Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 28, 2014 23:52:14 GMT -5
If the matter made it as far as a courtroom, although I'm sure the daughter's testimony would be very compelling, it simply isn't enough to convict a man. A conviction would require some kind of a history, or other witnesses to speak out against the molester, or physical evidence against him. But this doesn't mean that nobody believes the girl, or that they're "blowing off" her accusations. Requiring a history, other witnesses and/or physical evidence is equivalent to not believing the girl. If you believe the girl, those things would not be needed.
Requiring something other than the girl's testimony is a way to nicely, but effectively, state that the word of the girl (accuser) is less valid than the word of the molester. It is also reminiscent of Sharia law under which the testimony of a woman is not sufficient; for a rape conviction, there must be the eyewitness testimony of at least 4 devout Muslim men.
How often are you going to have a history, witness or physical evidence in a child molestation case? About as often as you're going to have 4 devout Muslim men witness a rape and be willing to testify. In other words, not very often.
There is no felony anywhere in the western world where a victim's uncorroborated testimony is sufficient to convict a man. That is the standard of proof of our justice system. "Beyond a reasonable doubt." If you find that standard unfair, by all means make your case for an alternative. I do thank you for the article. I was dismayed to find that 2/3 of its reference section is missing. And the article is older than I am.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 28, 2014 23:58:08 GMT -5
I comprehend them just fine. You and others have taken the discussion out of the arc of my Reply #25. None of my questions pertain to the groups mentioned in your excerpt. See Reply #55 for clarification. Your Reply #57 is far more to the point (although I'm sure more than a few clinicians would contest its conclusions). Thank you for providing an answer to my specific question. I didn't take anything out of your "arc." I'm responding to what you posted in #45.
Here's what you posted and what I (very much in context) responded to:
"When I asked her about it, you replied "And it's not the cops that don't believe the kids, it's the patents, the family, the neighbors, the juries."
As in: nobody believes the kid.
Virgil, given this comment and some of your other prior comments about spousal abuse, it appears that you live a very, very sheltered life. I'm happy for you that none of these situations have impacted you personally. I'm happy they haven't impacted me either.
And the reason I'm in this thread is trying to figure out why and under what circumstances people tend to side with a molester."
Those statements were in the context of Replies #25 and #28. As I said, I should have made that clearer. To restate here: yes, I could at least figure out why somebody with a strong personal respect for (or connection to) an accused molester would have faith in his/her innocence. Law enforcement, juries, the public at large, not so much.
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Mar 29, 2014 4:57:12 GMT -5
There is no felony anywhere in the western world where a victim's uncorroborated testimony is sufficient to convict a man. That is the standard of proof of our justice system. "Beyond a reasonable doubt." Interesting choice of words there.
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Mar 29, 2014 4:59:31 GMT -5
I do thank you for the article. I was dismayed to find that 2/3 of its reference section is missing. And the article is older than I am. Well if you feel that the social dynamics of child molestation have substantially changed in the past couple of decades, please feel free to present your case here.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,345
|
Post by swamp on Mar 29, 2014 6:38:06 GMT -5
Requiring a history, other witnesses and/or physical evidence is equivalent to not believing the girl. If you believe the girl, those things would not be needed.
Requiring something other than the girl's testimony is a way to nicely, but effectively, state that the word of the girl (accuser) is less valid than the word of the molester. It is also reminiscent of Sharia law under which the testimony of a woman is not sufficient; for a rape conviction, there must be the eyewitness testimony of at least 4 devout Muslim men.
How often are you going to have a history, witness or physical evidence in a child molestation case? About as often as you're going to have 4 devout Muslim men witness a rape and be willing to testify. In other words, not very often.
There is no felony anywhere in the western world where a victim's uncorroborated testimony is sufficient to convict a man. That is the standard of proof of our justice system. "Beyond a reasonable doubt." If you find that standard unfair, by all means make your case for an alternative. You are wrong. You need to stop giving legal,advice.
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Mar 29, 2014 8:25:47 GMT -5
Virgil, what exactly are you looking for here? You won't take Swamp's word for it (despite her years of experience as a prosecutor and defense attorney)...I believe genericname works for the police or prosecutor...Gira posted her own experience with an abusive parent and why a family friend would not have believed her...Drama posted a recent example from her community… and Milee posted an actual study on the dynamics of child abuse.
