Ever see chickens running free range when one of them is showing a wound?
It does not have to be a real wound, just something that looks like a wound to the other chickens.
:)
I've seen lotsa chickens .. but I'm not sure what happens when one appears wounded. Do the other chickens pick on them I guess? Or do they all run away in fear of a predator?
At what point (if ever) a woman (let's say Corps or staff) decided it was OK or even cool to have sex with twi leaders seems a big issue here, even to some Corps men (that weren't having sex at all maybe :blink: ) It seems very pertinent to the cult aspect of twi. My view is that many that came into the corps/staff fairly pure in the Word, left rather jaundiced and maybe involved in the adultry games. For some maybe that was their choice ... but the "offensive" part to me is that "It Is Written" seemed to be replaced with ... Party On ... and non partiers were labelled party poopers ... and not given choice assignments maybe (were the partiers sent to the big cities to party together?)
To say that happened as a matter of choice is partly true maybe for some ... but people that were looking for a place to party didn't go in the corps. Certainly everyone is responsible for their own actions, but basically we were sold a bill of goods that was almost the opposite of what was advertised. Perhaps we didn't get any written guarentees, but then again GSC is not a court of law.
I guess the stones were thrown at Freud and sogwap? ... certainly a level headed discussion is best. Still, it seems the point sogwap raised about ... here... I'll quote because this seems central to the whole issue ...
I'm not at all saying what he did was right. But I also don't put the blame on the sex totally with him. I believe there were willing partners as I was. The people that call rape are mad because of how it turned out....scorned women. Thought they would get more or the husband found out, whatever.
I slept with Craig for 4 years. He even came to my house the day after I was married on his motorcycle. I sent him away. BUT for the 4 years I slept with him, I always thought "I was the only one". Then found out there were others. BUT....I slept with him because I thought I was important, special.
Point is, you do what you do because you want to...and you usually think it advances you or makes you special in a "God" atmosphere. Until some are scorned and show their tallens.
I feel sorry for Craig....
the bold emphasis is mine. When she spoke for those women that say they were raped and said they were "mad because of how it turned out" ... I think some stone throwing should be expected. I stayed at sogwap's house at roa a few years with her hubby and nanci, and I liked the sogwap I remember, so have no animosity ... I would doubt she really meant that quite that way .. but to me that gets to the heart of the whole twi / cult / adultry/rape issue.
I guess that also led to the "get over it" thing. We are ultimately responsible, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't label those that deceived / defrauded / maybe raped in any higher regard. When such things go to court the "victims" get over it partly by putting the offender in jail. Unfortunately the victim mentality sometimes protects the offender, making abused women that protect their abuser perhaps the saddest cases.
I saw sogwap was back in chat, so hope she hangs around. Since I'm not one of the "partiers" nor one of the sex victims (nor a predator) and would tend to be on sogwap's side ... I thought I'd throw in my perspective. A courtroom is a tougher standard than GSC opinion standard, and lcm was guilty there, right? I certainly don't feel sorry for craig.
I guess I am confused by some of this. I think I finally figured out who the two posters are that Paw was referring to and I have to say I agree with him 100% with respect to what happened and I am disappointed to learn they may never post here again.
However, with regard to some other examples from this thread -
It seems to me that it is a "no brainer" that when you go to a forum that is by and large made up of people who feel they were hurt by their experience with TWI, VPW, or LCM and you post in defense of them that you are going to get some angry responses.
Likewise when you post on a topic where sexual abuse is being discussed and you make a statement that in effect says those women were not, in fact, sexually abused but participated willingly and are now crying sexual abuse because it didn't turn out they way they expected , you are going to get some angry responses.
Yes, everyone is entitled to your opinion and you are entitled to express it. But you cannot expect others to agree with it, or even like it.
Also, I find it very interesting that a couple of you who are defending the notional that all posters should be treated with respect and given the benefit of the doubt are comparing others to a flock of chickens attacking the wounded. Seems to me that the pot is calling the kettle black. Not once have I or any of the others who "seem" to view things in a similar manner as my POV called anyone names or made anything even remotely close to a derrogatory remark towards those with the opposing POV.
What followed was a vile bashing of her and her opinions. Was she not entitled to her opinion? Or have we gotten to the point that we throw stones and ask questions later or never? Now I know that GS is a tough crowd, but My God. And to add to the disgust of the whole thing, people that I have protected in the past were in the front row throwing stones!
I think that calling what happened a "vile bashing" and "throwing stones" may be a somewhat exaggerated if not misguided portrayal of the situation. The fact that someone is honest in sharing an experience should not make their opinions off bounds for discussion or disagreement.
Certainly everyone that posts here should be entitled to their opinions whether or not is is GSPC. However that entitlement should not go so far as to disenfranchise the opinions of those who might disagree.
It seems to me that it is a "no brainer" that when you go to a forum that is by and large made up of people who feel they were hurt by their experience with TWI, VPW, or LCM and you post in defense of them that you are going to get some angry responses.
Perhaps this gets to the root of the problem. Too often when someone posts something that is true or a true fact at least in their life experience. Because it does not agree with the "by and large majority" who have the hurt perspective that you described above, and because of their "feelings" they perceive it to be an attack on them., or as supportive of that which they they hate. To acknowledge benefit is not the same as support or denying or accepting other behavior. For instance someone may post
I learned some beneficial things in PFAL
That alone is enough to bring on the attackers. Truth is the poster may have learned something good, that does not speak to behavior issues or excuse them. And yet the message sent although maybe not stated in English by the volume of immediate posts is that you can't be right and here is why: It was plagiarized, VPW abused women, you learned at the expense of others who were victimized, how dare you! appreciate such a thing and on and on.... Perhaps if we could separate feelings from other issues and read what the poster is saying only without adding what we feel because of our experience into it we'd have less problems.
Well I'm the female who was really offended by sogwap's post. I read it as it was written, and saw a sweeping indictment of those of us who were sexually abused.
