Child Abuse - An Indictment of Society

Discussion in 'Science & Society' started by Gustav, Nov 9, 2007.

  1. Gustav Banned Banned

    the topic : of utmost gravity
    the man : awe inspiring

    incest laws in america. a particular factoid caught my eye. a loophole. in ny. regarding incest laws. it as been repealed yet allegedly in effect in a bunch of other states. will factoid later. lemme reproduce...

    New York's law — much like that of most other states — allows the possibility of privileged treatment for a special class of offender: the perpetrator who is related to his prey. In other words, the penal code gives a discount to child rapists who grow their own victims.

    In New York, sex with a child under the age of 11 is a Class B felony, punishable by up to 25 years in prison. The law is indexed appropriately, in the chapter on sex offenses. If, however, the sexually abused child is closely related to the perpetrator, state law provides for radically more lenient treatment.

    In such cases, the prosecutor may choose to charge the same acts as incest. This is not listed as a sex offense, but instead as an "offense affecting the marital relationship," listed next to adultery in the law books. It is a Class E felony, for which even a convicted offender may be granted probation. (Andrew Vachss, Op-Ed, The New York Times, 20 November 2005)

    so ah. vachss! a man on a mission. intense!!
    here. a few snippets, link and a "thanks for your time"

    If you look at Burke closely, you'll see the prototypical abused child: hypervigilant, distrustful. He's so committed to his family of choice — not his DNA-biological family, which tortured him, or the state which raised him, but the family that he chose — that homicide is a natural consequence of injuring any of that family. He's not a hit man. But he shares the same religion I do, which is revenge." (Andrew Vachss," Horror Online, April 1999.)

    Vachss coined the phrase "Children of the Secret," which refers to abused children, of whatever age, who were victimized without ever experiencing justice, much less love and protection.[8] In the Burke novels, some of these Children of the Secret have banded together as adults into what Vachss calls a "family of choice." Their connection is not biological, and their bond goes well beyond mere loyalty. Most are career criminals; none allows the law to come before their duty to their family

    "There's a very specific formula for creating a monster," Vachss says. "It starts with chronic, unrelenting abuse. There's got to be societal notification and then passing on. The child eventually believes that what's being done is societally sanctioned. And after a while, empathy -- which we have to learn, we're not born with it -- cracks and dies. He feels only his own pain. There's your predatory sociopath."

    now, i have a background in clinical psychology and this shit is old hat. perhaps what catches the eye is his prose an the raw emotion that bleeds thru. alright. to the point already

    The difference between calling Destiny a "child prostitute" and a "prostituted child" is not purely semantic. It is more than the difference between a hard truth and a pernicious lie. It not only injures the victims; it actively gives aid and comfort to the enemy. By allowing the term "child prostitution" to gain a foothold in our language, we lose ground that can never be recovered. Look at the following examples:

    *A judge spares a predatory pedophile a long prison sentence on the grounds that "it takes two to tango." Another grants work-release to a sex offender, declaring that the 5-year-old victim was "unusually promiscuous."

    *A teacher is arrested for sexual intercourse with a minor student in her class. The newspapers describe the conduct as "a forbidden love affair."

    *A young actor, in an interview given before his drug-overdose death, describes how he "lost his virginity" when he was 3 or 4 years old.

    How have such grotesque distortions taken control of our language? To answer that question, we must first ask another: Who profits? Who benefits from pervasive cultural language that trivializes violence against children?
    (a god amongst men)

    next up
    some talmudic strictures roughly pertaining to the tp that will blow you away. i've been sitting on it for years, since only scenario was to utilize in trolling as an anti semite.
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2007
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. Orleander OH JOY!!!! Valued Senior Member

  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Gustav Banned Banned

    its been a long strange trip courtesy of some demented old coot but i shall attempt to salvage

    my objectives are to outline the sanctioning of child abuse thru the various institutions that exist within any given society. from the beginning of goddamn time to the present. no one will be spared. not even the daddy who got aroused when his preteen daughter squirmed on his lap

    failing that, i shall randomly throw mud hoping for a stick

    How have such grotesque distortions taken control of our language? To answer that question, we must first ask another: Who profits? Who benefits from pervasive cultural language that trivializes violence against children?
    (a god amongst men)

    the impetus for this particular aspect of my discourse. wachss has already established the insidious ways language can aid and abet in exploitation. how ever, asking who, assigning blame, is fraught with pitfalls and is a veritable minefield

    i shall troll with this....