If you're looking for a scientific study that says "Police and the public do not believe abused children in X number of cases because…" I don't think such a thing exists. But I also think the fact that you have disputed everything that has been posted in this thread so far indicates there is not much that will convince you.
By you own admission, you have very little experience with the criminal justice system or the dynamics of child abuse, so I'm not sure why you are so quick to discount the statements of those who do.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 17:05:05 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2014 8:53:40 GMT -5
Because people do not want to believe such evil exists. Because people do not want to look at their neighbors and wonder. They don't want to at their families and wonder. They don't want to look at themselves and wonder.
DENIAL. it's in the title...
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 29, 2014 10:38:54 GMT -5
There is no felony anywhere in the western world where a victim's uncorroborated testimony is sufficient to convict a man. That is the standard of proof of our justice system. "Beyond a reasonable doubt." If you find that standard unfair, by all means make your case for an alternative. You are wrong. You need to stop giving legal,advice. Give me example of a felony a prosecutor would take to trial with absolutely no evidence besides the testimony of a victim. No physical evidence. No witnesses. No prior bad acts by the defendant. Nothing except a victim's uncorroborated testimony. Swamp stated that the police typically do believe the accusations, but that juries don't. As for my being obtuse: I didn't dispute the study that milee put up. I thanked her for it. It's the only reply that has thus far even remotely addressed the specific question I asked. And as a matter of fact, a study on either how likely police are to believe a molestation claim, or a study on how likely jurors are to believe one, or a study on how likely strangers are to believe one would very much be of interest to me. As milee's own study states, the less training clinicians had, the more likely they were to believe a molestation claim. Would this not also apply to the public at large? I'm not interested in the opinions of people who know and respect the alleged molester. We've established 8 ways to Sunday that friends, family, and colleagues of the molester believe strongly in his (or her, for milee's edification) innocence.
|
|
raeoflyte
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 3, 2011 15:43:53 GMT -5
Posts: 14,759
|
Post by raeoflyte on Mar 29, 2014 11:37:33 GMT -5
So how are little kids supposed to get in front of police and juries when the adults around them don't believe them and make them think it was their fault or they made it up? The kid has to go home with mom even if stepdad is put in jail.
Sent from my ADR6410LVW using proboards
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Mar 29, 2014 13:36:06 GMT -5
Which question? First you asked why wouldn't police believe the victim. Then you asked about the public/juries. Then you asked about felonies that can be taken to trial with the victim's uncorroborated testimony (and told both lawyers who responded that we were wrong).
W/r to "why wouldn't a jury believe the victim?" I believe Swamp, Milee, and Oped answered your question in replies #36, #37, and #67.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Mar 29, 2014 13:47:49 GMT -5
I will admit that I would have a very hard time believing that the man I married and chose to have children with was molesting boys. It goes against everything I know about my husbands character. I don't know what it would take for me to believe that my husband was actually guilty
|
|
steff
Senior Associate
I'll sleep when I'm dead
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 17:34:24 GMT -5
Posts: 10,772
|
Post by steff on Mar 29, 2014 13:57:17 GMT -5
this entire topic makes my skin crawl, but I do have experience in this area.
so Virgil, because I was the only victim (that we knew of at the time) of my abuser, I shouldn't have been believed? The ONLY reason my abuse finally came to light was because it escalated to rape. Why did I not tell anyone thru the years of my abuse? Because I was told repeatedly (as in every instance of abuse) that NO ONE would believe me & that *I* would be sent away from my family forever. When you are told that repeatedly for years, you believe it. When the conditioning starts as a child and your abuser is a family member that you are taught to obey, you don't rock the boat. when your home is already a violent battle ground with alcohol, physical, mental, emotional AND sexual abuse, you do everything you can in your power to become invisible. I was in my 20's before I stopped doing everything I could to be invisible to people. I took it as far as there isn't a single picture of me in any school yearbook. I wanted to vanish & not be seen by anyone, even tho no one knew what I was going thru.
