Freedom to Express

Speaking in Tongues

I'm going to present an overview of an ongoing child sexual molestation case in a bit. First though I need to provide some background to explain why I am interested in this.

I am trying to advance the position that their should be financial redress for child abuse perpetrated by parents. I'm going even further than this, I'm saying that the abuse standard sets the bar too high. I say that their should be redress any time a child is being used. By this I mean any time parents are using a child in order to gain adult identity, social legitimacy, or to keep a marriage together. What is the test for this? I say that it should be simply that there is animosity.

So in doing this I am intentionally attacking the self-reliance ethic. People say things like, "Your parents don't own you anything", "It's their money", and "You have to rely on yourself". I do not agree with any of this. I have had to endure harsh online treatment over this, but I still don't agree. I say that all it amounts to is an exoneration scheme for parents who have themselves acted in Bad Faith.

No, I don't equate this with severe abuse cases, but I still say that it is important that the parents be penalized and the child vindicated. Further, I feel that most of the exploitation of children is legitimated by the self-reliance ethic. So I am opposed to this and opposed to all the ways it plays out in our ethics, economics, and legal system.

I say that children should have rights, and these include rights to economic and social support independent of the family. When someone has used a child as property, even had a child for this reason, then they should be penalized and the child compensated and vindicated.

As such I have been trying to locate Comrades, those who share similar views and are working to advance them. In particular I want to know of attorneys who are trying to find ways of advancing such an agenda.

At a minimum I say that disinheritance should be prohibited. My understanding of this is that in Europe it is this way already. But I don't know this.

Here is a law firm in Vancouver which is working to establish the idea that family dysfunction is cause for litigation.
http://www.disinherited.com/article/dys ... l-families

In an effort to pursue this and learn of works going on, I have interacted with those fighting for justice in the area of Catholic Clergy Sexual Abuse. I have learned of some of the attorneys involved and have talked with activists. As I see it, clergy abuse and family abuse are closely related, as the Catholic Church seems to do little more than promote the Good Family, and this alone constitutes child exploitation. I have found though that the Clergy Abuse activists have little to contribute to what I want to advance, and are made very uncomfortable by the subject.

So I learned of a paternal molestation case on going, where I casually know both parents. Of particular importance to me is the black sheeping of this eldest daughter. I finally got the chance to read the file. First, it is a religious fundamentalist family. Second, the father earns his living as a motivational speaker. Third, I only know about it because the father confided in me. What he told me matches with what it says in the case file.

Their church is something which I find deeply disturbing, a kind of insanity. They also hold motivational events in their church. So just issues one and two are for me cause for concern about the family, and I believe their 5 children should have de-programming services offered to them.

Item three is important because I have had misgivings about investigating something told to me in confidence. But there is an over riding concern here for me. I see myself as an activist, or want to be activist in this area. What the father told me was that all of this is caused by this eldest daughter. He blames her own history of drugs, alcohol, and promiscuity as being the whole reason this case exists. He says that she turned the two younger girls against him. His defense attorneys have submitted big reports trying to disqualify police video recordings of interviews. But they also claim that this daughter hates her father, and that some how this makes their client innocent.

Well, "hates her father" is my turf. That is, I say that animosity is evidence of the child having been used, exploited, and is by itself cause for compensation.

I cannot judge the criminal charges, but I heard the black sheeping myself.

I read this case and I see that it will proceed. It is not clear to me that there ever will be a civil case for the children to claim financial compensation.

I am reading an excellent book by Louise Armstrong, Rocking the Cradle of Sexual Politics, What Happened When Women Said Incest. She shows how most of the responses still blame the victims and she also claims that male incest is still being treated like a prerogative. So she sees the solution as having to involve political action. I agree with her and I am learning.

Let me anticipate one more objection, the claim that I might be intruding in something. Court cases and their files are public information. Anyone in the world who wants to can go to the court house and read the file, and if they wish to, sit in on the trial. I probably won't sit in on the trial because I don't have anything to add to it. But I am interested in their being civil redress. As all of this is a matter of politics, it has to be handled publicly.

So I've finally gotten to read the case file. I know I've been too long on the periphery of the legal system when I recognize the names of all of the police officers, the judge, and the prosecutor. Some of these people I have had personal dealings with. When I go to the court house, I recognize prosecutors and defense attorneys. Some of them must recognize me.