    i am a denizen of cyberspace. a hardened warrior. i have seen it all. here, i have cried, been unable to watch, the little girl, bewildered, in pain, numb, blank eyed and drugged, being abused by monsters

    swayed? jump aboard and contribute. time to make a stand
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 9, 2007
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    I'm interested in the reasoning behind the leniency. What was it?
  8. Gustav Banned Banned


    off the top of my head, social services, by default, will do their best to keep a family intact

    what does the sharia say with regards to the tp, sam?
  9. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Social services define civil jurisprudence?

    Apparently the loophole was deliberately added in Illinois in 1981.

    Its interesting how much the thinking has changed.

    Apparently at the time it was enacted, parental child abuse was not even a matter under consideration
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2007
  10. Gustav Banned Banned

    alright, lets figure how laws are formulated and put into books. who are the players?

    as for the question, you seem surprised. tell me then, what is used to define civil jurisprudence? does the question even make sense? it is always safe to assume ignorance on my part

    make an effort please. a thread consisting of one line q&A posts suck
  11. Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    Mamby-pamby, doo-gooder, bleeding-heart liberals!

    Baron Max
  12. Gustav Banned Banned

    i shall pay particular attention to the vice ridden republican pigs
    yes siree

    The Ethical Divide - Red States vs Blue States (With a Special Emphasis on Texas)

    you are sooooo dogmeat

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    and a thesis...reps molest dems rescue

    nice work sam!

    justify the merge #3. does it look right, feel right? same goals/issues in both?
    show me how i erred.

    it is getting to be the case now that it would be more efficient to document entirety offline, then post
    it is amazing. this meddling. sci is nuts
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2007
  13. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Is that better? A visual divide?

    I'm writing a paper, try not to be a pest, darlin'
  14. greenberg until the end of the world Registered Senior Member

    Two things:

    One, people are often cruel, and this shows in all areas of life. Behavior toward children is just one aspect of this cruelty.

    Two, it's not only about verbal language, but also about non-verbal language. Gestures, mimics. Clothes, make-up. Colors. Accessoires.
    All these things are assigned particular meanings in a society - meanings that might be uncomfortable to express in words, but are deemed ok to express non-verbally. There is a lot more going on than is put into words, but it still contributes to how we view things.
  15. Gustav Banned Banned

    she loves me she loves me not she loves me she loves me not she loves me she loves me not she loves me she loves me not she loves me she loves me not......

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ..she loves me she loves me not she loves me she loves me not she loves me she loves me not she loves me she loves me not she loves me she loves me not

    SAM! The Best Mod In The Whole Wide World!
  16. Gustav Banned Banned

    let me see if i can do a quick documentation on that. it was an issue, a big stink actually. allow me to first bore with a personal anecdote. tho not an exact fit, it is close enough

    back in the day, living out in placerita canyon, one could find me peddling my wares at saugus speedway which was turned into a swapmeet on weekends. a little girl walked by and i got a glimpse of her tshirt. scrawled on it was (ahh, i fucking speak louder......)

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    top row, left and center

    i was struck dumb. what are the conceptual underpinnings required to print a tshirt like that? here a pedo, there a pedo, everywhere a pedo pedo?


    no seriously. there seem to be an implicit assumption, an acknowledgment of sorts. what about the parents? what does this say about them?

    ok ok
    i am really a redneck
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2007
  17. greenberg until the end of the world Registered Senior Member

    Moreover, what are the conceptual underpinnings for mothers to doll up their 5-year old daughters like Barbie dolls and take them to beauty contests?!

    A personal account - Just yesterday, I met my elementary school math teacher. I was reminded of several incidents at school and on excursions. We were 7th and 8th grade, he was about ten years older than we. Rather shy, timid, seemed very gentle, but tall. This teacher - well, he really behaved like a shy teenage boy. If the boys in the class would go after girls, he watched with interest. On an excursion, the whole class slept over at an inn; there was a bit of a party, a lively evening - and he, as if he really wanted to be part of it, as if he too were 14 years old. It was really odd.