If that was not her intention, and now I don't think it was, I apologize for my emotional reaction. My intention was not to "cast stones" at her. I have a pretty strong opinion about what was posted, but I guess now that's not really what she meant?
No one pmed, or posted to me on that thread that I was out of line or needed to apologize or anything. One poster I respect stated in a pm that she disagreed with me. That was it.
I thought about contacting sogwap and asking what she really meant, but she didn't correct herself on the thread and then said she was leaving. So I assumed she wasn't interested in working anything out.
Again, I apologize for my contribution in making a mess of that thread. I should have asked for more clarification, and not have reacted so emotionally.
Regarding the two posters who "know" LCM, one of them is some kind of cult researcher. I suggest that a cult researcher who is surprised at how former cult members might react to his words needs to reconsider his profession. Freud, if you're reading this, and if you're good at what you do, come back. Consider the audience and don't be surprised at the tone of some of the replies you get. It shouldn't surprise you. Don't let it turn you away.
I'm not putting any blame anywhere. I just understood that a lot of women posters felt that the other poster who shared she willingly had a 4 year affair with leadership was tearing down all the work done done to help the understanding that there was sexual abuse, rape, and unwilling women who were victmized.
Going back to my own thoughts when I first started on GSC, I never knew about sexual abuse. I knew that promiscuity happened between leaders and willing participants. I never dreamed that anyone who had sex with the MOG didn't want to. I had blinders on. It took Chatty Kathy knocking me over the head almost all day long on a thread about 3 years ago for me to "get it". BTW, thank you very much Chatty Kathy :). But it was really one poster who had experienced abuse to make a comment that just let it all fall in to place for me. It was one little comment from that person which made me see the hurt and pain it caused. I was a changed person after that.
There are a lot of women on this board who don't want the ugliness of sexual abuse at the hands of top leadership in twi to be covered over by someone's claim of "I did it willingly."
I am using the threads I mentioned as examples of what I see happening here. There are people that lurk but won't post after seeing the way people are received here. And others that have posted, that I have been able to contact, leave because of the harshness that their ideas receive.
I think that Linda Z used a valid example to make her point.
We misdirect our anger here, imo.
Wayfer Not -- the fact of the matter is that willing partners are out there and their voices are just as valid.
I suggest that a cult researcher who is surprised at how former cult members might react to his words needs to reconsider his profession.
Umm, that seems sort of.... , but, I don't really see where Froid acted surprised at the reactions found here. He only simply stated that he was "not a plant", and that he didn't understand how people here thought he was "trying to reconcile Craig" back to he people here, but rather that he was simply stating what appears to be a dichotomy, between the picture painted here, and the current picture that he views of Craig in the venue in which he has now taken up residence. "Reconsider his profession"? I am not so sure that this is his profession, but rather an interest that he has...
And back to the topic, EX10. You are wonderful. What next? Well, on her original post, she did leave an e-mail address if you care to write her. I got a pm from her and she was really nice...
It's not off topic. Those two posters were mentioned in the opening post on this thread.
I'd have to do more reading of all his posts to answer the "profession" issue. I was under the impression that it was more than a mere interest.
And if the reaction he gets here stops him from posting, then I suggest "surprise" is an appropriate word. But if you can come up with a better word for it, I won't quibble.
"Perhaps this gets to the root of the problem. Too often when someone posts something that is true or a true fact at least in their life experience. Because it does not agree with the "by and large majority" who have the hurt perspective that you described above, and because of their "feelings" they perceive it to be an attack on them., "
WhiteDove, I agree that this occurs and is a problem. I've seen it happen on both sides of the fence, but it is far more prevalent when people share about their good experiences. While I understand why this happens, I think we could all do well to remember if we didn't have at least SOME good experiences with TWI, none of us would have stuck around as long as we did.
***See, I am at least trying to be objective ;) ***
"And yet the message sent although maybe not stated in English by the volume of immediate posts is that you can't be right and here is why: It was plagiarized, VPW abused women, you learned at the expense of others who were victimized, how dare you"
I have to disagree with you to some extent here, at least from my own experience via the posts I have read. I don't think the majority of the posters are saying you can't be right in what you experienced, I think they are simply pointing out the incredibly high cost a number of us paid for the good experiences or valid teachings. I think also, they are expressing their opinion that someone who abuses women and plagarizes cannot be a MOG. Perhaps I am wrong on this, but that is how I have read it.
"Perhaps if we could separate feelings from other issues and read what the poster is saying only without adding what we feel because of our experience into it we'd have less problems."
I am sure your are correct on this. But we all tend to view things through our own filters to some degree or another. Personally, I feel that the debates often help us (in time) learn to adjust our filters to allow various points of view in. Again, I see this as part of the healing process - it is often painful, but that is the nature of healing even with physical problems.
Paw,
"I am using the threads I mentioned as examples of what I see happening here. There are people that lurk but won't post after seeing the way people are received here. And others that have posted, that I have been able to contact, leave because of the harshness that their ideas receive."
I have mixed feelings on this one. When I first came to Greasespot I was on the receiving end of the name calling and accusations - I was called a troll, etc. And because I was still very much indoctrinated by TWI's teachings, many of my ideas were received with harshness. So, I do understand the distress this can cause.
However, I firmly believe that it was because I was faced with these challenges that I "recovered" as quickly as I did. It was sink or swim - stand up for myself or give up. The opposition to my ideas forced me to view them through a different filter. No one forced me to change my ideas, but they did cause me to re-examine them, which resulted in my changing them.
I do think it is sad that there are people who leave or won't post for fear of the response they will get. But, there are other forums where they can speak up and NOT be challenged. So I guess my perspective is that in the large scheme of things, there are enough ExWayfer communities to meet the needs of almost all ex-wayfers, but no one size will fit all.
"We misdirect our anger here, imo.
Wayfer Not -- the fact of the matter is that willing partners are out there and their voices are just as valid."