My abuse all came to a head in the mid 80's. At that time, the police didn't even arrest my step dad for beating the crap outta my mom on a regular basis. when called, they would show up long enough for my mom to leave, but often would NOT allow her to take her children with her. Thankfully, THAT has at least changed now. But it's also a reason why there came a point when we didn't bother to call the police. When my abuse came to light, the police told my mom to NOT drag it thru the courts because no one would believe a 14 year old. Thankfully my mom DID believe me! the advice she was given was to put me into therapy & don't tell anyone about it. I did do therapy & as far as not telling anyone, well, we didn't follow that advice. While my abuser was not prosecuted, he didn't fight for custody of my brothers in the divorce.
I remember one brutal fight night. It was very near the end of our nightmare. My abuse wasn't known yet. My step dad was threatening to kill himself. The police had already come & gone. I had called an adult friend of my step dad's that lived up the street for help. His wife wouldn't allow him to come help & he didn't. My step dad had locked a hall door between himself & my mom while making his threats to kill himself. I laid in bed, wide awake & prayed that he would just do it already. My mom is screaming for me to unlock the door, but I wouldn't. I just wanted him to kill himself. I was so numb & so tired of it all that I didn't even really care if he killed all of us....at least it would have been over. When he didn't do it & unlocked the door & the fight continued, I climbed outside my window & just sat behind the bushes, in the middle of the night, scared of everything. It was also the night that I decided I couldn't go on like this anymore. thankfully, as horrible as it was to go thru, shortly afterwards, everything came to a head, the truth came out & we left.
virgil, you simply do NOT understand what it's like to live thru such a nightmare & the threats that go along with it. You don't understand that lying becomes second nature when you live under constant abuse & threats. You don't understand the beat down nature of a person who has been under constant abuse. You don't understand that until recently, abuse was something to be ashamed of & to be hidden even if you were the victim. Until recently, the police were NOT there to help abuse victims.
and at the risk of being banned, the fact that you believe a single child shouldn't be believed over an adult makes me want to kick you in the nuts repeatedly.
|
|
raeoflyte
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 3, 2011 15:43:53 GMT -5
Posts: 14,759
|
Post by raeoflyte on Mar 29, 2014 14:55:29 GMT -5
Steff- I am so sorry you had to go through that but relieved that your mother believed you and took steps to protect you.
|
|
goldensam
Established Member
Joined: Jul 6, 2012 11:40:27 GMT -5
Posts: 295
|
Post by goldensam on Mar 29, 2014 15:08:30 GMT -5
steff -hug-I'm so sorry. I, too, am a victim of verbal, physical, and sexual abuse from a young age. My mom's second husband adopted me at 2 and began sexually abusing me around 5 or 6. I finally reported it at 7 when we had a special session given by our counselor at school to talk about good touch/bad touch. I remember going to the counselor afterward to tell her to I had been "bad touched". That was followed by hours of telling my story to the counselor, the police, my mom, and hospital staff, then later to lawyers, my court appointed advocate, and finally, on the witness stand at his trial. All of this while in the second grade. I believe the trial may have gone into third grade, but that's not important. I am thankful that the important people in my life believed me and did everything they could to protect me, but I am disgusted to know that there were many people who did not believe me because I was his only (known) victim at the time, I may have acted out because of emotions and thoughts that I can't begin to explain, or that I may have told conflicting stories. It it helps my case in the court of Virgil , he went on to sexually assault more children after pleading down to probation in my case, was convicted, and is now serving a life sentence.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,345
|
Post by swamp on Mar 29, 2014 15:10:57 GMT -5
Give me example of a felony a prosecutor would take to trial with absolutely no evidence besides the testimony of a victim. No physical evidence. No witnesses. No prior bad acts by the defendant. Nothing except a victim's uncorroborated testimony. I'm not going to give you case names. And the testimony of a victim is evidence. It may not be the strongest case, but he said/she said is not an usual prosecution scenario. Prior bad acts of the defendant are generally not admissible anyways.
