Adrianne Braverman says:
Your remark about my "emotional
state" shows that you are behaving exactly
like an abuser who is upset because he/she being held responsible for
his/her actions, and is trying to ignore the problem by deflecting the argument.
Judge Wallis Friel says about the Wenatchee persecution of 43 innocent
"A mind-set developed among those who became involved in the cases
allegations were to be taken at face value," Friel wrote. "Such allegations
were not tested by doubt. Instead, there was a predisposition to believe
the allegations. This mind-set apparently also affected the defense
In a message dated 9/28/99 1:45:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> ``If there is any truth to the saying that it takes a village, then every
> person in the village ought to value children''
> It has nothing to do with protecting children and everything to do with the
> "It Takes A Village Idiot" mentality which created this ugly monster.
> you don't seem to detect, or want to acknowledge, in that sentence is the
> word "IF". Most American parents DO NOT think "it takes a
village" to raise
> children. True, American Indians, natives on the Serengetti Plain, and
> other people around the world living in mud huts think this, but modern
> societies don't http://fathersmanifesto.com/cfc.htm
You might want to be a bit more careful about whose letter you're responding
to when you write. I never mentioned "It Takes A
Village" in any of my notes
to you. In fact, I've never read the book. That certainly proves you are
hearing from more people than me with opinions that don't match yours.
I don't believe ANYONE should get settlement monies from lawsuits involving
child abusers. I believe that the abusers should be put in prison for the
rest of their natural lives. As for my personal politcal agenda, its very
simple: All victims of abuse in this country should be allowed to choose the
method of recovery that works the best for them. No group should be allowed
to try to eliminate the helping professional that provide recovery services.
You seem to be confusing the "diet industry" with the community of helping
professionals. Again, I think you should check your facts.
You seem to be confusing Vietnam Veterans with Survivors of Childhood Sexual
Abuse. Beyond the fact that some of the people in both categories suffer
from Post Traumatic Stress Disorders they are not the same group of people.
I notice that mention of anyone of consequence who has denounced your
precious Rind Study certainly struck a nerve. I also notice that you ignored
the resources I suggested to you in my last email.
Those of us who see the Rind Study for the propoganda that it is, are
dedicated to making the public aware of that fact that it is not a valid
study. Even the journal that published the study re-examined its lack of
judiciousness by allowing the Rind Study into their journal. They
appoligized for their error.
The Rind Study uses college students with no regard as to whether or not
these students have gone through the recovery process for their abuse.
Without recovery, victims of abuse are living in their own worlds of denial.
They have to do that to continue day to day functions of life. Students in
that state could not possibly be able to evaluate whether or not the abuse
actually affected their lives, and in what ways. That fact in and of itself
renders the data from the Rind Study to be flawed. It was not a properly
If you, personally, were really so sure about the Rind Study, you certainly
wouldn't feel the need to try to attack people with opposing views, you'd
simply be confident that the merit of the study would prove itself.
I am very familiar with the Rind Study and what it says. It is skewed
research at best.
Sexual abuse causes long term injury to the victim. Yes, when recovery is
allowed, the human spirit does recover, but that does not change the fact
that the abuse affects every aspect of a person's life. After a child is
sexually abused, their world is never the same. The age of the abuser is
relevant only to show how deeply enmeshed in dysfunction our society is. It
doesn't matter whose name(s) endorse(s) the Rind Study, it does not change
the fact that sexual abuse
is exactly that - ABUSE. To minimize it by calling it anything else is to
try to sweep it under the rug.
Your remark about my "emotional state" shows that
you are behaving exactly
like an abuser who is upset because he/she being held responsible for his/her
actions, and is trying to ignore the problem by deflecting the argument.
I don't know where you've been since the Rind Study was published, but I am
one among many who believe it to be biased and an attempt to justify sexual
abuse. ITo list a few: Laura Schlessinger highlighted it on her show and
Web site, Family Research Council, the Christian Coalition, along with
another group I know you've heard of, US House of Representatives. I assume
that you know they act on behalf of their constituencies, (that means that
each one of them represents a very large number of people). If you believe
that I am the only one who has a problem with the "validity" of the Rind
Study, you are extremely unaware of your surroundings.
House Votes 355 - 0 to Denounce Rind Study
By JIM ABRAMS Associated Press Writer, July 12, 1999
WASHINGTON (AP) --The House on Monday unanimously condemned a 1998 article in
an American Psychological Association journal that concluded that some
victims of child sexual abuse suffered little long-term consequences. The
House voted 355-0 to denounce the study in the Psychological Bulletin, one of
the APA's 37 journals, that Rep. Matt Salmon, R-Ariz., sponsor of the
resolution, called the ``emancipation proclamation of pedophiles.'' Thirteen
voted ``present.'' The APA, which represents 159,000 clinicians,
researchers and educators, earlier this month put out a statement responding
to the furor caused by the article, saying it strongly endorses the position
that ``the sexual abuse of children is a criminal act that is
reprehensible in any context.'' It said that for the first time in its
107-year history of publishing it has sought independent expert evaluation of
the scientific quality of the article. It added that ``we recognize that we
must take into account not only
the scientific merit of articles but also their implication for public
The July 1998 article analyzed the findings of 59 earlier studies involving
college students who had been sexually abused before the age of 18,
concluding that not all victims viewed their experiences negatively and that
lasting negative effects were less serious in many cases than commonly
believed. ``Those who excuse this evil conduct, particularly those in
positions of influence, are also pretty low on the food chain and deserve
the harshest possible condemnation,'' Salmon said. But he also praised the
APA for its strong stand against child sexual abuse and noted that the
resolution had been revised to reflect the APA position.
The article became an issue in Congress in recent weeks after radio therapist
Laura Schlessinger highlighted it on her show and Web site. Conservative
groups such as the Family Research Council and the Christian Coalition have
also spoken out against it. ``If there
is any truth to the saying that it
takes a village, then every person in the village ought to value children,''
said Family Research Council spokesperson Janet Parshall. ``If we don't decry
this from one end of the Congress to the other something is seriously wrong
with this country.''
The bill is House Con. Res. 107. AP-NY-07-12-99 1923 EDT
If you'd like more information on the effects of child abuse, may I suggest
reading the following:
The Courage to Heal by Laura Davis and Ellen Boss, anything written by John
Bradshaw, anything written by Charles Whitfield as a start. If you really
want to know first hand how child abuse actually affects victims, get
information from local women's and children's shelters who deal with it every
day. Get information from groups like the Healing Woman Foundation (a
world-wide organization), One Voice, SAFAR, ACAA. In fact, go to the
internet and look up sexual abuse recovery and you'll find a huge number of
sites and organizations that work with survivors regularly who can give you
accurate information on the subject before you continue to support garbage
disguised as scientific research (and badly disguised at that).