Agree and agree. But I tend to think as long as you are dealing with people, the misdirection is going to occur and the only way to stop it is to heavily moderate and censor posts.
1. TWI fostered a "nitpicking-ness" surrounding words, unlike any other group of people with which I've been around. That similar nitpicking and desire to be so right (for some who post here), seems to carry over in their posting syle.
2. Boundaries: there was a huge lack of respect for people's personal boundaries in twi (hence the word "cult" we often ascribe to the group) and the co-dependent mindset is alive and evident in some posters' behavior here. Without request or permission, there are some who jump right in as the defenders of all that was wrong, is wrong, may be wrong, etc. Excathedra, who IMHO has one of the worst abuse stories I've heard of here, seems quite capable of defending herself when needed (and desired), as do others if given the opportunity.
3. Misdirected anger: it happens to people all the time. I have a bad day at work, and perhaps take it out on the next person in my path. It happens. But in cyberspace, where everyone can read and refer back to your thoughts???? How about breathing, walking away for a bit, thinking, processing instead of the temptation to simply vomit your crap all over everyone? That desire to pick a fight, jump in the middle of one, add fuel to, etc. is really sometimes unbelievable to watch here.
4. Sogwap: I agree, Paw. There are stories out there that still may need to be told and HEARD. Probably painful to admit to and/or tell. I wanted clarificaton from Sogwap on her story (though I was pretty sure I got it). I PM'd her. Gave her my thoughts and she responded in a couple of days with a thoughtful, gracious response.
I don't like the attack mode here. Having been around argumentative and healing people, I get it; just don't like it.
Wayfer Not -- the fact of the matter is that willing partners are out there and their voices are just as valid."
Abi said ... "Agree and agree. But I tend to think as long as you are dealing with people, the misdirection is going to occur and the only way to stop it is to heavily moderate and censor posts.
The issue doesn't seem to be about the willing partners but about the accusation that those that claimed rape were just bitter.
That is the big issue, but to me the secondary and also important point is that adultry was also "wrong", especially for these "It Is Written" heavyweights. That is the level that is not probably legally wrong, but oh so wrong to those thinking twi had some standards. That singles would hook up is no surprise (though still not biblically allowed I guess), but what led these mostly very young idealistic (some) women into relationships with married older "ministers" would probably get them fired in today's corporate world. I would think twi should have had higher standards than ExxonMobile.
The motives for any apologies for craig's adultrous behavior might raise an eyebrow, and raise some ire when calling all those claiming some level of rape... just bitter or confused. I'm certainly willing to listen, and am interested in the psychological side if Freud or anyone offers that. Most of us were "victims" of lies and deceit on some level. That's why I'll never buy another Ford ... :)
I wonder if part of the emotional temperature here lately is because of the posters who have been posting just to stir sh1t up and allowed to stalk posters, post hateful, venomous posts and otherwise contribute nothing of value. Sort of like inciting riot.
The mood of the boards has seemed to change to me based on how active those particular posters are. It's a lot like when Refiner and the other JW's were here. They were starting fights, but that defensive, aggressive attitude flowed over into all the other threads and sections of the board - even the threads where they weren't even posting.
It's kind of like being in a meeting with a total @$$hole - the whole meeting turns sour and then everyone takes that bad attitude and experience back to their own departments and pretty soon nobody is smiling, happy or positive in the whole company for that day. My former boss is like that ... he's a seagull manager - flies in; sh1ts all over everyone's desk and leaves. Usually by the time he leaves there are petty arguments going on within everyone else in the department even though we always got along well - especially when he wasn't around.
Oh, and for the record....absolutely nothing sogwap posted has anything to do with why I started that "get over it" thread. :)
I, too, want to thank Paw for bringing this issue up. This forum is to important to risk having it closed off.
There was a comment by someone in chat a while back about not coming here anymore because there is no new information, and the same things just get chewed on over and over.
If we can't give new people the benefit of the doubt, then we will be going in circles forever.
I wouldn't want to see a "kumbaya" atmosphere, but it's got to improve over what it has become.
Oh, and for the record....absolutely nothing sogwap posted has anything to do with why I started that "get over it" thread. :)
OK, sorry ... I guess I lost track of where I read that.
I think this is a sensitive subject ... that is the main reason for the intensity. I'm not sure what rabble rowsers you're referring to ... maybe me! To me though the issue of adultry/rape by leadership carries over into the heart of twi. In a sense I was "married" to the ministry, and I found them cheating on me. Any defense of the cheaters is revolting. The twi leader mentality was pervasive and damaging on many levels ... the clergy having sex with their "flock" is just one of the more obvious physical ramifications that can be more easily pointed out.
Many prefer to minimalize that. I prefer to emphasize it.
I'm not at all saying what he did was right. But I also don't put the blame on the sex totally with him. I believe there were willing partners as I was. The people that call rape are mad because of how it turned out....scorned women. Thought they would get more or the husband found out, whatever.
I read that as one context. I told her in post I would give her that she was not speaking women who had truly been abused. And after all that everyone has eloquently spoken I still read it in the same context.
The first sentence speaks of her stand right off the bat should there be any confusion to follow. The second sentence speaks a truth that she feels about him and then she gave us an example of why in her third sentence where she speaks of the willing partners.
She could have in the beginning of her forth sentence made sure it was tied to the subject willing partners she spoke of in her third sentence and thus caused herself and all of us a lot less words spoken regarding it. She ties the willing partners again in this last sentence by referring to ones that would call rape who wanted more. I saw it the first time and continue to see it now as the same subject matter spoken of all throughout and it was willing partners.
I've seen nothing of sogwap to make me think she would be the type to belittle the ones abused. I think she meant to bring a truth here.
And after such a humble post of someone's I hate to sound contradictory but I feel that we can't dismiss there were willing partners. If we can't acknowledge it because we feel it demeans the ones abused then it binds up the experience we can have and thus deliverance as well.
