Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Becoming Other on July 18, 2012 at 12:22pm

What follows is a reply to someone on another forum, redacted just a bit to protect that party's privacy.

**********************************************

Thank you for sharing that.  I am sorry that such things are in the background of your father and that you have had to be exposed to the enduring aspects of such a legacy.

I don't support the concept of "dysfunctional family", as this is still based on the idea that there is some sort of "normal family" and so it amounts to reification.  That is, one is worshiping the Good Family.

Instead I talk about exploitation and Bad Faith.  Someone is living in Bad Faith when they have other choices, but decline to admit it.  This statement from your paternal grandfather is a prime example of that, "**************************."

FWIW, when I was about 3yo, still not exploring outside the house by myself, my father walked me to a school playground about two blocks away.  Then he said, "I could leave you here."  I asked him why, and he said, "Because I could."  I was terrified.  After that I never felt secure around my father again.  Even to this day I can still feel that fear of him and a need to please him.  As I look back over the decades and into what remained of my childhood, I can see that this rejection from him has shaped all of my interactions with him, and really shaped my entire life.

If a statement like this was just an aberration, reflective of a poor choice of words on his part, or just my own misunderstanding of him, then his real feelings would have been obvious and the misunderstanding corrected.  But no, what he said was an accurate expression of how he really felt, and that has never changed.

I could say that such a parent should burn in Hell for all eternity.  But the fact is, he already burns during this lifetime.  Problem is, he is still able to hurt others along the way, and he does so, and he thinks he is right.  I don't see that anything will ever change until their is redress, until parents are held responsible whenever they have used a child.

Some years later he would say that I am his pet.  I questioned this, and again he just responded by affirming that it is true.  He meant that I was like a dog or a cat.

Now of course this was when my mother was not around.  She would not let him say things like that and would not say such herself.  But still, what she actually felt was not that much different.  For her, having children and keeping up the appearance of a Good Family were obligations.

What I am talking about, and what I read in your share, are children being used, exploited.

My own interest here is in finding ways to seek legal redress.  I say that if a child has been used, then the parents are responsible.  In practice what this should mean is that they have to pay.  That is, they cannot exit with money or assets.  They used a child, so they should be pauperized.

The kind of economically and socially isolated family of the age of industrial capitalism is most certainly a strange entity.  While some people may think its just fine, if a child has been exploited, and if there is evidence for this in the resulting animosity, then the parents should be made to pay.  They did not have to practice the family system.  Nothing forced them to do this.  So if they did and and there was harm, then they should pay.  All sorts of things can be overlooked, but not the exploitation of a child.

I also notice in your story how central is the making of money.  For my parents, holding onto money was important.  The type of bad faith living I am focused on is a phenomenon of the middle class, that is people who have at least something.

What the Family System seems designed to do is to instill the Self-Reliance Ethic.  It instills this, just like a primitive society might use hot coals or sharp stones to make scars.

So of course then, when people have a problem with the family, the usual response is simply to say, "Oh well, now I rely on myself."  What this amounts to is exoneration of the parents, giving them a free pass, letting them claim that they did right.  Self-Reliance is seen as the moral basis for even being able to make a criticism of one's parents.

Claiming redress on the other hand is much more difficult.  One actually has to face the pain.  One also has to see all the ways society tries to make such redress impossible.

What I want are lawyers who are trying to find ways to sue over an increasingly broad class of family issues.  I want lawyers who are trying to find ways to make the US like many other countries by blocking disinheritance.  In trying to find this, the going has been tough.  Facing how we have been used is the hardest thing any of us can ever do.  It is far easier to seek nirvana or enlightenment and. then to learn to live in the small corner of the world which is left when one has been so violated.  The pain is incredible, all the more so when you see how society sanctions this exploitation of children and provides no redress.  Rather it exonerates the parents and blames the child.

So what can one do?  Well, most people are just like their parents.  If they got beat over the head, the first thing they will do is have a child whom they can beat over the head.  If tricky games where plaid with them, they will play games with a child of their own.  If their parents read books which promoted parenthood, giving them license to use a child, then they will do the same.  New books are published every few years.  In my day it was Benjamin Spock.  Now the new books deal with things like "attachment", "empathy", and "nurturing".  Get the lingo down and you are authorized to make a child be responsible for your adult identity!

So the thing to look for is animosity.  Sometimes for some reason you find people who have extreme animosity towards their parents.  For some reason they are not in denial, and not 100% like their parents.  When this is found, it is evidence that the parents have used the child, have lived in Bad Faith.  The thing to do then is to sue.

You spoke about Pentecostals.  Well what Pentecostalism is is simply a most extreme form of non-denominational Protestantism, where they take the Bible as a prescription.  I have noticed that among Pentecostals that the most important aspect of faith is an external pronouncement of loyalty, "Are you a Christian?  Are you Saved?"  A very high percentage of the congregation will have had a serious history with drugs or alcohol.  They tell their stories of Getting Saved.

So to me, the stories sound like the substituting one addiction for another.  I am always telling them, "People who have been treated with dignity and respect and given the chance to develop and apply their abilities are not likely to become substance addicts.  So I don't go along with this idea that alcoholics and addicts have some special need for redemption."