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Mar 29, 2014 22:02:48 GMT -5
We've established 8 ways to Sunday that friends, family, and colleagues of the molester believe strongly in his (or her, for milee's edification) innocence. Why would you need to educate me on the fact that females can be molesters as well? I've been a Court Appointed Special Advocate for foster children and spent years learning about abuse and volunteering in the foster care system, so am unfortunately quite familiar with the many and varied forms abuse can take.
It's unbecoming of you to take a cheap shot at me with the condescending comment about you needing to provide information for my edification. You're attempting to divert attention from the fact that you are ignorant in this area by brushing off the input of people with experience and the studies provided and by using the "that's not what I meant so I will gloss over the fact that you've discredited my assertion" approach.
If you're not interested in understanding this subject in which you are so clearly ignorant, why not either move on to a topic for which you are actually interested in learning or have some experience/knowledge to contribute or be mature enough to admit it's something about which you know nothing and then actually seek to understand? But to demonstrate complete ignorance and then argue and nitpick just for the sake of argument is beneath you. And frankly, it's tasteless behavior especially considering this subject matter. We're not discussing a political point or financial technique, we're discussing something that's intensely personal to people.
If you want to understand, then be open to understanding and stop the petulant behavior.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 17:05:05 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2014 22:10:53 GMT -5
Steff and goldensam and anyone else with a story like theirs...
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Mar 29, 2014 22:12:13 GMT -5
Interesting. I just logged off here and went to read the news and the first story that came up may be (reading between the lines of what wasn't said) one of those cases where there would be no physical evidence, no prior history, no other eyewitnesses, just her word against his yet still resulted in the trial and conviction of this molester... news.msn.com/crime-justice/off-duty-pilot-convicted-of-groping-girl-on-flight?g1=51501
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 29, 2014 22:38:11 GMT -5
W/r to "why wouldn't a jury believe the victim?" I believe Swamp, Milee, and Oped answered your question in replies #36, #37, and #67. Hence my statement in Reply #31 is accurate. In this thread we have a 100% consensus that molestation is real, that people are capable of it, and that such claims are rarely false. But "out there" in the world, where everyone's opinion is the polar opposite of the consensus in this thread, juries and whole communities at large live in a completely irrational state of denial. This thread and this online community is a black swan. A perfect statistical anomaly. That's one theory. Let me ask you this: If you were sitting on a jury, and a girl of age 14 testified that her male teacher molested her, and no evidence of any kind except the girl's heartfelt testimony was presented in support of the allegations, would you vote to convict the teacher? Suppose for sake of argument that the teacher is considered by his community to be a "great guy" and that no other complaints (as far as what can be brought forward at trial) have ever been filed against him. and at the risk of being banned, the fact that you believe a single child shouldn't be believed over an adult makes me want to kick you in the nuts repeatedly. You never read anything I write. You never address comments I actually make. I've said none of the things you claim I "believe". Have at your straw man. Give me example of a felony a prosecutor would take to trial with absolutely no evidence besides the testimony of a victim. No physical evidence. No witnesses. No prior bad acts by the defendant. Nothing except a victim's uncorroborated testimony. I'm not going to give you case names. And the testimony of a victim is evidence. It may not be the strongest case, but he said/she said is not an usual prosecution scenario. Prior bad acts of the defendant are generally not admissible anyways. Hence you're saying I could walk into a police station tomorrow afternoon, claim that my employer repeatedly molested me, and without so much as a shred of evidence besides my testimony, my employer would find himself being prosecuted for sexual crimes by a prosecutor with a reasonable hope of getting a conviction? My employer has no recourse whatsoever in the event that I'm a sociopath and a liar? Could you give me a case name? So the jury basically flips a coin? Or the most charismatic party wins? That's our justice system? To hell with "beyond a reasonable doubt"? You're in the thick of it. I'll believe you. I obviously read too much legal fiction. My apologies for the bad legal "advice" earlier.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 29, 2014 22:40:45 GMT -5
Interesting. I just logged off here and went to read the news and the first story that came up may be (reading between the lines of what wasn't said) one of those cases where there would be no physical evidence, no prior history, no other eyewitnesses, just her word against his yet still resulted in the trial and conviction of this molester... news.msn.com/crime-justice/off-duty-pilot-convicted-of-groping-girl-on-flight?g1=51501He apparently admitted to touching her, but claimed it was "inadvertent". That's his own testimony as evidence against him--as damning as evidence as you could get.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 29, 2014 23:15:15 GMT -5