Of particular note in this case is that they used a different police detective to interview each family member. I recognize this kiddie room the police have set up. No, its not the bare light bulb hanging from the ceiling. It has plush carpeting, a sofa and coffee table, and there are lots of stuffed animals and toys.

The lead police detective and principle author of the report is someone I met 20 years ago. I was particularly taken with his abilities in dealing with different sorts of people and sensitive situations. He tried to diffuse racial prejudice and fear of gangs. He extended himself to talk an elderly woman into not accepting back a man who was using her. This had been a man who I also found to be completely unacceptable in some of his doings. I also extended myself to try and persuade the woman not to accept him back. This young officer educated many people in a positive way about police. Since, I've noticed his name on things from time to time. Now I see that he is the lead detective in this molestation case.

So let me lay out some of the parameters. The youngest of the three girls somehow ended up talking to a councilor at some sort of a youth center. Well, in times past they didn't have such youth centers or such councilors. This councilor was just a young intern, someone who probably wouldn't want to extend herself very far.

Well, this 8th grade girl talked about this and that, and said much about what her father had been doing with the eldest daughter.

In times past this would have just been dismissed. Here it was not. This young intern did exactly what the law requires. She wrote it up and faxed it to Police and Child Protective Services.

Things are not as they used to be.

Now this eldest daughter no longer lived with her parents and sisters. She lived in a different city. But soon Police were in contact with her and CPS was making a well being check on the family. What would follow would be the police doing careful interviews of everyone separately, and using different police officers to handle each family member.

So as you can see, so far I am liking this very much!

I'm going now to do my best to present this in as tactful a way as possible. I don't have to be as explicit as the police report is.

*********************************************************************************************
WARNING, GRAPHIC SEXUAL MOLESTATION INFORMATION
*********************************************************************************************

Most of this pertains to what the father had been doing with the eldest daughter from when she was age 8 until age 16. At age 16 I think she found someway to get out or something. Not sure.

He was fondling her all over, on a regular basis. Often it was in the context of giving her a massage in her underwear. He also referred to it as the "tickling game". She says this was done many hundreds of times. She did not feel that she could refuse. She would just try to keep her legs together to minimize it.

Once he directed her to change into her swimming suit for a "new game". This new game involved the use of string, beads, feathers, and also a serrated steak knife.

He has admitted to all of this. The mother has admitted to knowledge of this as well.

This guy has manic mood swings. He accepts a psychiatric diagnosis. When he has these swings he is known to often be grabbing at the girls, touching them all places. Sometimes he apologizes the next day.

He is always watching them dress and undress. He says to them, "Hey its okay, I'm your dad."

The youngest girl described him as "creepy".

When the eldest girl was 16 they took to strip searching her. This was led by the father, with the mother standing right there. They were concerned about her smuggling drugs in and out of the house, probably marijuana. This searching also included looking under the sanitary napkin stuck with adhesive to her underpants. This so angered her that she threw her underpants at her father. The mother and father have admitted to this strip searching and have tired to justify it.

********************************************************************
CONCLUSION
********************************************************************

When police came for him, he was in his car and had turned the ignition on. Police blocked his car. When they were putting the bracelets on him, the wife lamented that he is their only source of income ( they live quite well ) and speaking of the eldest daughter's upcoming wedding, "Who will walk her down the aisle?"

Police did not have to include these statements of the wife in their report, but I'm glad that they did.

This man has a spotless record. I've checked it myself. His only income is from motivational speaking and from his "coaching" clients.

He has been charged with 6 felonies. These address that fact that the children were in his care, that this was a repeat practice, and that there was some physical coercion involved, and recognition of their young ages. If convicted on all counts the maximum sentence could exceed 50 years.

Since he has been out on $500k bail, and he has paid $25k to an extremely high power law firm which specializes in sex crime defense. They lead their promotionals with talk of child sex abuse cases. They have been extremely busy trying to sink this case before it can get to a jury. They have already been able to delay it for 2 years. Usually case files don't have much except the police report before they go to trial. This law firm writes big inch thick glossy reports saying that the digital video recording evidence is bad. So the file is about 5 inches thick already.