I have also noticed that in their families they always have a Black Sheep.  They say things like, "So I have to wonder, did he/she really get Saved or not?"  They even say this after the person has died at a very early age.  I find it all to be extremely disturbing.

So what drew me to this molestation case was the strong animosity between this eldest daughter and her father, and the irrefutable confirmation of this in the father's black sheeping of her.

I am still a beginner here, and so I am not sure how I feel about the 50 year plus sentence that the state wants to give him.  I just want him to get a smaller sentence, but then I want the money to go to the children.

I don't have anything to contribute to the criminal proceeding.  But maybe I could get myself involved by finding a suitable lawyer who will get that money for the children.  Maybe I could find some source of deprogramming from Born Again Christianity, and from a lot of other stuff, because these three daughters must be in need of emotional support to follow this through and destroy their father.  Maybe this could be a place for me to finally be able to draw blood, and be the beginning of an ever expanding campaign to hold parents responsible for the ways they exploit children.

Vachss, Angela Doe case:
http://www.vachss.com/guest_dispatches/excerpt_battle_11.html

BO
portal page: http://theexploitedunited.onlinewebshop.net

Permalink Reply by Becoming Other on July 18, 2012 at 6:54pm

This is a bit of a clarification I wrote for someone.  I really want to know what people think about this molestation case.

Here I repeat my attempt to tactfully summarize what it says in the police report:

*********************************************************************************************
WARNING, GRAPHIC SEXUAL MOLESTATION INFORMATION
*********************************************************************************************

I'm going now to do my best to present this in as tactful a way as possible. I don't have to be as explicit as the police report is.

Most of this pertains to what the father had been doing with the eldest daughter from when she was age 8 until age 16. At age 16 I think she found someway to get out or something. Not sure.

He was fondling her all over, on a regular basis. Often it was in the context of giving her a massage in her underwear. He also referred to it as the "tickling game". She says this was done many hundreds of times. She did not feel that she could refuse. She would just try to keep her legs together to minimize it.

Once he directed her to change into her swimming suit for a "new game". This new game involved the use of string, beads, feathers, and also a serrated steak knife.

He has admitted to all of this. The mother has admitted to knowledge of this as well.

This guy has manic mood swings. He accepts a psychiatric diagnosis. When he has these swings he is known to often be grabbing at the girls, touching them all places. Sometimes he apologizes the next day.

He is always watching them dress and undress. He says to them, "Hey its okay, I'm your dad."

The youngest girl described him as "creepy".

When the eldest girl was 16 they took to strip searching her. This was led by the father, with the mother standing right there. They were concerned about her smuggling drugs in and out of the house, probably marijuana. This searching also included looking under the sanitary napkin stuck with adhesive to her underpants. This so angered her that she threw her underpants at her father. The mother and father have admitted to this strip searching and have tired to justify it.

********************************************************************
CONCLUSION
********************************************************************

So our DA's Office has charged this guy with 6 felonies.  These recognize that this was a child he had regular access to and that the practice was being repeated, and that there may have been some physical coercion involved in some aspects of this.  If convicted on all counts the maximum sentence he could receive exceeds 50 years.

Is this what you mean by a long sentence?  Do you think this is right in this situation?  What sentence do you think he should get?  This is what I really want to know.  I just want to know what other people think, as I am a beginner here, but I am going to get myself into the middle of this.

The police report was more graphic than what I wrote.  I did not write it the way they did because I don't want to traffic in such texts, as I don't know how people might read them on the open net and on these sorts of forums.  The police wrote it the way they did, because they had to under the circumstances.

I am greatly offended by what this man did.  I am also offended by the mother and by their entire church.  I am offended by the acts, and also by the attitudes which try to justify and legitimate them.

A curious thing, a few days ago this defendant just happened to sit down across from me at a table in a library.  He was using his laptop computer.  I spoke to him in a friendly way.

I take great exception to this guy's religion, and to all the attitudes which underlie it.  I also take exception to the way he projects this into his occupation of motivational speaking.  But beyond that, I have found him and his wife to be nice, though kooky.  They extended themselves to come to court for another case which I am concerned with, when they did not need to.  If they could impose the judgemental standards of their religion onto other people, then I would consider them dangerous.  As it stands now though, they are only dangerous when they can use a parental authority to impose their religion based predjudice.

So I have some reservations about aiding in their destruction, about inserting myself into this matter.  But on the other hand, it is something I care about deeply.  Also, I heard the guy black sheeping the eldest daughter.  He spoke directly to me and did this.  He said that the whole case is based on false accusations and that the reason for this is this daughter's own problems with sex, drugs, and alcohol from the age of 16.  He said she was even having sex in the bushes in the park.  He also blames her for turning the two younger daughters against him.  He said that what she has done with them since they were transfered into her custody has been."Pure malice!"  By this time he was pacing back and forth and making lots of gestures.

Well sorry guy, you stepped into my territory.  At least it is territory I want to advance into.  As far as I am concerned that sort of denigration, black sheeping, is by itself cause for redress.

I asked him about the "false accusations", I said, "Do you mean there is no substantial basis to the claims, or do you mean that it is a matter of misinterpretation?"

"It's a matter of misinterpretation."