We've established 8 ways to Sunday that friends, family, and colleagues of the molester believe strongly in his (or her, for milee's edification) innocence. It's unbecoming of you to take a cheap shot at me with the condescending comment about you needing to provide information for my edification. You misunderstand. Reply #63: "Interesting choice of words there." with "man" highlighted in bold. What am I supposed to take from that? What I did take from it is "There are male and female molesters. You are ignorant not to acknowledge this." Now forget the fact that your own article uses male pronouns to avoid having to plug up the text with hundreds of unnecessary he/she's, his/hers, him/hers, man/womans, etc.--which is precisely why I chose "man" in this context--could you not simply have made a clear objective statement? Instead of "interesting choice of words there", perhaps "It's important to note that molesters can be female too."? Or since gender has absolutely nothing to do with the argument, how about not saying anything at all about it? I added in the female pronoun for your edification. In other words, it's completely unnecessary, and I put it in solely because you insinuated that I'd be ignorant not to. ETA: I honestly don't want to fight with everyone in here, and it seems like that's what this has degenerated into. I have no experience whatsoever with molestation. I have no frame of reference. I have no ability to empathize, and my interest is purely academic. This obviously isn't the forum for academic discussion, and while I do thank you for your SECASA article, I think it best that I leave while there are at least two or three people left who don't want to throw me into a jet engine. It was an enlightening, if frustrating, discussion.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,195
|
Post by tallguy on Mar 30, 2014 0:02:15 GMT -5
While I agree with you that using the male pronoun rather than the clumsier him/her type is generally accepted and should be understood to stand for both, I would also have objected to what you wrote. Not for that, certainly, but for the use of the word "edification." Perhaps my understanding of its meaning is more strict than some, but I generally believe that term to be properly used in the "building up" (from the Latin) of someone, especially in the moral or religious sense or their strength of character. None of those seemed relevant here, and I can certainly see reason for offense. I don't believe it was in any way your intent to offend but I really don't see "edification" as the correct word choice. Sorry.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 30, 2014 0:32:09 GMT -5
It's sometimes used in the context of "edifying the ego", as in a guess fawning over beautiful gardens to the edification of his host. But I admit it's been a while since I've seen it used in that capacity.
I meant it in the sense "I'm putting this in for no reason other than to appease you."
As for the original grievance, if you want to gum up your posts with dozens of awkward split pronouns for no good reason, be my guest. Just like the SECASA article, I'll limit their use to situations where they're relevant to the topic being discussed. And for the record, male-perpetrated sexual abuses outnumber female-perpetrated abuses 20:1 according to the Wiki citation.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,195
|
Post by tallguy on Mar 30, 2014 0:43:17 GMT -5
I very rarely (or possibly never) gum up my posts with dozens of awkward split pronouns for no good reason, hence why I said I agreed with you on that. Try to keep up.
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Mar 30, 2014 4:49:37 GMT -5
It's unbecoming of you to take a cheap shot at me with the condescending comment about you needing to provide information for my edification. You misunderstand. Reply #63: "Interesting choice of words there." with "man" highlighted in bold. What am I supposed to take from that? What I did take from it is "There are male and female molesters. You are ignorant not to acknowledge this." Now forget the fact that your own article uses male pronouns to avoid having to plug up the text with hundreds of unnecessary he/she's, his/hers, him/hers, man/womans, etc.--which is precisely why I chose "man" in this context--could you not simply have made a clear objective statement? Instead of "interesting choice of words there", perhaps "It's important to note that molesters can be female too."? Or since gender has absolutely nothing to do with the argument, how about not saying anything at all about it? I added in the female pronoun for your edification. In other words, it's completely unnecessary, and I put it in solely because you insinuated that I'd be ignorant not to. No, you misunderstand. My reply in #63 highlighting "a man" had nothing to do with the fact that there are female molesters as well. It was a comment on how gender biased both the justice system and your posts are. Your choice of wording was very telling in that it would have been just as easy and much more clear to use the all encompassing word "person" or "citizen" than to pick out either gender. There would have been no need for you to plug up your text with hundreds of unnecessary he/she's. Instead, you chose to use a word that was not only revealing about you but entirely accurate in regards to our justice system; men and women receive different treatment and credibility whether they are a defendant or a witness.
