this comment) |
| | From true that
Tuesday, January 22, 2008, 19:00
(Agree/Disagree?)
I know what you say about Jules to be true. It's entirely possible to have faith in and individual while disagreeing with or questioning decisions or actions of said individual.
Just because I have faith in someone or a group or someones doesn't mean that I'm going to blindly accept their judgement(s), or forgoe the possibility of vehemently questioning their judgement or actions on occasion. If that's translated as lack of faith in said individuals(s), there's not much I can do about that perception.
I watched a documentary recently about a man who's best friend was a surgeon, who botched and operation on his arms, leaving him disabled. It was necessary for that man to sue his surgeon, who was still his friend, for an error in judgement or execution. The cool part about it was that they were both mature enough to remain friends even during / after said lawsuit. I thought that was a good example of maturity.
(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | From neez
Friday, January 18, 2008, 02:06
(Agree/Disagree?)
Find his name in the user directory, and click on "email this person" (or something similar).
I haven't seen him post here in awhile so I doubt he's seeing any of this.
But if you already recieved an email from him, and you found your way onto here. Then you can probably figure out how to send him an email back.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | from shikaka
Thursday, January 17, 2008 - 12:44
(Agree/Disagree?)
I did consider taking this with a grain of salt, but I discovered that I had used up all my salt on other similarly shocking articles, such as the one claiming that my dad is a rapist.
I honestly dont know what to think about this.
(reply to this comment)
| | | | | | | From Jesusbabee
Friday, January 25, 2008, 00:57
(Agree/Disagree?)
she didnt have the resources, she just explained the way things happened, and in a way through the years of obviously thinking it over, as an adult put the pieces together for her own judgement, i dont want to go into detail but it sounds to be exactly that, but at eleven she didnt think about pregnancy, but what happened in the time following makes it pretty clear, i didnt post the article to by any means confirm the situation, but as this section implies identifying people who are to blame for the horrors that occured, and the way in which the culprit refered to it when he didnt know who he was talking to confirmed what i already believe to be true, the assault that is.(reply to this comment) |
| | From Jesusbabee
Tuesday, January 22, 2008, 02:34
(Agree/Disagree?)
its by no means just an accusation, i regret posting the emails but i have so much rage, heartbreak and feeling of helplessness from so much of what has happened in our lives and my emotions had got the better of me, if i was ready to disclose who we are it would probably clear alot up, i was "rescued" very young but always involved indirectly to the family, and my wife has said she never received any medical attention but something happened if you know what i mean, and althoug she has always been very reclusive and unstable, she not the kind of person who lies, and shes discussed it many times with me, and i couldnt even count how many times she would have the most shocking nitemares to me waking her up and she is still regressing it, trapped in her dream so to speak, amongst other terrible things, sounds selfish in comparison but it rips my heart out of my chest every time it happened. but she would even say his name when she would regress it, but could you have idea what its like for her to look at me with that fear in her eyes, so sean knows she has relived it too many times to count, i wish i knew his last name, have alot of friends next door in Finland, i wish he could be brought to justice, maybe one day it will be possible, amongst a few others i do know the full names of, and DNA aside, the beautiful light of my life who is my daughter, and the predator who also is a SGA who drugged and raped my wife one year clear of her running away, i have some pretty influencial friends in Japan who are on constant lookout, thats if he is out of jail, what they will do to him will make him wish he never came out.(reply to this comment) |
| | From Conqueror of Uranus
Friday, January 25, 2008, 02:10
(Agree/Disagree?)
I doubt Sean would ever be put in a Japanese prison, unless he was caught drug trafficking or committed murder in Japan.
The Japanese judicial system deports most criminals to their respective countries for most crimes, with the exception of crimes that affect public saftey such as; high-profile cases, exceptionally brutal and/or violent crimes, murder, etc.
I don't think he has ever been in jail either.
Him being one of the more vocal memebers of M.O. he would have definitely mentioned something about being imprisoned, if he ever has been.
I know he has spent time in the Swedish military, as all adult Swedish males physically capable are, that, as I hear, is a jail of sorts.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | From rainy
Sunday, January 20, 2008, 15:40
(Agree/Disagree?)
Sorry, that sounded so calloused, I thought I should add that I was deeply shaken by this article and there were tears in my eyes. And it also raises the question I've asked before, where are the second-generation abusers? How are they dealing? Are they in the same deep denial as the first generation abusers? Do we hold them equally accountable?(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From fragiletiger
Tuesday, January 22, 2008, 02:28
(Agree/Disagree?)