So its like it says in the police report, he generally admits to what is being claimed.  What it seems then is that he just rationalizes this some way as being in some different category than sexual molestation, and as being a parental perrogative.  What it comes down to is this is the role he sees himself as authorized by God Almighty to fulfill.  This is why he has children and this is why he practices the Family System.

So again, what sentence do you think he should get?

What could be added to what the cops and DA are already doing?  What could I possibly do here?  First I wish there were some deprogramming resources available.  These girls need help in deconstructing all the ideology behind Born Again Christianity, the Good Family, and Motivationalism.  Second, looking at this as a beginner I still am not exicted about this guy getting a real long sentence.  Rather, I just want the children to get the money.  These are the areas where I think it could be possible that I could locate resources which would help.

And yes, I do want to completely pauperize these parents.  I think their assets should even be seized before they can be handed over to his high powered Sex Offender Defender.  I mean, this is how they do it in Narcotics and Escort Service cases, they deem the assets proceeds of illegality, and they are able to seize them.

Well, these assets are the proceeds of Bourgeois Family Happiness Inc., an enterprise which exploits children.  So they should not be able to retain control of those assets and use them to hire a specialist law firm.

Right to Kill (1985)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KflGXruJRc

Foster care reform litigation:
http://www.youthlaw.org/publications/fc_docket/

Becoming Other
Exploited Children United, new portal page:
http://theexploitedunited.onlinewebshop.net

Permalink Reply by Becoming Other on July 20, 2012 at 2:11pm

What do people think about the 50 year sentence that this guy faces?

 

Are there people on this forum who have some feelings about such, maybe even have some experience with child molestation cases?

 

I still have reservations about getting involved in this because I find our criminal justice system to be excessive.  There are other things I am involved in where I am trying to overturn convictions and alert people as to how unfair our criminal justice system is.  If I got involved here, among other things, I'd be helping to bring about this high sentence.

 

I want the guy to be severely penalized, but not really in this way.  My agenda is a broader one, not limited to sexual molestation.  And of course I see religion as being a central component of this and it is part of my motivation.

 

BO

Permalink Reply by Becoming Other on August 7, 2012 at 4:18pm

Here someone wrote to me at length about a "dark side", so I've responded:

********, thank you for posting that. It is interesting and shows deep reflection.  If I am understanding you then, you wrote that yourself.  It is touching. 
You talk much about a dark side. I look at things rather differently than you do. I don't fear what is in my dark side, or in other people's dark sides. This is not something I see a need to be concerned with. More than anything I have worked hard on myself to learn not to be moralistic. I am not saying I am there yet, but I have made a great deal of progress.  The key will be when I start scoring some victories.  I call this, "taking scalps".
As I see it, the moralistic view and the fear of a dark side is something associated with religion, and also with Sigmund Freud.
Century of Self http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmUzwRCyTSo Freud's idea, you might just listen to 1 minute of this: http://youtu.be/OmUzwRCyTSo?t=4m "unearthed powerful sexual and aggressive forces" "feelings we repressed because they were too dangerous"

In 1914 Freud was in Austria and watched hostilities erupt and denounced these "primitive forces" which had been unleashed.  I do not agree with him, not at all.  Though I would never endorse the Central Powers side of WWI, I do not see "primitive forces" as the problem.  Rather I see things like monarchy and capitalism as the problem.  So in criticizing ordinary soldiers, Freud is just plain wrong.  Freud is laying the ground work for a doctrine of disengagement, of nirvana seeking.

Even today, psychoanalysis still denigrates aggression and sexuality, sees them as something which must be overcome, sublimated or harnessed.  It finds fault anytime they are demonstrated.  So psychoanalysis is just another type of religion, another way of refusing to engage.

Rather than responding with fear or by postulating good over evil, I look here to this.  It provides an alternate way of responding to the world as it is experienced.

White's main page http://web.williams.edu/wp-etc/philosophy/awhite/

Some 20 years ago when White's book came out someone I know gave an excellent talk, about Nihilism.  Its one I keep coming back to.

If you might just read these three short portions of White's book,

Nihilism section of Within Nietzsche's Labyrinth: http://web.williams.edu/wp-etc/philosophy/awhite/WNL%20web/Nihilism%20frames.htm http://web.williams.edu/wp-etc/philosophy/awhite/WNL%20web/Transformations%20frames.htm http://web.williams.edu/wp-etc/philosophy/awhite/WNL%20web/Completing%20frames.htm

White is interpreting Nietzsche's unpublished literary works, his Nachlass, commonly titled as "Will to Power".  White sees the central idea as being nihilism and its transformations.  He identifies 3 stages:

1. Religious Nihilism

2. Radical Nihilism

3. Complete Nihilism

I will try here to summarize what White says, and then offer my own take.

Religious Nihilism

Based on the sense that this world as it is does not have a right to exist, but needs some sort of other worldly justification.  Needs some external categories or ideals, some sort of purpose.  Nihilism begins with the failure of this attempt to endow the world with this external purpose.

While this most certainly is a type of nihilism, its adherents would deny that they are nihilists.  Long ago I recognized that in the areas of self-help, motivationalism, enlightenment seeking, and most especially recovery, this is the sort of thinking which dominates.  I would also include here moralisms and concern about a "dark side".

