On Hope and Speaking the Truth

Why I write this blog and continue to speak out:

“On the other end of the spectrum,” said [Vaclav] Havel, there are those who insist on ‘speaking the truth simply because it [will] lead somewhere tomorrow, or the day after, or ever.’ This urge, too, is fully human, every bit as much as the temptation to despair. Such daring, he argued, grows out of the faith that repeating truth makes sense in itself, regardless of whether it is ‘appreciated, or victorious, or repressed for the hundredth time. At the very least, it [means] that someone [is] not supporting the government of lies.’ Havel admitted, however, that defiance is not undertaken for its own sake but because people cannot exist in the absence of hope. Logically or not, people act out of faith ‘that a seed once sown [will] one day take root and send forth a shoot. No one [knows] when.'”

– By Eric Gfesser in an Amazon review of Madeleine Albright’s book Prague Winter quoting Albright quoting Vaclav Havel regarding the existence of two types of hope.  The first was just sitting and waiting for some kind of outside help or salvation.

 

 

Pennsylvania Crimes Code / CHAPTER 31 – SEXUAL OFFENSES

Source: http://www.pitt.edu/~weinberg/sexual.htm

Pennsylvania Crimes Code

CHAPTER 31 – SEXUAL OFFENSES

Sec.

3101. Definitions.

3102. Mistake as to Age.

3103. (Repealed.)

3104. Evidence of Victim’s Sexual Conduct.

3105. Prompt Complaint.

3106. Testimony of Complainants.

3107. Resistance Not Required.

3121. Rape.

3122. (Repealed.)

3122.1. Statutory Sexual Assault.

3123. Involuntary Deviate Sexual Intercourse.

3124. (Repealed.)

3124.1. Sexual Assault.

3125. Aggravated Indecent Assault.

3126. Indecent Assault.

3127. Indecent Exposure.

3128. (Repealed.) Continue reading

Guilty Until Proven Innocent

Reblogged from buckwheatsrisk-surviving abuse:

Yesterday a thought crossed my mind (yes another thought ).  Why is it that those of us who have been abused and escaped are the ones that have to change everything?

It’s been liberating for me to cut ties but frustrating in another way.  I am the one who has been abused and I’m the one that basically  has to go into hiding like a criminal and that really sucks.

Read more… 384 more words

Why do those of us who are abused have to change everything, why are our abusers believed and not us? Why are the victims of abuse so often revictimized repeatedly by the courts and everyone else? An important quote from this post: “Narcissistic/sociopaths are just as wickedly abusive as those that physically abuse and yet no one sees the scars and unhealed wounds they leave. They are not visible to the naked eye but they are visible if one looks closely. These people are dangerous people and often they will physically abuse, they even have the potential to kill, yet they are cowards so more often, they will beat, whip and abuse with their tongues. They will manipulate, guilt and lie to control you. They will use mind games to convince you that you are the one that is bad, wrong, messed up and needs fixing…Well ya, now I need fixing because of you, I wouldn’t have otherwise!Add your thoughts here… (optional)

Blaming the Victim of Lying About Harm Done to Her

I read a post in a certain person’s Fetlife writings putting forth a Zen parable that spoke of a woman who lied to her parents about who had fathered her out-of-wedlock child, blaming it on a “Zen teacher”, to whom the parents then brought the infant, telling him he must raise it.  He accepted the child with equanimity as they cursed him out for his hypocricy, just commenting, “Is that so?” (Another poster said the parable was originally a Buddhist monk, and the comment was “We shall see”, which is more how I remember hearing it originally.)

A year later, the daughter recanted, reportedly “distraught”, and Mom and Dad came back to the master, begging him to return the child, profusely apologizing for besmirching his good name, and received exactly the same serene response from the master as the year before, of “Is that so?”/ “We shall see”.

The moral, of course, is that women (or at least certain women) may lie (!) about what well-known masters have done, claiming harm that never actually happened, so one should not believe them when they issue accusations against the high-and-mighty, who often believe themselves to be invincible (at least in the BDSM world), particularly when they are better known.  It is likely to turn out that the complaints are what was untrue.

(Of course, it often turns out that the “master” isn’t that much of one to start with, except in his own imagination, and comparisons to Zen masters are thus absurd to the point of ridiculousness, but I digress…)

Another poster responded with a quote from the I Ching, which I quoted partially and responded to.  I am reproducing my response here because I fully expect that the OP will delete my posts, and this is an incredibly important issue – and there’s a reason it’s been raised at this point.