The eldest daughter helped to get the two younger ones removed and then placed into her care. Since a married couple has been designated as their legal guardians.

The mother has been doing the leg work for this law firm. That is, she is the one who serves the DA's office with all the motions for delay and additional discovery.

The replies are written in the name of the elected DA, and authored by a prosecutor who seems specialized in these sorts of issues. The man who will be prosecuting at trial is merciless and experienced in child sex abuse crimes. The judge is someone who will have no sympathy for such a defendant. Neither of them will be intimidated by what to me seem like bullying tactics coming from this law firm.

The wife spends her time painting an elaborate mural on the walls of their church's kiddie room. I know of this case because the father confided it to me.

He blames the eldest daughter and her own problems with sex, drugs, and alcohol. The high power law firm presents pretty much the same narrative.

What I have heard from the church members is that they blame the Police Dept for making a case where there should be none.


Enough for now.

People will be reading this who have grown up in different decades and who live in different countries, where practices may be different. Before I say what my emotional reaction is to all of this, I am interested to hear what others think.

BO

http://theexploitedunited.onlinewebshop.net/
http://freedomtoexpress.freeforums.org/

Louise Armstrong
Rocking the Cradle of Sexual Politics, What Happened When Women Said Incest

What follows is a reply to someone on another forum, redacted just a bit to protect that party's privacy.

**********************************************

Thank you for sharing that. I am sorry that such things are in the background of your father and that you have had to be exposed to the enduring aspects of such a legacy.

I don't support the concept of "dysfunctional family", as this is still based on the idea that there is some sort of "normal family" and so it amounts to reification. That is, one is worshiping the Good Family.

Instead I talk about exploitation and Bad Faith. Someone is living in Bad Faith when they have other choices, but decline to admit it. This statement from your paternal grandfather is a prime example of that, "**************************."

FWIW, when I was about 3yo, still not exploring outside the house by myself, my father walked me to a school playground about two blocks away. Then he said, "I could leave you here." I asked him why, and he said, "Because I could." I was terrified. After that I never felt secure around my father again. Even to this day I can still feel that fear of him and a need to please him. As I look back over the decades and into what remained of my childhood, I can see that this rejection from him has shaped all of my interactions with him, and really shaped my entire life.

If a statement like this was just an aberration, reflective of a poor choice of words on his part, or just my own misunderstanding of him, then his real feelings would have been obvious and the misunderstanding corrected. But no, what he said was an accurate expression of how he really felt, and that has never changed.

I could say that such a parent should burn in Hell for all eternity. But the fact is, he already burns during this lifetime. Problem is, he is still able to hurt others along the way, and he does so, and he thinks he is right. I don't see that anything will ever change until their is redress, until parents are held responsible whenever they have used a child.

Some years later he would say that I am his pet. I questioned this, and again he just responded by affirming that it is true. He meant that I was like a dog or a cat.

Now of course this was when my mother was not around. She would not let him say things like that and would not say such herself. But still, what she actually felt was not that much different. For her, having children and keeping up the appearance of a Good Family were obligations.

What I am talking about, and what I read in your share, are children being used, exploited.

My own interest here is in finding ways to seek legal redress. I say that if a child has been used, then the parents are responsible. In practice what this should mean is that they have to pay. That is, they cannot exit with money or assets. They used a child, so they should be pauperized.

The kind of economically and socially isolated family of the age of industrial capitalism is most certainly a strange entity. While some people may think its just fine, if a child has been exploited, and if there is evidence for this in the resulting animosity, then the parents should be made to pay. They did not have to practice the family system. Nothing forced them to do this. So if they did and and there was harm, then they should pay. All sorts of things can be overlooked, but not the exploitation of a child.

I also notice in your story how central is the making of money. For my parents, holding onto money was important. The type of bad faith living I am focused on is a phenomenon of the middle class, that is people who have at least something.

What the Family System seems designed to do is to instill the Self-Reliance Ethic. It instills this, just like a primitive society might use hot coals or sharp stones to make scars.

So of course then, when people have a problem with the family, the usual response is simply to say, "Oh well, now I rely on myself." What this amounts to is exoneration of the parents, giving them a free pass, letting them claim that they did right. Self-Reliance is seen as the moral basis for even being able to make a criticism of one's parents.