    My point is that many adults are actually like that, they just hide it more or less succesfully.
    They have the rights and responsibility of adults, but the values and interests of teenagers.
  18. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Yes. He originally posted it in Linguistics and I moved it to EM&J when it became clear that putting the word "Language" in the title was only a ploy to have it accepted on the Linguistics board.

    The Moderator of this board should investigate this. Obviously Gus has a personal issue he is trying to work out, but starting the same discussion in multiple places is not the way to do it.
    You must be joking. The major hotbed of incest in the USA is the Old South.

    The reason that laws against child abuse (of any type, not just sexual) are not stronger is that in probably 95% of the serious cases the perpetrators are men. What a coincidence that up until very recently, 95% of the lawmakers in this country were also men. Men stick together. Even to the point of protecting the assholes among us. Each one of us knows that he has been an asshole many times in his life and so he doesn't feel that he can start punishing some other man for being an asshole, even a colossally big asshole like a child abuser. It really is true that imprisoning a man for child abuse reduces the community's GDP, even if it would be a relief for the small number of people in his immediate family. It's a primitive application of situational ethics. Don't misunderstand, I'm not saying that any halfway decent man likes a child abuser, but he weighs his contribution to the community as a whole against the cost to his family.

    Since the advent of birth control and abortion and the rise of less physically demanding work freed women from Kinder, Kirche und Kuche, I believe this is the major reason we are still in charge. Women (at least in America) may cooperate in the daily business of life--keeping children out of the street etc.--but in my observation (and that of my wife who is a woman), women don't really support each other in larger arenas and therefore don't constitute an effective power group. Men back each other up with the idea that it's for the greater good.

    Please understand that this is presented as your elder's observation of the situation, not as an endorsement of the practice. I agree that as a society we can and should do better. There's still enough of a "bleeding heart liberal" left in this libertarian to understand that child abuse affects more than the victim and the perpetrator, more than the immediate family. We all suffer from it and it becomes part of the Shadow of each one of us, festering and making us ashamed of ourselves. It becomes part of our collective unconscious, part of the Shadow of our nation, part of the festering guilt that makes us do stupid things to other countries in the name of freedom, security and democracy. I'm a great believer in situational ethics but it has to be done wisely, taking all of the variables into account and not just the obvious ones.
  19. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Take personal complaints to PM or site feedback, lets just discuss the topic here.
  20. Gustav Banned Banned

    you could'nt even set the guy straight eh?
  21. greenberg until the end of the world Registered Senior Member

    I think there's more than that to it.

    Abuse tends to "run in the family", abusers have often been abused themselves when they were children.

    Considering this, to expose an abuser could mean also exposing his childhood and the rest of the family. This would be a scandal for the whole family, stigmatizing all.

    Also, the abuser's abuser might not be alive anymore. In that case, the whole blame and punishment would ba laid on the current abuser (and his living family), while his abuser got away with it. It would be unfair.

    Not to forget that if the father was the sole breadwinner, a charge of paedophilia and possibly prison sentence would seriously endanger the wellbeing of the family. He'd probably lose his job and would have difficulty finding a new one.

    The legal leniency is understandable - the law had to make a choice between what it perceived a greater and a lesser evil.
  22. Grantywanty Registered Senior Member

    But Greenberg,
    Shouldn't that be an on the table, democratically arrived at prioritization?
    Also in WW2 with men off to war women slid rather well even into physical labor positions. With this historical knowledge we know that women could hop out again in a time of national crisis.
  23. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    In the USA, the percentage of the female population in the workforce has already regained its WWII level and is approaching 60%. In addition to the mothers who are already working, take into account the mothers with no marketable job skills, the mothers with no access to affordable child care, the mothers who are dead or otherwise absent, etc. It's likely that in a huge majority of cases, putting a father in prison and reducing his opportunity for employment after being released as an ex-felon would indeed destroy the family economically.

    Once again, note that I am only pointing out this fact for the sake of clarity of discussion, not judging whether abuse is preferable to poverty.

Share This Page