Radical Nihilism

Nihilism becomes conscious or avowed when one realizes that these sources of external value are absent.  They see the problem as being that nothing in our world corresponds to these highest values.  Though they still do not deny the values themselves.  They still believe in the categories.  So even Radial Nihilism is not that radical.  As they are horrified by what they see and forced to draw a verdict, they become avowed nihilists.

Complete Nihilism

One becomes a complete nihilist only when one has completed nihilism, when one has ceased to be a nihilist.  Complete nihilism comes from an acceptance of the world as it is, and with the intention of engaging with it and shaping it.

So rather than follow doctrines of disengagement and resignation ( "You can't change other people, you can only change yourself"  "Live and Let Live" ) I want people to band together and gain power, the power to vanquish foes.  I'm not issuing a call to enlightenment seeking, I'm issuing a call to band together and seize power by inflicting consequence.

If you have been exploited by the Family System, then right now you stand alone because other people are not doing anything about it.  They are claiming that they feel your pain, but this is just commiseration, really its just pity.  They are hurting you, because they cannot face the pain of what was done to them.  Most of all, they cannot face how our society condones such child exploitation.  I want none of this.  Instead I want people who want to fight, who want to band together and seize power, to actually enforce, to impose severe consequence upon those who use children.

Rather than follow things like psychoanalysis and religion, I want to restore my ability to fight, and my ability to fuck.

Now, about this current religious fundamentalist fatherly molestation case, what do people think about it.  What troubles me most is the 50 year sentence that this guy could receive.  I am having a hard time with this.  You've read my description of the police report.  What do you think about it?

How about my betraying a confidence, the fact that I would not know of this case unless the defendant decided to make me his confidant and disclosed it to me, and then my jumping into it and trying to influence it against him?

What I am more interested in than the criminal prosecution, is getting the children to sue for money.  Any thoughts about this?

One of the problems here is that I am only hearing from the father, as he tries to defend himself.  I want to operate from the child's perspective, and I do not have that.  Yes, I have researched these people online, and they do have a significant presence.  But I still am not able to taste their animosity.  The child's animosity is after all just the bad faith of the parents.  I have identified that as the indicator of when to strike.  Here, I do not have that.  Other social circumstances prevent me from openly approaching them.  So my communication will have to be one which invites them to be open to their own animosity and to let that guide them.  Any thoughts about this?

http://theexploitedunited.onlinewebshop.net/ BO
Rolling Stones ( with Mick Taylor ) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSjT1JBLnN4&feature=related

Permalink Reply by Becoming Other on August 23, 2012 at 7:16pm

BO to Forum, What if I Cannot Act?

I don't mean just in this case, but what if I cannot act in any case?

Then I am a pillow punching recovery movement neurotic.  There I am, confessing on the couch, turning it all into personal pathology and disclosing my intentions so that they are neutralized.  My therapist is telling me about how horrible the family I grew up in was, and she is instructing me about communications skills, about empathy, about nurturing, and about attachment.  She is assuring me that life can be different for me if I can learn the ways of the Good Family.  I can be redeemed.  She might also suggest verious New Age Churches I might start attending.

I come to accept this, and I begin to denigrate anyone who does not accept this teaching of feel good, who does not disclose everything about themselves in a confessional manner, and who does not learn the concepts which legitimate the Good Family.

I let my therapist lead me in histrionic venting rituals which resemble exorcisms.  I project everything back to infancy, and still earlier.

Never do I seek to redress the wrongs done to me, or to anybody else.  Never do I seek to make common cause with others and act against people.  Rather I seek nirvana and try to avoid conflict.

I become a recovery movement online forum moderator, so that instead of striking against actual perpetrators, those who use children in order to gain for themselves an adult identity, instead I can exercise arbitrary authority over anyone on the online forum who does not accept the premises of the recovery movement and who does not venerate the Good Family.  This sort of power is my subsitute for all the devestation and wreckage in my own life.

Becoming Other

Exploited Children United, new portal page: http://theexploitedunited.onlinewebshop.net

Permalink Reply by Becoming Other on August 30, 2012 at 9:39pm

Moved Off Of the Fence

What follows is a message sent to someone I knew face to face, who is now living overseas.  I present it here in order that there might be original discussion:
********************