Claiming redress on the other hand is much more difficult. One actually has to face the pain. One also has to see all the ways society tries to make such redress impossible.

What I want are lawyers who are trying to find ways to sue over an increasingly broad class of family issues. I want lawyers who are trying to find ways to make the US like many other countries by blocking disinheritance. In trying to find this, the going has been tough. Facing how we have been used is the hardest thing any of us can ever do. It is far easier to seek nirvana or enlightenment and. then to learn to live in the small corner of the world which is left when one has been so violated. The pain is incredible, all the more so when you see how society sanctions this exploitation of children and provides no redress. Rather it exonerates the parents and blames the child.

So what can one do? Well, most people are just like their parents. If they got beat over the head, the first thing they will do is have a child whom they can beat over the head. If tricky games where plaid with them, they will play games with a child of their own. If their parents read books which promoted parenthood, giving them license to use a child, then they will do the same. New books are published every few years. In my day it was Benjamin Spock. Now the new books deal with things like "attachment", "empathy", and "nurturing". Get the lingo down and you are authorized to make a child be responsible for your adult identity!

So the thing to look for is animosity. Sometimes for some reason you find people who have extreme animosity towards their parents. For some reason they are not in denial, and not 100% like their parents. When this is found, it is evidence that the parents have used the child, have lived in Bad Faith. The thing to do then is to sue.

You spoke about Pentecostals. Well what Pentecostalism is is simply a most extreme form of non-denominational Protestantism, where they take the Bible as a prescription. I have noticed that among Pentecostals that the most important aspect of faith is an external pronouncement of loyalty, "Are you a Christian? Are you Saved?" A very high percentage of the congregation will have had a serious history with drugs or alcohol. They tell their stories of Getting Saved.

So to me, the stories sound like the substituting one addiction for another. I am always telling them, "People who have been treated with dignity and respect and given the chance to develop and apply their abilities are not likely to become substance addicts. So I don't go along with this idea that alcoholics and addicts have some special need for redemption."

I have also noticed that in their families they always have a Black Sheep. They say things like, "So I have to wonder, did he/she really get Saved or not?" They even say this after the person has died at a very early age. I find it all to be extremely disturbing.

So what drew me to this molestation case was the strong animosity between this eldest daughter and her father, and the irrefutable confirmation of this in the father's black sheeping of her.

I am still a beginner here, and so I am not sure how I feel about the 50 year plus sentence that the state wants to give him. I just want him to get a smaller sentence, but then I want the money to go to the children.

I don't have anything to contribute to the criminal proceeding. But maybe I could get myself involved by finding a suitable lawyer who will get that money for the children. Maybe I could find some source of deprogramming from Born Again Christianity, and from a lot of other stuff, because these three daughters must be in need of emotional support to follow this through and destroy their father. Maybe this could be a place for me to finally be able to draw blood, and be the beginning of an ever expanding campaign to hold parents responsible for the ways they exploit children.

Vachss, Angela Doe case:
http://www.vachss.com/guest_dispatches/ ... le_11.html

BO
portal page: http://theexploitedunited.onlinewebshop.net

This is a bit of a clarification I wrote for someone. I really want to know what people think about this molestation case.

Here I repeat my attempt to tactfully summarize what it says in the police report:

*********************************************************************************************
WARNING, GRAPHIC SEXUAL MOLESTATION INFORMATION
*********************************************************************************************

I'm going now to do my best to present this in as tactful a way as possible. I don't have to be as explicit as the police report is.

Most of this pertains to what the father had been doing with the eldest daughter from when she was age 8 until age 16. At age 16 I think she found someway to get out or something. Not sure.

He was fondling her all over, on a regular basis. Often it was in the context of giving her a massage in her underwear. He also referred to it as the "tickling game". She says this was done many hundreds of times. She did not feel that she could refuse. She would just try to keep her legs together to minimize it.

Once he directed her to change into her swimming suit for a "new game". This new game involved the use of string, beads, feathers, and also a serrated steak knife.

He has admitted to all of this. The mother has admitted to knowledge of this as well.

This guy has manic mood swings. He accepts a psychiatric diagnosis. When he has these swings he is known to often be grabbing at the girls, touching them all places. Sometimes he apologizes the next day.