Because *my* moral to the story, with some known additional history (which could in fact also be played out in many ways by many people), is “Be careful, those of you who proclaim that your victims are lying about you when they tell the world what you have done to harm them, because we shall indeed eventually see…”


==============================

Second, a compromise with evil is not possible; and must under all circumstances be openly discredited.

Very well said.

Nor must our own passions and shortcomings be glossed over.

True, but if they are unrelated to the evil situation in question, they are irrelevant to the resolution of it and the discrediting of the perpetrator, and may only confuse an oftentimes far more clear issue.

IOW, pointing a finger inwards certainly may be necessary at times – but should never distract from when the fingers definitely ought to be pointed outwards. Even more importantly, it is essential that others not distract from the issue by doing this.

There is a time and a place to look at them together – and a time and a place to hold them separate.

If a person is grievously physically injured, for example, there is simply no excusing the perpetrator who has caused this injury by his deliberate actions, and it is irrelevant what the injured party may have done because inflicting a nonaccidental injury is entirely under the control of the perpetrator. It’s like no one makes anyone rape someone else, no matter what they may have been doing before it happens. No one makes another perform any other manner of evil or harmful deed. That responsibility lies entirely with the person who causes the harm.

If one is himself the perpetrator of a harm, of course, then not glossing over it (and not blaming the victim for it or accusing him of lying about it) it is certainly the only appropriate course of action.

Indeed, it is incumbent upon said perpetrator, if he is an honest person and wishes to be so perceived, to own up to what he has done without excuses.

Amazingly, sometimes all it takes is an honest apology to rectify even some of the most grievous of situations, even when vast amounts of documentation as to the cause of the problem exist.

Therefore it is important to begin at home, to be on guard in our own persons against the faults we have branded.

Just so.

It is also important to recognize, if an outsider to the situation, that these “faults we have branded” (and here we are, of course, discussing lying about a harm done) may lie (so to speak) far more in the home of the party doing the open branding than that of the one so accused.

Sometimes, large amounts of documentation exist that prove who is actually doing the branding and who ought to be the one justly discredited, if one but consults the blamed party who is so branded a liar. Not all accusations of lies are themselves the truth as in the parable told in the OP – and many such accusations can be readily so proven to be the actual falsehoods.

And indeed, in the end, the real truth will tend to out eventually…

Sociopaths in the Scene

“What is a sociopath?

“Someone without conscience, empathy, or remorse for having harmed someone by their words or deeds. They live to suit themselves and use people in the power games that form the core of their lives. These people are often diagnosed as having Antisocial Personality Disorder (Stout, 2005).”   -Ponygroom

Ponygroom has written a very nice piece about sociopaths in the scene, complete with a very good list of books about the subject.  You can read his post and the subsequent comments in a thread in the group of the same name on Fetlife at https://fetlife.com/groups/45394/group_posts/2350167.

As I pointed out in a comment there, this is only one way in which abuse can manifest itself, and the article is not complete in terms of what constitutes a sociopath, nor do the examples provide a particularly complete picture, but between the article itself and some of the other comments, it’s a good start on one of the more common patterns that underlie abusive behavior.  At some point, I may go into more detail, but I don’t have the energy right now.

Bottom line – sociopaths don’t care about you, no matter what they say, even if they are the type who will at least apologize for harming you when they see that it is in their better interest to do so. Most simply won’t apologize at times you’d expect a normal person to do so – and they won’t apologize for not apologizing if you call them on it, either.  If they do, it will be obviously insincere.

Get out once you identify this kind of pattern going on, because nothing is ever going to change.

These people are snakes of the first water, and you will absolutely never win trying to negotiate with them.  They will twist and distort everything you say, and change their own stories time and time again, and even go out of their way to make you think that you are the crazy one (gaslighting), to the point that you will end up apologizing to them when they have hurt you!

Another little trick they often play is warning others about how you may be lying about them and their behavior – another little device to undermine you and pull the support over to their side.

If you know someone (A) who has been abused, and the person they accuse (B) starts telling you things like you are going to start hearing lies from (A) about (B), think twice before believing (B).

This is an absolutely classic technique for undermining a victim and turning people against her.  Chances are extremely good that this person is in fact the abuser they are accused of being, mounting an offensive in advance, in an attempt to discredit his victim, before he can be busted, which he knows darn well is coming.  He knows he will end up looking really bad (and rightfully so) unless he can discredit her first, before she gets to their friends.

I’m not talking about people who, in the course of a normal conversation about the subject, may disclose that their ex has been spreading lies about them, but particularly about the ones who actually go out of their way to make this kind of announcement, possibly even in public, often in the absence of any reasonable context.