I don't really get it but I've tried to hate someone. I mean dug in my feet gave it all I had and that was bountiful I might add. But I just fooled myself and made it all the worse on me. I have to give the benefit there could be change in a person. It's part of how I think. I don't see the need to change it. When we think there was always and will forever remain nothing but evil in a person it might help get through the angry periods we all go through but in time it'll start eating at your gut I suspect. Unless there really are people that can claim 100% they got 0 out of twi. And then I'd have to disagree. Because they got us here and I'd call that something. So it can't be 0 out of twi IMHO.
Okay, after taking a couple hours off to walk the river and feed the ducks with the kids, I'm ready to jump back in. :) Lotsa catching up to do
"1. TWI fostered a "nitpicking-ness" surrounding words, unlike any other group of people with which I've been around. That similar nitpicking and desire to be so right (for some who post here), seems to carry over in their posting syle. "
J, someone else mentioned nitpicking-ness on another thread today too. I do think we sometimes nitpick and I agree that it was fostered in TWI. But as my manner sometimes is, I like to post the other side of the coin. I can be VERY nitpicky about words - for me, it doesn't just come from TWI, but is simply how my brain works. Perhaps it is the result of growing up with a family full of lawyers. I can be at the doctor and the doctor may ask "does this hurt?" And my response is, define hurt. Because in my mind - I may feel a sensation that is somewhat uncomfortable, but I may not describe it as pain and I want to understand exactly what the doctor is looking for. In this medium, the words we chose can be even more crucial.
"I wonder if part of the emotional temperature here lately is because of the posters who have been posting just to stir sh1t up and allowed to stalk posters, post hateful, venomous posts and otherwise contribute nothing of value. Sort of like inciting riot. "
Belle, I do think that there is some validity to that idea. The mood at greasespot often seems to move in "waves". We can sometimes go for weeks and months with a smooth and gleaming shoreline and then the storms will come in and the waves get bigger and meaner.
" To me though the issue of adultry/rape by leadership carries over into the heart of twi. In a sense I was "married" to the ministry, and I found them cheating on me. Any defense of the cheaters is revolting. The twi leader mentality was pervasive and damaging on many levels ... the clergy having sex with their "flock" is just one of the more obvious physical ramifications that can be more easily pointed out.
Many prefer to minimalize that. I prefer to emphasize it."
Rhino, on an emotional level I agree with you 100%. And for me too, that is a very emotionally charged topic. I do think, though, that we should try to leave room for the stories of good experiences, because to deny them is to deny part of the TWI experience.
Kathy,
I understand your perspective and respect it. You said: "I've seen nothing of sogwap to make me think she would be the type to belittle the ones abused. I think she meant to bring a truth here."
Did you know Sogwap prior to the post in question? Not necessarily personally, but were you familiar with her other posts? Because if you were, I can't help but wonder if you didn't read her post through that filter. That's not a criticism, just a question. I have since gone back and read a number of posts by her that I had never previously seen, and it seems from those other posts that she has a very gentle and caring heart.
I had never seen many of her posts prior to the one you quoted. So I took the post on face value. And at face value to me, the post very clearly stated that there were willing partners (which I do not doubt and would agree that their stories have validity and value). Her post also clearly stated to me that she believed the people that call rape are mad because of how it turned out....scorned women. Thought they would get more or the husband found out, whatever.
Why would I think that? Because that is exactly what she said.
Given the context of the thread, and the amount of back and forth that often goes on in threads that discuss the sexual abuses that took place in TWI, as to whether it really occured, as to whether the men who forced or coerced women hold any blame, as to whether or not a victim of force or coersion is also to blame, it is not hard to understand why people would be offended and angry by such a statement.
Sometimes proper wording is crucial. Sometimes looking at the context and direction of the thread as a whole is also crucial.
So, while I do understand how you could have viewed what was said in a different light, my question would be, can you not see how others might have seen it differently than you did?
It's not too often I get angry over something that's posted at GS. I take most of it in stride, figuring that people have their own reasons for posting here, even if it looks ugly to me, or is unpleasant to read, and that if the catharsis helps them somehow, that's part of why GS is here. Fine. But what really gets my ire is when I see posters used as target practice; when whatever contempt people feel toward The Way, God, or just life in general, is directed at the unsuspecting, and the unprepared. Belle, you made a parallel between these current trends and JWO. Where I see the similarity is in the way people are being trashed, not for who they are, but because they don't fit in.
Sogwap didn't post on any thread about sexual abuse. She posted on a thread about Craig. She wrote about her experience with him. Someone who has had contact with Craig was trying to reconcile his impressions of Craig with what he was reading here and on other sites. From her post, it sounds to me like Craig is someone she once loved, and still cares about on some level. What amazes me more than her story is that so many of you can't relate to it. Her post was on-topic and relevant. So why isn't there room for that topic here? Why isn't there room for her here? Maybe you all can't relate to her, but you don't have to. Not everyone can relate to some of your stories, either. With or without modifiers, it is her story to tell, in her own words.
Is sogwap really the only one here who has had sex under morally ambiguous circumstances? I find that hard to believe, but, okay, if you say so. Even if that's the case, she said it was a relationship that happened in the seventies. Doing the math, it could quite possibly have been before Craig was married, and I assume it was, if only because she said she thought she was "the only one." If he were married, it would likely have been obvious to her that she wasn't the only one. I don't know if that makes a difference or not. If she had held a grudge, would she have been welcomed here more graciously? It's disappointing to think so.
I think there is room for those who were willing participants here at the cafe. In fact, I think it could add much to our understanding of the culture of TWI. Likewise, I think very few took umbrage with the notion that someone might have had sex under morally ambiguous circumstances.
What I found offensive was the statement that those who say they were raped did so merely because they felt scorned. That is an opinion that more than one person here at the cafe has had. It is also an opinion that many here will find hurtful, damaging, and offensive. And because it is an opinion, I think we should be free to respond to it as such.