He is always watching them dress and undress. He says to them, "Hey its okay, I'm your dad."

The youngest girl described him as "creepy".

When the eldest girl was 16 they took to strip searching her. This was led by the father, with the mother standing right there. They were concerned about her smuggling drugs in and out of the house, probably marijuana. This searching also included looking under the sanitary napkin stuck with adhesive to her underpants. This so angered her that she threw her underpants at her father. The mother and father have admitted to this strip searching and have tired to justify it.

********************************************************************
CONCLUSION
********************************************************************

So our DA's Office has charged this guy with 6 felonies. These recognize that this was a child he had regular access to and that the practice was being repeated, and that there may have been some physical coercion involved in some aspects of this. If convicted on all counts the maximum sentence he could receive exceeds 50 years.

Is this what you mean by a long sentence? Do you think this is right in this situation? What sentence do you think he should get? This is what I really want to know. I just want to know what other people think, as I am a beginner here, but I am going to get myself into the middle of this.

The police report was more graphic than what I wrote. I did not write it the way they did because I don't want to traffic in such texts, as I don't know how people might read them on the open net and on these sorts of forums. The police wrote it the way they did, because they had to under the circumstances.

I am greatly offended by what this man did. I am also offended by the mother and by their entire church. I am offended by the acts, and also by the attitudes which try to justify and legitimate them.

A curious thing, a few days ago this defendant just happened to sit down across from me at a table in a library. He was using his laptop computer. I spoke to him in a friendly way.

I take great exception to this guy's religion, and to all the attitudes which underlie it. I also take exception to the way he projects this into his occupation of motivational speaking. But beyond that, I have found him and his wife to be nice, though kooky. They extended themselves to come to court for another case which I am concerned with, when they did not need to. If they could impose the judgemental standards of their religion onto other people, then I would consider them dangerous. As it stands now though, they are only dangerous when they can use a parental authority to impose their religion based predjudice.

So I have some reservations about aiding in their destruction, about inserting myself into this matter. But on the other hand, it is something I care about deeply. Also, I heard the guy black sheeping the eldest daughter. He spoke directly to me and did this. He said that the whole case is based on false accusations and that the reason for this is this daughter's own problems with sex, drugs, and alcohol from the age of 16. He said she was even having sex in the bushes in the park. He also blames her for turning the two younger daughters against him. He said that what she has done with them since they were transfered into her custody has been."Pure malice!" By this time he was pacing back and forth and making lots of gestures.

Well sorry guy, you stepped into my territory. At least it is territory I want to advance into. As far as I am concerned that sort of denigration, black sheeping, is by itself cause for redress.

I asked him about the "false accusations", I said, "Do you mean there is no substantial basis to the claims, or do you mean that it is a matter of misinterpretation?"

"It's a matter of misinterpretation."

So its like it says in the police report, he generally admits to what is being claimed. What it seems then is that he just rationalizes this some way as being in some different category than sexual molestation, and as being a parental perrogative. What it comes down to is this is the role he sees himself as authorized by God Almighty to fulfill. This is why he has children and this is why he practices the Family System.

So again, what sentence do you think he should get?

What could be added to what the cops and DA are already doing? What could I possibly do here? First I wish there were some deprogramming resources available. These girls need help in deconstructing all the ideology behind Born Again Christianity, the Good Family, and Motivationalism. Second, looking at this as a beginner I still am not exicted about this guy getting a real long sentence. Rather, I just want the children to get the money. These are the areas where I think it could be possible that I could locate resources which would help.

And yes, I do want to completely pauperize these parents. I think their assets should even be seized before they can be handed over to his high powered Sex Offender Defender. I mean, this is how they do it in Narcotics and Escort Service cases, they deem the assets proceeds of illegality, and they are able to seize them.

Well, these assets are the proceeds of Bourgeois Family Happiness Inc., an enterprise which exploits children. So they should not be able to retain control of those assets and use them to hire a specialist law firm.