Yes, I have moved off of the fence.  My last likely chance for conversation with the defendant has passed.  Probably he is terrified and doesn't know what to do.  He may even be in custody for psychiatric evaluation.  This is a guy who went from drugs and alcohol to Born Again Christianity and psychiatric medication.  This guy has never dealt with the violence and abuse he grew up with.  Instead he has tried to hide behind a parental role.  We see how this has gone.  Trying to make the Ideal Family means using children, exploiting them.
His main defense is still to say that all 3 girls are liars.  This more than anything compels me to act.  I have to stand with the children.
His defense lawyer is someone who specializes in child sex abuse and internet kiddie porn cases.  He claims to be a civil libertarian, but really he is an arch reactionary.  I already have the deepest of hatred for this lawyer. I would like to see him *************************.
The lawyer has got the defendant convinced that because there is some contradictoryness in the statements of the younger girls, that the case should not have been charged.
I our last conversation I explained to the defendant that there is no strict formula.  In many criminal investigations there is going to be some contradiction  and some culpability in the victims.  The DA's Office has to use its best judgment in deciding how to proceed.  In the case of family molestation it is likely that victims will not even have the understanding of what has happened.  I think this defendant has not really comprehended the implications of the concept that minors cannot be consenting.  Think about the ramifications of this, an abusive parent blames what happens on the minor's own agency.  It's not just in sex abuse cases but it's for anything.  In his published writings he speaks of he and the wife "having trouble with one of their children", and having to have contact with the police.  This was the oldest daughter and alcohol, marijuana, and sex.  He blames her for all of this!
The police officer who wrote the report for this defendant's case is someone I have met long ago and took most positive notice of.  I have a very high opinion of him.  This defendant says, "he is a dirty cop".
The case surfaced because the youngest girl, then in the 8th grade, was talking with a youth councilor.  She said somethings which alerted the councilor, an intern.  So she pressed further.  Then she did exactly what the law requires.  She wrote it up and faxed it to Police and Child Protective Services.  Soon Police were tracking people down and using a different detective to interview each family member.
Many in this guy's church blame the police for making something where there is nothing.  Again, they go along with the black sheep interpretation of the eldest daughter.  So she, being unsaved, is not to be listened to.  She doesn't support the familyism.  She has not made the professions which they want.
I think in showing my skepticism I may have helped to pressure him to plead guilty.  This would probably mean a shorter sentence.  It would mean less money going to the high power sex offender defender.  I want the children to sue for all the money.  I don't know that they have even considered this as a possibility.
I also told him and the wife that any talk about "The Family" or "Family Values" is always at the expense of children.  It is children who pay the cost of this, children who are being used.  It amounts to sacrificing children on the altar of the Family System.  This probably is why the two of them have vanished, as they don't want to talk to me anymore.
I try not to be unfair in blaming the wife.  But truth is, I can't stand to be around her, I can't even look at her.  I find myself trying to pretend that she is not there.  She has not been charged.
We learn by doing, by engaging with situations and handling the conflict well.  We don't learn by confessing to a therapist or by letting a therapist instruct us.  We don't learn by histrionic venting either.
Anyway, I have crossed the line, in sending them an email stating my interest in this, trying to sound open minded, and asking if they would be "offended" if I attended some of the trial.  At least this way they won't be surprised.  They won't feel so much that I have stabbed them in the back.  I mean really, this guy has talked about writing a book about it.  He seems to have a martyr complex.  This message from me could also press him a little harder to plead guilty.  The sentence he gets, especially if he does not plead guilty, could be in effect a life sentence.
I am almost done composing a message to publicize the case to journalists and activists.   Of course I don't know how they will respond to it, but these are the same people I sat in the court room with during the ********* trial.  My message emphasizes the religious fundamentalist aspect of this, trying to show that this is almost built in to the "familyism" of their religion.  I talk about how most of the members have serious histories with alcohol and drugs, including this defendant.  I talk about how he freaked out when his daughter at 16 started using drugs and alcohol, and how this is also when she got out of the home and when the molestation stoped.  My message to these journalists is intended to make the hair on the backs of their necks stand up.  I try to make this guy sound like the wacko which he is.
I explain how in their church they talk about the Second Coming and how "there is still time for more people to Get Saved", and how they say that dinosaurs must be mentioned somewhere in the Bible.  The first time I ever met him, I felt that he was a wacko.  I even told other people this, and cited specifically absurd things he had said..  This was long before I knew anything of this ongoing criminal case.
He is sensitive and intelligent.  This is a reason this has been hard for me.  But he is blaming his daughter.   The lawyer wrote that she "hates her father", and this is supposed to make her a liar and the defendant innocent.  I believe that she doesn't think any better of her mother, but the mother is not this lawyer's client.  I have to stand with the child, and make this guy pay.
The oldest boy was diagnosed with a psychiatric condition, placed on medication, and also removed at the age of 16.  I also see this as a related type of abuse.  I want to make the parents pay for this too.
So I have already acted in announcing to him that I will attend the trial, and I am close to sending the message to journalists and activists.
Sometimes plea agreements are only reached on the morning of jury selection.  This is what could happen in this case.  At the right point I will be contacting the children, addressing my message to all of them.  I have already made investigations to figure out how best to contact them.  I will tell them that those who never act will forever be subjugated by the same sorts of abuse.  There are real people behind it.  The purpose of the abuse is to prevent you from being able to strike back.  If you decline to ever strike back, then the abusers win.  About the family what I always say is, "They break your wings so that you won't try to fly."
Attending the trial will deepen me in every possible way.  In moving from passivity to action, I am forced to look harder at my own experience.  I am already influencing this in some ways, in having stated my intent to attend to the defendant.
I want to be and need to be Man of Action.
Additional reflections on what it means to be unable to act. http://freedomtoexpress.freeforums.org/speaking-in-tongues-t124.htm...
What Louise Armstrong says is that the problem starts by turning it into personal pathology, an individual experience, and then following the therapeutic model.  She also points out how religion and psychotherapy used to be seen as enemies.  Now they have become one and the same, and that this is most alarming. http://www.amazon.com/Rocking-Cradle-Sexual-Politics-Happened/dp/B000H2NEAE/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1346374456&sr=8-2-fkmr0&keywords=louise+armstrong%2C+rocking+the+cradel
I also have to credit Deleuze and Guattari here.  Writing back in 1972, the sameness of religion and psychotherapy is one of their primary points.
Reading: Childism, confronting prejudice against children, Elisabeth Young-Bruehl
She also maintains: http://whosafraidofsocialdemocracy.com/
Young-Bruehl also emphasizes how the real problem is turning it into personal pathology.  Once one does this, then action is impossible.  Of course this has always been one of my primary objections to religion as well.
She writes about the large number of youth in detention.  I think about this.  I think about my own adolescence.  I can see now that if I had ended up in some sort of juvenile jail, my parents would have loved it.  They would not have admitted it.  On the surface they would have been outraged.  But they would be outraged at me, not standing with me.  They would come to love it because it would exonerate them.  They could say that I was defective and destined for such.  Its just like this guy, the son getting a psychiatric diagnosis and him and the wife lamenting in their writings that he must be removed from the home.  And then the daughter, supposedly "having a problem with sex, drugs, and alcohol", and then blaming her now for turning the two younger ones against them.  I must stand with the children.
Again, I think of my own adolescence.  There were troubles.  Well into my 20's and 30's I completely blamed myself for the grief of my parents.  Even now, I don't really understand what happened and why.  But I believe that all of it came down to the ways in which I was used.  They way I will come to understand more is by standing with children in exactly situations like this, I mean actually helping them get tangible redress.  So here in this case I need to tell these children that those who don't learn to fight back will spend their entire lives in avoidance venues, while the same dynamics play out over and over and over.