You know I’ve had enough of these accusations of us protecting the Australian’s, especially as the person who does the accusing, always remains nameless.
How dare you, I grew up in Australia and I was physically, sexually mentally and spiritually abused by both SGA’s and FGA’s. And how I chose to deal with that is my prerogative. I have never once said that there was no abuse, I have never gone against anyone who wanted to speak out or face their abusers.
I do have an issue with the Medias gross exploitation, of our lives, I have an issue with those who gleefully participated in our abuse and now, set themselves up as our saviours, I have an issue with those who make alligations, they are unable or unwilling to in anyway substantiate.
After all I’ve done and all I’ve been through, if I’ve managed to find a way to move on and come to terms with what happened to me, if I’ve managed to find a way to live, how dare turn and tell me that I’m not angry enough. How dare you, accuse me of protecting and condoning the actions of abusers.
I can’t even express what I want to say, after everything, after the absolute crap that we’ve been through after clawing our way up, you turn a place where we are supposed to be able to heal, into yet another abusive environment, where people are afraid to express their views. Where they are not allowed, to explore all the different, complex and conflicting emotions, that come with this sort of intense, programming and abuse.
You Gutless Fuckwit! (reply to this comment) |
| | From clocker
Tuesday, January 22, 2008, 12:04
(Agree/Disagree?)
I'm not accusing anyone of anything. That was kind of my whole point really.
I never even mentioned you, and I never did any of the things you are ACCUSING me of doing here. I simply wondered why there was such a difference in reaction from Rainy regarding a similar situation.
And I will continue to ask these questions if I see fit, because I would hate for this to turn into a place "where people are afraid to express their views. Where they are not allowed, to explore all the different, complex and conflicting emotions, that come with this sort of intense, programming and abuse" as you put it.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | From rainy
Tuesday, January 22, 2008, 23:43
(Agree/Disagree?)
I didn't say you ARE a stalker, I was just asking if you were this person who used to follow me around on this site about two years ago, saying I said things I hadn't, but always nameless and vanishing when I tried to find out what they were talking about, and where any examples of me having said those things were. I started to refer to that person as my cyber-stalker (half jokingly) because they knew a lot about me but I had no idea who they were. When you came up with an instant link to an old comment of mine, I thought maybe you were that person. I was only asking, not accusing.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | From figaro
Tuesday, January 22, 2008, 08:37
(Agree/Disagree?)
I can certainly see your logic. How can we expect them to behave in accordance with what is deemed as right and wrong when; A. They don't have any real knowledge of what right and wrong actually is, since everything they were taught was right is actually wrong, and all they were told is wrong is actually right (not ALL but you get my point). & B. Right and wrong is decided by society, if the society they were raised in deemed his actions right then how was he to know what he was doing was, in fact, wrong? Legally if a person believes what he is doing is right, he is still held accountable for his actions as long as he knows that society views his actions as wrong. Well, what happens when the person has never been in society and is NOT aware that society deems such actions as wrong, and the society that he is a member of has not only tolerated these kinds of actions, but ENCOURAGED them!! What do you do then?
I honestly don't think that, given even a decent lawyer, he would be held accountable. And maybe he shouldn't be, but then again, maybe he should. In my opinion theres much more that needs to be taken into consideration. That is, if these accusations are even true. (reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From figaro
Tuesday, January 22, 2008, 18:32
(Agree/Disagree?)
No, the FGAs don't have an excuse because they were part of society and taught real morals. Weather by their parents or school or society, none of them can say that at no point in their lives did they learn that rape was deemed wrong by the society they grew up in.
As for "morals are instinctive or taught" thats one argument that could go either way, but I think there are other factors involved like did they get raped themselves, if they did then they should know that it was hurtful and should have known better. Of course that is just a for instance, theres plenty other variables to factor in too, IMHO.(reply to this comment) |
| | From Jailbird
Tuesday, January 22, 2008, 18:52
(Agree/Disagree?)
I'm of the opinion that most of the FGAs that joined had some history of deviance/abuse/mental instability prior to joining. My father went to boarding school where he was molested. My mother was molested as well. This type of stuff made the vulnerable to the cult to start with. 90+% of them had messed up relationships with ther parents. Then you have others who joined when they were 16 or 17 like Jeremiah singer, who was very bipolar and still a child really, as well as other troubled youths who had basically turned their back on all of society's norms and mores.