Right to Kill (1985)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KflGXruJRc

Foster care reform litigation:
http://www.youthlaw.org/publications/fc_docket/

Becoming Other
Exploited Children United, new portal page:
http://theexploitedunited.onlinewebshop.net

Here someone wrote to me at length about a "dark side", so I've responded:


********, thank you for posting that. It is interesting and shows deep reflection. If I am understanding you then, you wrote that yourself. It is touching.

You talk much about a dark side. I look at things rather differently than you do. I don't fear what is in my dark side, or in other people's dark sides. This is not something I see a need to be concerned with. More than anything I have worked hard on myself to learn not to be moralistic. I am not saying I am there yet, but I have made a great deal of progress. The key will be when I start scoring some victories. I call this, "taking scalps".

As I see it, the moralistic view and the fear of a dark side is something associated with religion, and also with Sigmund Freud.

Century of Self
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmUzwRCyTSo

Freud's idea, you might just listen to 1 minute of this:
http://youtu.be/OmUzwRCyTSo?t=4m
"unearthed powerful sexual and aggressive forces"
"feelings we repressed because they were too dangerous"


In 1914 Freud was in Austria and watched hostilities erupt and denounced these "primitive forces" which had been unleashed. I do not agree with him, not at all. Though I would never endorse the Central Powers side of WWI, I do not see "primitive forces" as the problem. Rather I see things like monarchy and capitalism as the problem. So in criticizing ordinary soldiers, Freud is just plain wrong. Freud is laying the ground work for a doctrine of disengagement, of nirvana seeking.



Even today, psychoanalysis still denigrates aggression and sexuality, sees them as something which must be overcome, sublimated or harnessed. It finds fault anytime they are demonstrated. So psychoanalysis is just another type of religion, another way of refusing to engage.



Rather than responding with fear or by postulating good over evil, I look here to this. It provides an alternate way of responding to the world as it is experienced.



White's main page
http://web.williams.edu/wp-etc/philosophy/awhite/



Some 20 years ago when White's book came out someone I know gave an excellent talk, about Nihilism. Its one I keep coming back to.


If you might just read these three short portions of White's book,

Nihilism section of Within Nietzsche's Labyrinth:
http://web.williams.edu/wp-etc/philosop ... frames.htm
http://web.williams.edu/wp-etc/philosop ... frames.htm
http://web.williams.edu/wp-etc/philosop ... frames.htm



White is interpreting Nietzsche's unpublished literary works, his Nachlass, commonly titled as "Will to Power". White sees the central idea as being nihilism and its transformations. He identifies 3 stages:



1. Religious Nihilism

2. Radical Nihilism

3. Complete Nihilism



I will try here to summarize what White says, and then offer my own take.



Religious Nihilism



Based on the sense that this world as it is does not have a right to exist, but needs some sort of other worldly justification. Needs some external categories or ideals, some sort of purpose. Nihilism begins with the failure of this attempt to endow the world with this external purpose.



While this most certainly is a type of nihilism, its adherents would deny that they are nihilists. Long ago I recognized that in the areas of self-help, motivationalism, enlightenment seeking, and most especially recovery, this is the sort of thinking which dominates. I would also include here moralisms and concern about a "dark side".



Radical Nihilism



Nihilism becomes conscious or avowed when one realizes that these sources of external value are absent. They see the problem as being that nothing in our world corresponds to these highest values. Though they still do not deny the values themselves. They still believe in the categories. So even Radial Nihilism is not that radical. As they are horrified by what they see and forced to draw a verdict, they become avowed nihilists.



Complete Nihilism



One becomes a complete nihilist only when one has completed nihilism, when one has ceased to be a nihilist. Complete nihilism comes from an acceptance of the world as it is, and with the intention of engaging with it and shaping it.





So rather than follow doctrines of disengagement and resignation ( "You can't change other people, you can only change yourself" "Live and Let Live" ) I want people to band together and gain power, the power to vanquish foes. I'm not issuing a call to enlightenment seeking, I'm issuing a call to band together and seize power by inflicting consequence.



If you have been exploited by the Family System, then right now you stand alone because other people are not doing anything about it. They are claiming that they feel your pain, but this is just commiseration, really its just pity. They are hurting you, because they cannot face the pain of what was done to them. Most of all, they cannot face how our society condones such child exploitation. I want none of this. Instead I want people who want to fight, who want to band together and seize power, to actually enforce, to impose severe consequence upon those who use children.