*********************************
John Brown http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4wCvPwigYw When he was being held in Virginia awaiting execution, he refused consolation from any of the Southern clergy because they believed in the religion of external conformity and support for the status quo.  Hence they supported slavery.  

BO   

Permalink Reply by Becoming Other on September 13, 2012 at 9:47pm

Further reflections and elaboration on this Religious Fundamentalist Molestation Case

I've been posting about this because I want to hear other opinions and discuss it from different angles.  All the more so, because I still had a great deal of ambivalence about how I would enter into this.  Some variables are still in play.  I knew for certain that I needed to be involved in this case, to back up the children as soon as it was dumped in my lap.  I decided right then that something which had not been my business, I was going to make my business.  Its not so much to protect the children from further harm from their parents.  No, its to stand with all those who feel animosity towards their parents so that a path towards justice, instead of submission, can eventually be established.  If those of us who feel the animosity don't stand together, who is going to stand with us?  We need to protect each other from people who think it not right to feel animosity towards one's parents and towards the Family System as a whole.  More often than not this means protecting ourselves from advocates of psychotherapy and religion.  But what it really seems to come down to is the Self-Reliance Ethic.  It is this ethic which exonerates parents and which parents are playing to.  Only by standing together is there a chance that justice can be obtained.  Also, if we want to be able to honest with ourselves and others, then we have to protect ourselves from harm which be directed at us from those who are threatened by what we say.  People are threatened because what we say defeats their own denial systems.  As such, reactions can be hostile and persecutory.

That a 50 year sentence was on the table has made this more challenging for me.  I feel that there is a very good chance that the jury will convict on all counts.  When the jurors deliberate they will not know the potential sentences.  Then after the verdict, its just whatever the judge wants to do with him.

I am the public advocate for another man who is serving a life plus sentence over a conflict with a girlfriend and her father.  No one died.  No one was permanently injured.  My friend probably did only the very minimum necessary to save his life.  He may be completely innocent.  But what he got was a life sentence, plus a whole bunch of years.  There were serious problems with the Judge and with his Defense Attorney.  Our system can be extremely unfair.

With this religious fundamentalist case, I feel that the more the defendant talks, the more he will incriminate himself because people will be offended by his logic.  The more his lawyer tries to advance allegations against the eldest daughter, the more the jury will be angered.  They will take it out on the defendant.  So conviction on all counts is a definite possibility.  Its all the more so now, as I have gotten involved and I am exerting influence.

Our DA's Office has learned that they do not need evidence to convict people.  They do it by the creation of a story, a psychotic narrative.  The Prosecution will present this, if necessary even trashing their own witnesses.  "Don't listen to the witnesses.  I have experience with these sorts of cases.  Listen to me."  They get away with it.

I am not a fan of our criminal justice system.  Our country locks up more people and for much longer times than the European countries do.  We lock up a higher percentage of our people than does any industrialized nation.  We try to use prisons to solve very complex social problems, and it does not work at all.  If anything, it makes for a harsher world and increases the crime rate.  We have a higher crime rate than do the nations which have less harsh criminal justice systems.

In entering into this, I have to consider that the 50 year sentence is like Russian Roulette.  The defendant could get it, or something close to it.  If I contribute to it, then I am also responsible for the outcome.  This type of responsibility is what comes when one abandons Live and Let Live, or 12-step powerlessness, and instead decides to take action.