In addition to your misunderstanding of my post, you apparently misunderstand the meaning of the word "edification." Edification implies that you are instructing or teaching me something for my own good. Even if your interpretation of my earlier post was correct and the issue was one of me implying you were ignorant not to know there were female molesters, again, I'm the one who has background in this subject, not the one in need of instruction, education or improvement.
|
|
Jaguar
Administrator
Fear does not stop death. It stops life.
Joined: Dec 20, 2011 6:07:45 GMT -5
Posts: 50,108
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"https://cdn.nickpic.host/images/IZlZ65.jpg","color":""}
Mini-Profile Text Color: 290066
|
Post by Jaguar on Mar 30, 2014 5:03:06 GMT -5
<<HUGS>> to all those that suffered from child abuse.
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Mar 30, 2014 5:12:42 GMT -5
ETA: I honestly don't want to fight with everyone in here, and it seems like that's what this has degenerated into. I have no experience whatsoever with molestation. I have no frame of reference. I have no ability to empathize, and my interest is purely academic. This obviously isn't the forum for academic discussion, and while I do thank you for your SECASA article, I think it best that I leave while there are at least two or three people left who don't want to throw me into a jet engine. It was an enlightening, if frustrating, discussion. Instead of simply acknowledging your lack of understanding, your series of misstatements and the fact that you have been shown to be completely ignorant in these matters, you are choosing to leave by dropping by to take a cheap shot first, then implying that you're not in any way responsible by using the most passive language possible to describe what happened instead of recognizing that you were the agent of any degeneration and frustration. Classy.
Your words demonstrate that any "interest" you have is not in understanding more or gaining enlightenment for yourself.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 30, 2014 10:42:54 GMT -5
You misunderstand. Reply #63: "Interesting choice of words there." with "man" highlighted in bold. What am I supposed to take from that? What I did take from it is "There are male and female molesters. You are ignorant not to acknowledge this." Now forget the fact that your own article uses male pronouns to avoid having to plug up the text with hundreds of unnecessary he/she's, his/hers, him/hers, man/womans, etc.--which is precisely why I chose "man" in this context--could you not simply have made a clear objective statement? Instead of "interesting choice of words there", perhaps "It's important to note that molesters can be female too."? Or since gender has absolutely nothing to do with the argument, how about not saying anything at all about it? I added in the female pronoun for your edification. In other words, it's completely unnecessary, and I put it in solely because you insinuated that I'd be ignorant not to. No, you misunderstand. My reply in #63 highlighting "a man" had nothing to do with the fact that there are female molesters as well. It was a comment on how gender biased both the justice system and your posts are. Your choice of wording was very telling in that it would have been just as easy and much more clear to use the all encompassing word "person" or "citizen" than to pick out either gender. There would have been no need for you to plug up your text with hundreds of unnecessary he/she's. Instead, you chose to use a word that was not only revealing about you but entirely accurate in regards to our justice system; men and women receive different treatment and credibility whether they are a defendant or a witness. Beam me up, Scotty. Thank you for the SECASA article. Goodbye.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 17:05:05 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2014 11:20:57 GMT -5
Virgil, posts like this from you ( because they happen quite a bit) being that are a moderator are what makes me back away from this board again and again. I come back because I miss many people on here and then you post on something like this and it reminds me why I left.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Mar 30, 2014 11:25:32 GMT -5
Virgil, posts like this from you ( because they happen quite a bit) being that are a moderator are what makes me back away from this board again and again. I come back because I miss many people on here and then you post on something like this and it reminds me why I left. Virgil isn't posting as a moderator, gin. He's just posting his opinions as "one of the gang". While we might not agree with his opinions he shouldn't have to "shaddap and siddown" just because he's a moderator/administrator. I wear a very different hat when I moderate than the one I wear when posting. Virgil does the same thing. If his posts (or, anyone's posts) really bother you, you can block them through your profile page (edit profile/Privacy (at the bottom of the list).
|
|