Rather than follow things like psychoanalysis and religion, I want to restore my ability to fight, and my ability to fuck.



Now, about this current religious fundamentalist fatherly molestation case, what do people think about it. What troubles me most is the 50 year sentence that this guy could receive. I am having a hard time with this. You've read my description of the police report. What do you think about it?



How about my betraying a confidence, the fact that I would not know of this case unless the defendant decided to make me his confidant and disclosed it to me, and then my jumping into it and trying to influence it against him?



What I am more interested in than the criminal prosecution, is getting the children to sue for money. Any thoughts about this?



One of the problems here is that I am only hearing from the father, as he tries to defend himself. I want to operate from the child's perspective, and I do not have that. Yes, I have researched these people online, and they do have a significant presence. But I still am not able to taste their animosity. The child's animosity is after all just the bad faith of the parents. I have identified that as the indicator of when to strike. Here, I do not have that. Other social circumstances prevent me from openly approaching them. So my communication will have to be one which invites them to be open to their own animosity and to let that guide them. Any thoughts about this?


http://theexploitedunited.onlinewebshop.net/
BO

Rolling Stones ( with Mick Taylor )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSjT1JBL ... re=related

Here someone wrote to me at length about a "dark side", so I've responded:


********, thank you for posting that. It is interesting and shows deep reflection. If I am understanding you then, you wrote that yourself. It is touching.

You talk much about a dark side. I look at things rather differently than you do. I don't fear what is in my dark side, or in other people's dark sides. This is not something I see a need to be concerned with. More than anything I have worked hard on myself to learn not to be moralistic. I am not saying I am there yet, but I have made a great deal of progress. The key will be when I start scoring some victories. I call this, "taking scalps".

As I see it, the moralistic view and the fear of a dark side is something associated with religion, and also with Sigmund Freud.

Century of Self
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmUzwRCyTSo

Freud's idea, you might just listen to 1 minute of this:
http://youtu.be/OmUzwRCyTSo?t=4m
"unearthed powerful sexual and aggressive forces"
"feelings we repressed because they were too dangerous"


In 1914 Freud was in Austria and watched hostilities erupt and denounced these "primitive forces" which had been unleashed. I do not agree with him, not at all. Though I would never endorse the Central Powers side of WWI, I do not see "primitive forces" as the problem. Rather I see things like monarchy and capitalism as the problem. So in criticizing ordinary soldiers, Freud is just plain wrong. Freud is laying the ground work for a doctrine of disengagement, of nirvana seeking.



Even today, psychoanalysis still denigrates aggression and sexuality, sees them as something which must be overcome, sublimated or harnessed. It finds fault anytime they are demonstrated. So psychoanalysis is just another type of religion, another way of refusing to engage.



Rather than responding with fear or by postulating good over evil, I look here to this. It provides an alternate way of responding to the world as it is experienced.



White's main page
http://web.williams.edu/wp-etc/philosophy/awhite/



Some 20 years ago when White's book came out someone I know gave an excellent talk, about Nihilism. Its one I keep coming back to.


If you might just read these three short portions of White's book,

Nihilism section of Within Nietzsche's Labyrinth:
http://web.williams.edu/wp-etc/philosop ... frames.htm
http://web.williams.edu/wp-etc/philosop ... frames.htm
http://web.williams.edu/wp-etc/philosop ... frames.htm



White is interpreting Nietzsche's unpublished literary works, his Nachlass, commonly titled as "Will to Power". White sees the central idea as being nihilism and its transformations. He identifies 3 stages:



1. Religious Nihilism

2. Radical Nihilism

3. Complete Nihilism



I will try here to summarize what White says, and then offer my own take.



Religious Nihilism



Based on the sense that this world as it is does not have a right to exist, but needs some sort of other worldly justification. Needs some external categories or ideals, some sort of purpose. Nihilism begins with the failure of this attempt to endow the world with this external purpose.



While this most certainly is a type of nihilism, its adherents would deny that they are nihilists. Long ago I recognized that in the areas of self-help, motivationalism, enlightenment seeking, and most especially recovery, this is the sort of thinking which dominates. I would also include here moralisms and concern about a "dark side".