Any woman who calls "wolf" and falsely accuses someone of being raped does tremendous damage to those who truly have been raped. Any woman who incorrectly accuses someone who HAS been raped of making it up because they felt scorned, likewise does tremendous damage.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
11
16
9
8
Popular Days
Apr 29
56
May 1
26
Apr 30
17
May 2
11
Top Posters In This Topic
ChattyKathy 11 posts
Abigail 16 posts
Belle 9 posts
rhino 8 posts
Popular Days
Apr 29 2006
56 posts
May 1 2006
26 posts
Apr 30 2006
17 posts
May 2 2006
11 posts
J0nny Ling0
Nice thread Pawtucket, glad you brought it up. I think Galen's "chicken analogy" described it best. Too bad, that... :(
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rhino
At what point (if ever) a woman (let's say Corps or staff) decided it was OK or even cool to have sex with twi leaders seems a big issue here, even to some Corps men (that weren't having sex at all maybe :blink: ) It seems very pertinent to the cult aspect of twi. My view is that many that came into the corps/staff fairly pure in the Word, left rather jaundiced and maybe involved in the adultry games. For some maybe that was their choice ... but the "offensive" part to me is that "It Is Written" seemed to be replaced with ... Party On ... and non partiers were labelled party poopers ... and not given choice assignments maybe (were the partiers sent to the big cities to party together?)
To say that happened as a matter of choice is partly true maybe for some ... but people that were looking for a place to party didn't go in the corps. Certainly everyone is responsible for their own actions, but basically we were sold a bill of goods that was almost the opposite of what was advertised. Perhaps we didn't get any written guarentees, but then again GSC is not a court of law.
I guess the stones were thrown at Freud and sogwap? ... certainly a level headed discussion is best. Still, it seems the point sogwap raised about ... here... I'll quote because this seems central to the whole issue ...
I'm not at all saying what he did was right. But I also don't put the blame on the sex totally with him. I believe there were willing partners as I was. The people that call rape are mad because of how it turned out....scorned women. Thought they would get more or the husband found out, whatever.
I slept with Craig for 4 years. He even came to my house the day after I was married on his motorcycle. I sent him away. BUT for the 4 years I slept with him, I always thought "I was the only one". Then found out there were others. BUT....I slept with him because I thought I was important, special.
Point is, you do what you do because you want to...and you usually think it advances you or makes you special in a "God" atmosphere. Until some are scorned and show their tallens.
I feel sorry for Craig....
the bold emphasis is mine. When she spoke for those women that say they were raped and said they were "mad because of how it turned out" ... I think some stone throwing should be expected. I stayed at sogwap's house at roa a few years with her hubby and nanci, and I liked the sogwap I remember, so have no animosity ... I would doubt she really meant that quite that way .. but to me that gets to the heart of the whole twi / cult / adultry/rape issue.
I guess that also led to the "get over it" thing. We are ultimately responsible, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't label those that deceived / defrauded / maybe raped in any higher regard. When such things go to court the "victims" get over it partly by putting the offender in jail. Unfortunately the victim mentality sometimes protects the offender, making abused women that protect their abuser perhaps the saddest cases.
I saw sogwap was back in chat, so hope she hangs around. Since I'm not one of the "partiers" nor one of the sex victims (nor a predator) and would tend to be on sogwap's side ... I thought I'd throw in my perspective. A courtroom is a tougher standard than GSC opinion standard, and lcm was guilty there, right? I certainly don't feel sorry for craig.
Edited by rhinoLink to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
I guess I am confused by some of this. I think I finally figured out who the two posters are that Paw was referring to and I have to say I agree with him 100% with respect to what happened and I am disappointed to learn they may never post here again.
However, with regard to some other examples from this thread -
It seems to me that it is a "no brainer" that when you go to a forum that is by and large made up of people who feel they were hurt by their experience with TWI, VPW, or LCM and you post in defense of them that you are going to get some angry responses.
Likewise when you post on a topic where sexual abuse is being discussed and you make a statement that in effect says those women were not, in fact, sexually abused but participated willingly and are now crying sexual abuse because it didn't turn out they way they expected , you are going to get some angry responses.
Yes, everyone is entitled to your opinion and you are entitled to express it. But you cannot expect others to agree with it, or even like it.
Also, I find it very interesting that a couple of you who are defending the notional that all posters should be treated with respect and given the benefit of the doubt are comparing others to a flock of chickens attacking the wounded. Seems to me that the pot is calling the kettle black. Not once have I or any of the others who "seem" to view things in a similar manner as my POV called anyone names or made anything even remotely close to a derrogatory remark towards those with the opposing POV.
Edited to ad qualifiers
Edited by AbigailLink to comment
Share on other sites
Goey
I think that calling what happened a "vile bashing" and "throwing stones" may be a somewhat exaggerated if not misguided portrayal of the situation. The fact that someone is honest in sharing an experience should not make their opinions off bounds for discussion or disagreement.
Certainly everyone that posts here should be entitled to their opinions whether or not is is GSPC. However that entitlement should not go so far as to disenfranchise the opinions of those who might disagree.
Edited by GoeyLink to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Perhaps this gets to the root of the problem. Too often when someone posts something that is true or a true fact at least in their life experience. Because it does not agree with the "by and large majority" who have the hurt perspective that you described above, and because of their "feelings" they perceive it to be an attack on them., or as supportive of that which they they hate. To acknowledge benefit is not the same as support or denying or accepting other behavior. For instance someone may post
I learned some beneficial things in PFAL
That alone is enough to bring on the attackers. Truth is the poster may have learned something good, that does not speak to behavior issues or excuse them. And yet the message sent although maybe not stated in English by the volume of immediate posts is that you can't be right and here is why: It was plagiarized, VPW abused women, you learned at the expense of others who were victimized, how dare you! appreciate such a thing and on and on.... Perhaps if we could separate feelings from other issues and read what the poster is saying only without adding what we feel because of our experience into it we'd have less problems.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ex10
Well I'm the female who was really offended by sogwap's post. I read it as it was written, and saw a sweeping indictment of those of us who were sexually abused.