In my wanting the defendant to be imprisoned, I am not primarily motivated by a concern that he could hurt more children.  First of all, I don't see him as someone who would prey on children outside of the family.  Even though the massages started when his eldest daughter was only 8yo, I am not seeing him as a pedophile.  He would not go after any other children, because he has no claim on them.  With his daughters he feels that he has an ownership right.  When he started to rebel against the lifestyle choices he had made, commonly known as a mid-life crisis, he expressed this by acting psychotic and getting put on medication.  He found that he no longer liked the wife, because of the dynamics of their enmeshed relationship and because all it amounted to was keeping up appearances.  Something like this probably applied to his career choices too.  But rather than admit this to himself, he accepted the logic of a psychiatric diagnosis.  He then made the eldest daughter into his petting partner, while pretending it was something else.  Then when she reaches the age of 16 and starts having sex with a boyfriend, he freaks out.  He loads the two of them into his car and drives them to the police station.  This daughter gets out of their home, but then he starts grabbing at the younger two and watching them dress and undress.  He is not a pedophile, his is a father.  This is most evident in the logic he is using to try and defend himself.  And this is all the more reason why he must be convicted.

As far as the defendant inflicting more emotional pain, I know he is going to do this, convicted or not.  He is still going to try and proclaim his innocence and try to fight this.  The high powered sex offender defender he has hired is advancing a reactionary political agenda.  So the defendant will continue to attack the credibility of the 3 girls, and the legitimacy of any and all such cases.

For me, where I would stand would have been easier to decide if the children had killed their father, even killed their mother too.

Paul Mones defends parricide cases.  We have around 300 per year in the US.  Defending them is not easy.

http://www.amazon.com/When-Child-Kills-Paul-Mones/dp/0671674218/ref...

Anyway, I've put it out there for everyone.  Based on how I have described it, do you think he should be imprisoned?  For how long?  Do you think the children should recover a financial settlement?  How much and how should it be divided?  I am not aware that any of them are thinking financial settlement at this time.

So why do I want him to be imprisoned if not to protect other children or to stop the infliction of more emotional pain?  Its to make an example of him in order to attack the authority and justification which the Family System invokes when using children for instrumental purposes.  The high powered sex offender defender advances the line that the eldest daughter hates her father, and that this is the reason for this entirely unfair prosecution.  In the face of such a claim, I have to stand with this eldest daughter, so that such an argument cannot be used, so that her animosity towards her parents can be vindicated.  Those of us who feel animosity towards our parents face hostility and denigration from every corner.  So then the only way to advance is to band together and start scoring some visible victories.

This case is a better place to take such a stand than many family molestation cases.  Our justice system strikes harder on poor people, hard living people, and people with criminal records.  Many molestations result in parental separation, or the molestation doesn't even begin until there is parental separation..  This case fits none of these parameters.  The parents are married, well-off, financially solvent, white collar, and have spotless records.  They are heavily involved in their fundamentalist church.  The man has written of his intent to someday become a minister.  The husband and wife are standing together.  I just found a social networking profile for the wife.  It is drenched with the same self serving pity and melodrama that the defendant puts out.  Their defense is entirely based on calling the three girls liars, and then faulting our criminal justice system for not seeing this.  They are not saying that the acts alleged never happened at all, they just dispute the interpretation.  So this is a perfect case to use for an example, and for me to be able to claim as a "scalp".  I have to stand with the daughters, with all of the children.  This is the only way forwards for those of us who reject the Self-Reliance / Parental Exoneration Ethic and instead demand redress.

I have heard all sorts of horror stories about foster care, foster families, step families, and adoptive families.  I believe everything I hear and I am very sorry that people have suffered such.  I am also pleased to say that in the US the high water mark in lawsuits is $30Meg, against a county Child Protective Services for sexual abuse in foster care.  That kind of a judgement does change things.

But what will really solve the problem is the outing of The Family, that is the biological well-off married parents and liberal pedagogy family, the Good Family.  These problems which occur in the other forms do so because people are blinded by the Good Family, and because people accept the Self-Reliance Ethic which underlies it.  They see these other forms as poor substitutes, ones where problems are to be tolerated.  Well, if people start to understand better how The Family works, and what kinds of safeguards are needed to protect children from being used, then the same issues with these other forms will also be addressed.

As far as the idea that the girls would get therapy with money from a financial settlement, I am opposed to therapy and to the entire therapeutic paradigm.  I would not recommend it to anyone.  When I write to all of the children I am going to elaborate on this and try to discourage them from having any contact with therapists.

I understand perfectly that no amount of money would undo what has happened.  Fact is, these girls are already to doing very well on their own.  They were not looking for redress from the legal system.  They did not intentionally start this case.  They did not "drop a dime" on their parents.  It started because the youngest one, in the eighth grade, was talking to a youth councilor.  They have not taken deliberate acts to keep it going.  It goes because the criminal justice system is how the State legitimates itself.

You know that once this case started the eldest daughter got the younger two removed from the home, and then got herself and her new husband appointed as their legal guardians.  No, I am not too worried about these girls.  They have demonstrated that they are quite able to act on their own behalf.  I am though worried about the boy who ended up taking a psychiatric diagnosis, was placed on medication, and was expelled from the home, for his own good.  Him I am very concerned about because he has not acted in his own interest, but rather accepts the logic applied to him.

To focus on this aspect I've been promoting the classic text on the issue:

http://www.amazon.com/Sanity-Madness-Family-Schizophrenics-Psycholo...