You have people like Grant Montgomery who was in and out of juvenile hall. Others who had blown their brains out of hallucinegenic drugs, speed, etc. ... All these factors as well as the tremendous peer pressure and isolationism made them willing to either go along with or at the very least, be in denial about the abuse that was going on around them pumped from the top down. I mean every time that one of the Berg's or some top leader would show up at some little field outpost it pretty quickly immediately became a sesspool of sadistic abuse in my experience.
But I do believe that the factors above notwithstanding, they had more basis for understanding right from wrong when it came to sexual abuse of children than a person who was born into the group and socialized into a culture of kids sleeping with one another, rape, and all types of other nosense.
(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | From fragiletiger
Tuesday, January 22, 2008, 02:28
(Agree/Disagree?)
Unfortunately in a lot of case's they are both 'ppl who have been in the family and gone through fuked up shit in their youth' and 'mental rapist piece of shits that contributed to the hell alot of ppl had to go through'.
Hence the whole issue, which has been raised, on this site more then once. So often the abused, become the abuser; but it adds another dimension, when they are still children, or as good as.
They where taught, that this was the way to act, their whole life, that it was God's will; how can we hold them accountable on the level, of what we know now?
And before the fuckwit below, starts accusing me and my sister, of tag-teaming to protect our Australian connections, this is an issue, which I have struggled with on a very personal level.
In fact I think I posted one of the previous articulus, there are so many layers and complicated emotions and issues, in these situations. Importantly, I think there is no right answer; different approaches will work for different people.
I would like to see, support for people working through, these issues, not ill-informed judgements. (reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | From rainy
Tuesday, January 22, 2008, 01:31
(Agree/Disagree?)
Okay, "Clocker", there's a HUGE difference here. In one case, a person's legal name, location, place of business and website were being posted. The person was accused of turning consensual sex with someone of his own age into something non-consensual behind bedroom doors. The girl in question was distressed that this was posted and asking everyone to stop. I was just saying it was none of our business and objecting to them being raked through the mud.
THIS time, it's a user name only, and the accusation is far more serious. But I'm still with you; I would request the same for this person, that unsubstantiated rumour is no basis to name and shame someone. That's why I was checking if anyone's ever heard of something like that.
PS: are you my long-lost cyber-stalker come back to haunt me?(reply to this comment) |
| | From Jesusbabee
Thursday, January 24, 2008, 03:05
(Agree/Disagree?)
well maybe this was something i shouldnt have posted, i was at breaking point when i posted this article and saw what "he" said, as far as im concerned he did admit to it in a sense, i didnt transfer all the info i was given, and in so many ways the recollection and word of the person i trust more than anyone in the world that has discussed it with me starting from along time ago, and talked with the very "friend" in which i refer to in the article, and as his corrospondance has ceased directly after confronting the person in question confirms what i already know to be true, all admin has to do is kindly send me a mail requesting me to remove the article and i would do exactly that, so there it is, discussion or comment or ridicule was not what i posted the article for, it was purely an act of frustration, anger & ventilation that those words found their way here, the comments that have followed are in many cases are irrelevent to the content of the actual article, and to the people who work hard at providing a site for many people to interact, i apologise if I have caused any more uneeded pain in an already busy day, this comment is in no way a submission, but is made with respect to the people who make the wealth of information & resources possible.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | From gossip mill inc
Tuesday, January 22, 2008, 01:01
(Agree/Disagree?)
If someone is guilty of rape the authorities should be brought into the picture, as soon as possible. I wouldn't differentiate between 1st gen or 2nd gen, the damage done to the victim is the same regarless of what generation inflicted the abuse. Some cases are pretty blurry though, like if two young people were put on a sharing schedule and later on the one who was a year younger decides it was rape regardless of gender. I don't know. But until that's said and done, I wouldn't put much stock into posts or people's reaction to them.
I'd take other posts on this site with a grain of salt. I remember reading one set of comments by some whacked out site participant(s) where one girl was claiming someone had the hots for her and some other girl was claiming the same person had the hots for her husband. These are fairly unbalanced people, with a massive gossip circle, vindictive and angry as sin etc. ... Makes for good entertainment, though. ...(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
]
[About the Trailer Park] [Who Links Here]