If that was not her intention, and now I don't think it was, I apologize for my emotional reaction. My intention was not to "cast stones" at her. I have a pretty strong opinion about what was posted, but I guess now that's not really what she meant?
No one pmed, or posted to me on that thread that I was out of line or needed to apologize or anything. One poster I respect stated in a pm that she disagreed with me. That was it.
I thought about contacting sogwap and asking what she really meant, but she didn't correct herself on the thread and then said she was leaving. So I assumed she wasn't interested in working anything out.
Again, I apologize for my contribution in making a mess of that thread. I should have asked for more clarification, and not have reacted so emotionally.
So I guess my next question is "Now what?"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bluzeman
Easy! Just get over it!
Oops, wrong thread.
(Kidding....just kidding!) :)
Rick
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Regarding the two posters who "know" LCM, one of them is some kind of cult researcher. I suggest that a cult researcher who is surprised at how former cult members might react to his words needs to reconsider his profession. Freud, if you're reading this, and if you're good at what you do, come back. Consider the audience and don't be surprised at the tone of some of the replies you get. It shouldn't surprise you. Don't let it turn you away.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nottawayfer
I'm not putting any blame anywhere. I just understood that a lot of women posters felt that the other poster who shared she willingly had a 4 year affair with leadership was tearing down all the work done done to help the understanding that there was sexual abuse, rape, and unwilling women who were victmized.
Going back to my own thoughts when I first started on GSC, I never knew about sexual abuse. I knew that promiscuity happened between leaders and willing participants. I never dreamed that anyone who had sex with the MOG didn't want to. I had blinders on. It took Chatty Kathy knocking me over the head almost all day long on a thread about 3 years ago for me to "get it". BTW, thank you very much Chatty Kathy :). But it was really one poster who had experienced abuse to make a comment that just let it all fall in to place for me. It was one little comment from that person which made me see the hurt and pain it caused. I was a changed person after that.
There are a lot of women on this board who don't want the ugliness of sexual abuse at the hands of top leadership in twi to be covered over by someone's claim of "I did it willingly."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
pawtucket
I am using the threads I mentioned as examples of what I see happening here. There are people that lurk but won't post after seeing the way people are received here. And others that have posted, that I have been able to contact, leave because of the harshness that their ideas receive.
I think that Linda Z used a valid example to make her point.
We misdirect our anger here, imo.
Wayfer Not -- the fact of the matter is that willing partners are out there and their voices are just as valid.
Edited by pawtucketLink to comment
Share on other sites
J0nny Ling0
Umm, that seems sort of....
, but, I don't really see where Froid acted surprised at the reactions found here. He only simply stated that he was "not a plant", and that he didn't understand how people here thought he was "trying to reconcile Craig" back to he people here, but rather that he was simply stating what appears to be a dichotomy, between the picture painted here, and the current picture that he views of Craig in the venue in which he has now taken up residence. "Reconsider his profession"? I am not so sure that this is his profession, but rather an interest that he has...
And back to the topic, EX10. You are wonderful. What next? Well, on her original post, she did leave an e-mail address if you care to write her. I got a pm from her and she was really nice...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
It's not off topic. Those two posters were mentioned in the opening post on this thread.
I'd have to do more reading of all his posts to answer the "profession" issue. I was under the impression that it was more than a mere interest.
And if the reaction he gets here stops him from posting, then I suggest "surprise" is an appropriate word. But if you can come up with a better word for it, I won't quibble.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
"Perhaps this gets to the root of the problem. Too often when someone posts something that is true or a true fact at least in their life experience. Because it does not agree with the "by and large majority" who have the hurt perspective that you described above, and because of their "feelings" they perceive it to be an attack on them., "
WhiteDove, I agree that this occurs and is a problem. I've seen it happen on both sides of the fence, but it is far more prevalent when people share about their good experiences. While I understand why this happens, I think we could all do well to remember if we didn't have at least SOME good experiences with TWI, none of us would have stuck around as long as we did.
***See, I am at least trying to be objective ;) ***
"And yet the message sent although maybe not stated in English by the volume of immediate posts is that you can't be right and here is why: It was plagiarized, VPW abused women, you learned at the expense of others who were victimized, how dare you"
I have to disagree with you to some extent here, at least from my own experience via the posts I have read. I don't think the majority of the posters are saying you can't be right in what you experienced, I think they are simply pointing out the incredibly high cost a number of us paid for the good experiences or valid teachings. I think also, they are expressing their opinion that someone who abuses women and plagarizes cannot be a MOG. Perhaps I am wrong on this, but that is how I have read it.
"Perhaps if we could separate feelings from other issues and read what the poster is saying only without adding what we feel because of our experience into it we'd have less problems."
I am sure your are correct on this. But we all tend to view things through our own filters to some degree or another. Personally, I feel that the debates often help us (in time) learn to adjust our filters to allow various points of view in. Again, I see this as part of the healing process - it is often painful, but that is the nature of healing even with physical problems.
Paw,
"I am using the threads I mentioned as examples of what I see happening here. There are people that lurk but won't post after seeing the way people are received here. And others that have posted, that I have been able to contact, leave because of the harshness that their ideas receive."
I have mixed feelings on this one. When I first came to Greasespot I was on the receiving end of the name calling and accusations - I was called a troll, etc. And because I was still very much indoctrinated by TWI's teachings, many of my ideas were received with harshness. So, I do understand the distress this can cause.
However, I firmly believe that it was because I was faced with these challenges that I "recovered" as quickly as I did. It was sink or swim - stand up for myself or give up. The opposition to my ideas forced me to view them through a different filter. No one forced me to change my ideas, but they did cause me to re-examine them, which resulted in my changing them.
I do think it is sad that there are people who leave or won't post for fear of the response they will get. But, there are other forums where they can speak up and NOT be challenged. So I guess my perspective is that in the large scheme of things, there are enough ExWayfer communities to meet the needs of almost all ex-wayfers, but no one size will fit all.