It shows how none of these so called conditions would exist outside of the context of the family.  It makes for fascinating reading and I strongly recommend it.  At this point it may even be available somewhere online.

I also note that in Anti-Oedipus Deleuze and Guattari do not pay direct homage to too many people.  They in fact seem to oppose Laing and his thesis.  But in fact, you could not understand what they are saying without first understanding Laing.  They are completely indebted to him, as is Foucault.

Overall what concerns do I have about these children long term?  Its the same as I would have with most people, that the Family System has been effective.  Its not dysfunctional at all, as they are very much like their parents.  They define themselves by Self-Reliance.  They may not be able to see how their parents' lives worked and they may end up repeating the pattern.  They may not be receptive when I try to encourage them to file a lawsuit.  This is their liability.  So what they need is deprogramming.  They need to be deprogrammed from the doctrine of the Good Family, from Born Again Christianity, and from Motivationalism ( from their father and from their church ).  I will explain this when I write to them, but unfortunately I have little to suggest to them.  Therapy is the last thing I would suggest, and I will explain this.  I will commend them for what they have already done and encourage them to stay in the fight.  If we want deprogramming, if we want different ways to live, if we want to stop the instrumentalization of children, then we have to make these things happen.  So activism on on behalf of ourselves and others in the same situations has to be the way.  I am already being challenged intensely just by having moved off the fence and making communications which influence this.

I would never try to determine such a specific amount which would compensate these children.  They children have been USED, sexual molestation is only one of the more extreme facets of this.  I want to establish the principle that if someone uses a child, then they must pay.  I want to clean these parents out, leave them with nothing.  Whatever they have, I want to make sure that the children get it.  The children should not have been removed from the home.  It should be theirs just as much as it was the parents'.  The perpetrators are the ones who should have been removed and that home and everything else should now belong to the children.  You might think of this as a variation on divorce and on the definition of Community Property.

Animosity and what it means and where one goes with it are at issue.  The Defense is trying to use a claim of animosity as the cornerstone of its case.  My first interest is in sinking this as a defense and turning it around.  Certainly their church would try to find other explanations for animosity.  This already seems to be in play.  My own argument about utilitarian purposes is moral not legal.  That is, it applies in all cases, not just this one.  So really all that is necessary is to claim animosity, not to prove it or legitimate it.  Again this could be seen as a variation on the divorce law and the concept of irreconcilability.

Long term I don't see civil suits as the remedy, too cumbersome.  Holding parents accountable and bringing the Family System into check will be best served by more streamlined processes than lawsuits, but we are not there yet.  One simple reform which I support would be to let the US follow Europe and prohibit disinheritance.  Later I would see something like the Family Court or the Probate Court as the remedy.  Simply go in and claim "irreconcilable differences" and proceed to a settlement.

Remember, I'm not advocating a penalty for sex or conception.  That is not the issue here.  Rather its for using a child.  I mean like how some people would obtain a puppy or a kitten, and then abandon it after the summer.  Or think of the way many men have used mistresses and then paid them hush money when they were done.

I want children to have social and financial rights and I want there to be institutions which safeguard these.  These are to be independent of the family,  Children should not be used by the family.  But neither should they be used by the State or our society in order to keep their parents in harness.  Children must be provided for, no matter what.  Leaving them to their parents alone is high risk.  They must have other adult connections, other places to go besides the familial domicile.  Otherwise we will always be picking up the pieces at the end.  So no, I'm not advocating a penalty for sex or conception or for trying to tell people not to have children.  I don't see that it can work that way.  My primary intent is to see to it that children are not seen as and used as house pets, and then told that they have zero redress.

As far as being able to strike back, I don't mean just as it pertains to this case.  I mean ever.  If I can never strike back what could that mean?  It must mean that I have been so shaped by the Family System, so influenced by its high level of functionality and effectiveness, that I am unable to act against it.  In that case it would have to mean that my abusers have won.  They have made me submit.

The Family System would then have been as effective on me as are the sharp stones and hot coals which primitive societies use for scarification and genital mutilation.  Never being able to strike back would mean that I accept this and I am incapable of opposing it, because I have been broken, because I accept its logic.

Since this is not what I want, I have to find places to act.  I am acting here, and I hope that by making a good showing here, I will be able to find more situations in which to act.  What I most hope for is to find comrades.  To a certain extent now I do have a high profile journalist in  my camp.  I am being straight about what I am doing and why.  The people who are doing unfair manipulations are the parents who use children plus doctrine from pedagogy manuals, psychotherapy, and religion to give themselves social identity.

Becoming Other

http://theexploitedunited.onlinewebshop.net/

31:45 - 35:40

http://youtu.be/FZYs8OGeCAA?t=31m45s

When Love Comes to Town

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2mIzIBoPtU

Permalink Reply by Becoming Other on November 1, 2012 at 8:58pm

Outrage!

The father expected the girls to submit to drug tests and home pregnancy tests.  The wife went along with this!

The second son is still loyal to the parents and talks about how the girls had had "trust invested in them", and how he "respects his parents".  He stands with the parents and is blaming the girls for being "rebellious".

Christian Fundamentalism is all over this case!

The father installed keystroke tracking software on the girls' computers and he had all their passwords.  He was always confiscating cell phones.

Now he doesn't seem to understand why he is on trial!