"We misdirect our anger here, imo.
Wayfer Not -- the fact of the matter is that willing partners are out there and their voices are just as valid."
Agree and agree. But I tend to think as long as you are dealing with people, the misdirection is going to occur and the only way to stop it is to heavily moderate and censor posts.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jardinero
Good discussion. Thanks for addressing it, Paw.
A couple of thoughts:
1. TWI fostered a "nitpicking-ness" surrounding words, unlike any other group of people with which I've been around. That similar nitpicking and desire to be so right (for some who post here), seems to carry over in their posting syle.
2. Boundaries: there was a huge lack of respect for people's personal boundaries in twi (hence the word "cult" we often ascribe to the group) and the co-dependent mindset is alive and evident in some posters' behavior here. Without request or permission, there are some who jump right in as the defenders of all that was wrong, is wrong, may be wrong, etc. Excathedra, who IMHO has one of the worst abuse stories I've heard of here, seems quite capable of defending herself when needed (and desired), as do others if given the opportunity.
3. Misdirected anger: it happens to people all the time. I have a bad day at work, and perhaps take it out on the next person in my path. It happens. But in cyberspace, where everyone can read and refer back to your thoughts???? How about breathing, walking away for a bit, thinking, processing instead of the temptation to simply vomit your crap all over everyone? That desire to pick a fight, jump in the middle of one, add fuel to, etc. is really sometimes unbelievable to watch here.
4. Sogwap: I agree, Paw. There are stories out there that still may need to be told and HEARD. Probably painful to admit to and/or tell. I wanted clarificaton from Sogwap on her story (though I was pretty sure I got it). I PM'd her. Gave her my thoughts and she responded in a couple of days with a thoughtful, gracious response.
I don't like the attack mode here. Having been around argumentative and healing people, I get it; just don't like it.
J.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nottawayfer
I agree Jardinero.
I was only stating what I understood to be the problem with someone making a statement that they had sex willing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rhino
That is the big issue, but to me the secondary and also important point is that adultry was also "wrong", especially for these "It Is Written" heavyweights. That is the level that is not probably legally wrong, but oh so wrong to those thinking twi had some standards. That singles would hook up is no surprise (though still not biblically allowed I guess), but what led these mostly very young idealistic (some) women into relationships with married older "ministers" would probably get them fired in today's corporate world. I would think twi should have had higher standards than ExxonMobile.
The motives for any apologies for craig's adultrous behavior might raise an eyebrow, and raise some ire when calling all those claiming some level of rape... just bitter or confused. I'm certainly willing to listen, and am interested in the psychological side if Freud or anyone offers that. Most of us were "victims" of lies and deceit on some level. That's why I'll never buy another Ford ... :)
Edited by rhinoLink to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
I wonder if part of the emotional temperature here lately is because of the posters who have been posting just to stir sh1t up and allowed to stalk posters, post hateful, venomous posts and otherwise contribute nothing of value. Sort of like inciting riot.
The mood of the boards has seemed to change to me based on how active those particular posters are. It's a lot like when Refiner and the other JW's were here. They were starting fights, but that defensive, aggressive attitude flowed over into all the other threads and sections of the board - even the threads where they weren't even posting.
It's kind of like being in a meeting with a total @$$hole - the whole meeting turns sour and then everyone takes that bad attitude and experience back to their own departments and pretty soon nobody is smiling, happy or positive in the whole company for that day. My former boss is like that ... he's a seagull manager - flies in; sh1ts all over everyone's desk and leaves. Usually by the time he leaves there are petty arguments going on within everyone else in the department even though we always got along well - especially when he wasn't around.
Oh, and for the record....absolutely nothing sogwap posted has anything to do with why I started that "get over it" thread. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
topoftheworld
I, too, want to thank Paw for bringing this issue up. This forum is to important to risk having it closed off.
There was a comment by someone in chat a while back about not coming here anymore because there is no new information, and the same things just get chewed on over and over.
If we can't give new people the benefit of the doubt, then we will be going in circles forever.
I wouldn't want to see a "kumbaya" atmosphere, but it's got to improve over what it has become.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rhino
I think this is a sensitive subject ... that is the main reason for the intensity. I'm not sure what rabble rowsers you're referring to ... maybe me! To me though the issue of adultry/rape by leadership carries over into the heart of twi. In a sense I was "married" to the ministry, and I found them cheating on me. Any defense of the cheaters is revolting. The twi leader mentality was pervasive and damaging on many levels ... the clergy having sex with their "flock" is just one of the more obvious physical ramifications that can be more easily pointed out.
Many prefer to minimalize that. I prefer to emphasize it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
I read that as one context. I told her in post I would give her that she was not speaking women who had truly been abused. And after all that everyone has eloquently spoken I still read it in the same context.
The first sentence speaks of her stand right off the bat should there be any confusion to follow. The second sentence speaks a truth that she feels about him and then she gave us an example of why in her third sentence where she speaks of the willing partners.
She could have in the beginning of her forth sentence made sure it was tied to the subject willing partners she spoke of in her third sentence and thus caused herself and all of us a lot less words spoken regarding it. She ties the willing partners again in this last sentence by referring to ones that would call rape who wanted more. I saw it the first time and continue to see it now as the same subject matter spoken of all throughout and it was willing partners.
I've seen nothing of sogwap to make me think she would be the type to belittle the ones abused. I think she meant to bring a truth here.
And after such a humble post of someone's I hate to sound contradictory but I feel that we can't dismiss there were willing partners. If we can't acknowledge it because we feel it demeans the ones abused then it binds up the experience we can have and thus deliverance as well.
I don't really get it but I've tried to hate someone. I mean dug in my feet gave it all I had and that was bountiful I might add. But I just fooled myself and made it all the worse on me. I have to give the benefit there could be change in a person. It's part of how I think. I don't see the need to change it. When we think there was always and will forever remain nothing but evil in a person it might help get through the angry periods we all go through but in time it'll start eating at your gut I suspect. Unless there really are people that can claim 100% they got 0 out of twi. And then I'd have to disagree. Because they got us here and I'd call that something. So it can't be 0 out of twi IMHO.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
Okay, after taking a couple hours off to walk the river and feed the ducks with the kids, I'm ready to jump back in. :) Lotsa catching up to do
"1. TWI fostered a "nitpicking-ness" surrounding words, unlike any other group of people with which I've been around. That similar nitpicking and desire to be so right (for some who post here), seems to carry over in their posting syle. "
J, someone else mentioned nitpicking-ness on another thread today too. I do think we sometimes nitpick and I agree that it was fostered in TWI. But as my manner sometimes is, I like to post the other side of the coin. I can be VERY nitpicky about words - for me, it doesn't just come from TWI, but is simply how my brain works. Perhaps it is the result of growing up with a family full of lawyers. I can be at the doctor and the doctor may ask "does this hurt?" And my response is, define hurt. Because in my mind - I may feel a sensation that is somewhat uncomfortable, but I may not describe it as pain and I want to understand exactly what the doctor is looking for. In this medium, the words we chose can be even more crucial.
"I wonder if part of the emotional temperature here lately is because of the posters who have been posting just to stir sh1t up and allowed to stalk posters, post hateful, venomous posts and otherwise contribute nothing of value. Sort of like inciting riot. "
Belle, I do think that there is some validity to that idea. The mood at greasespot often seems to move in "waves". We can sometimes go for weeks and months with a smooth and gleaming shoreline and then the storms will come in and the waves get bigger and meaner.
" To me though the issue of adultry/rape by leadership carries over into the heart of twi. In a sense I was "married" to the ministry, and I found them cheating on me. Any defense of the cheaters is revolting. The twi leader mentality was pervasive and damaging on many levels ... the clergy having sex with their "flock" is just one of the more obvious physical ramifications that can be more easily pointed out.
Many prefer to minimalize that. I prefer to emphasize it."
Rhino, on an emotional level I agree with you 100%. And for me too, that is a very emotionally charged topic. I do think, though, that we should try to leave room for the stories of good experiences, because to deny them is to deny part of the TWI experience.
Kathy,
I understand your perspective and respect it. You said: "I've seen nothing of sogwap to make me think she would be the type to belittle the ones abused. I think she meant to bring a truth here."
Did you know Sogwap prior to the post in question? Not necessarily personally, but were you familiar with her other posts? Because if you were, I can't help but wonder if you didn't read her post through that filter. That's not a criticism, just a question. I have since gone back and read a number of posts by her that I had never previously seen, and it seems from those other posts that she has a very gentle and caring heart.
I had never seen many of her posts prior to the one you quoted. So I took the post on face value. And at face value to me, the post very clearly stated that there were willing partners (which I do not doubt and would agree that their stories have validity and value). Her post also clearly stated to me that she believed the people that call rape are mad because of how it turned out....scorned women. Thought they would get more or the husband found out, whatever.
Why would I think that? Because that is exactly what she said.
Given the context of the thread, and the amount of back and forth that often goes on in threads that discuss the sexual abuses that took place in TWI, as to whether it really occured, as to whether the men who forced or coerced women hold any blame, as to whether or not a victim of force or coersion is also to blame, it is not hard to understand why people would be offended and angry by such a statement.
Sometimes proper wording is crucial. Sometimes looking at the context and direction of the thread as a whole is also crucial.
So, while I do understand how you could have viewed what was said in a different light, my question would be, can you not see how others might have seen it differently than you did?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
laleo
A few thoughts, for what it's worth.
It's not too often I get angry over something that's posted at GS. I take most of it in stride, figuring that people have their own reasons for posting here, even if it looks ugly to me, or is unpleasant to read, and that if the catharsis helps them somehow, that's part of why GS is here. Fine. But what really gets my ire is when I see posters used as target practice; when whatever contempt people feel toward The Way, God, or just life in general, is directed at the unsuspecting, and the unprepared. Belle, you made a parallel between these current trends and JWO. Where I see the similarity is in the way people are being trashed, not for who they are, but because they don't fit in.
Sogwap didn't post on any thread about sexual abuse. She posted on a thread about Craig. She wrote about her experience with him. Someone who has had contact with Craig was trying to reconcile his impressions of Craig with what he was reading here and on other sites. From her post, it sounds to me like Craig is someone she once loved, and still cares about on some level. What amazes me more than her story is that so many of you can't relate to it. Her post was on-topic and relevant. So why isn't there room for that topic here? Why isn't there room for her here? Maybe you all can't relate to her, but you don't have to. Not everyone can relate to some of your stories, either. With or without modifiers, it is her story to tell, in her own words.
Is sogwap really the only one here who has had sex under morally ambiguous circumstances? I find that hard to believe, but, okay, if you say so. Even if that's the case, she said it was a relationship that happened in the seventies. Doing the math, it could quite possibly have been before Craig was married, and I assume it was, if only because she said she thought she was "the only one." If he were married, it would likely have been obvious to her that she wasn't the only one. I don't know if that makes a difference or not. If she had held a grudge, would she have been welcomed here more graciously? It's disappointing to think so.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
penguin
Thanks Paw for what you wrote.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
Laleo,
I think there is room for those who were willing participants here at the cafe. In fact, I think it could add much to our understanding of the culture of TWI. Likewise, I think very few took umbrage with the notion that someone might have had sex under morally ambiguous circumstances.
What I found offensive was the statement that those who say they were raped did so merely because they felt scorned. That is an opinion that more than one person here at the cafe has had. It is also an opinion that many here will find hurtful, damaging, and offensive. And because it is an opinion, I think we should be free to respond to it as such.
Any woman who calls "wolf" and falsely accuses someone of being raped does tremendous damage to those who truly have been raped. Any woman who incorrectly accuses someone who HAS been raped of making it up because they felt scorned, likewise does tremendous damage.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.