Radical Nihilism



Nihilism becomes conscious or avowed when one realizes that these sources of external value are absent. They see the problem as being that nothing in our world corresponds to these highest values. Though they still do not deny the values themselves. They still believe in the categories. So even Radial Nihilism is not that radical. As they are horrified by what they see and forced to draw a verdict, they become avowed nihilists.



Complete Nihilism



One becomes a complete nihilist only when one has completed nihilism, when one has ceased to be a nihilist. Complete nihilism comes from an acceptance of the world as it is, and with the intention of engaging with it and shaping it.





So rather than follow doctrines of disengagement and resignation ( "You can't change other people, you can only change yourself" "Live and Let Live" ) I want people to band together and gain power, the power to vanquish foes. I'm not issuing a call to enlightenment seeking, I'm issuing a call to band together and seize power by inflicting consequence.



If you have been exploited by the Family System, then right now you stand alone because other people are not doing anything about it. They are claiming that they feel your pain, but this is just commiseration, really its just pity. They are hurting you, because they cannot face the pain of what was done to them. Most of all, they cannot face how our society condones such child exploitation. I want none of this. Instead I want people who want to fight, who want to band together and seize power, to actually enforce, to impose severe consequence upon those who use children.



Rather than follow things like psychoanalysis and religion, I want to restore my ability to fight, and my ability to fuck.



Now, about this current religious fundamentalist fatherly molestation case, what do people think about it. What troubles me most is the 50 year sentence that this guy could receive. I am having a hard time with this. You've read my description of the police report. What do you think about it?



How about my betraying a confidence, the fact that I would not know of this case unless the defendant decided to make me his confidant and disclosed it to me, and then my jumping into it and trying to influence it against him?



What I am more interested in than the criminal prosecution, is getting the children to sue for money. Any thoughts about this?



One of the problems here is that I am only hearing from the father, as he tries to defend himself. I want to operate from the child's perspective, and I do not have that. Yes, I have researched these people online, and they do have a significant presence. But I still am not able to taste their animosity. The child's animosity is after all just the bad faith of the parents. I have identified that as the indicator of when to strike. Here, I do not have that. Other social circumstances prevent me from openly approaching them. So my communication will have to be one which invites them to be open to their own animosity and to let that guide them. Any thoughts about this?


http://theexploitedunited.onlinewebshop.net/
BO

Rolling Stones ( with Mick Taylor )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSjT1JBL ... re=related

BO to Forum, What if I Cannot Act?

I don't mean just in this case, but what if I cannot act in any case?

Then I am a pillow punching recovery movement neurotic. There I am, confessing on the couch, turning it all into personal pathology and disclosing my intentions so that they are neutralized. My therapist is telling me about how horrible the family I grew up in was, and she is instructing me about communications skills, about empathy, about nurturing, and about attachment. She is assuring me that life can be different for me if I can learn the ways of the Good Family. I can be redeemed. She might also suggest verious New Age Churches I might start attending.

I come to accept this, and I begin to denigrate anyone who does not accept this teaching of feel good, who does not disclose everything about themselves in a confessional manner, and who does not learn the concepts which legitimate the Good Family.

I let my therapist lead me in histrionic venting rituals which resemble exorcisms. I project everything back to infancy, and still earlier.

Never do I seek to redress the wrongs done to me, or to anybody else. Never do I seek to make common cause with others and act against people. Rather I seek nirvana and try to avoid conflict.

I become a recovery movement online forum moderator, so that instead of striking against actual perpetrators, those who use children in order to gain for themselves an adult identity, instead I can exercise arbitrary authority over anyone on the online forum who does not accept the premises of the recovery movement and who does not venerate the Good Family. This sort of power is my subsitute for all the devestation and wreckage in my own life.

Becoming Other
Exploited Children United, new portal page:
http://theexploitedunited.onlinewebshop.net

BO to Forum, What if I Cannot Act?

I don't mean just in this case, but what if I cannot act in any case?

Then I am a pillow punching recovery movement neurotic. There I am, confessing on the couch, turning it all into personal pathology and disclosing my intentions so that they are neutralized. My therapist is telling me about how horrible the family I grew up in was, and she is instructing me about communications skills, about empathy, about nurturing, and about attachment. She is assuring me that life can be different for me if I can learn the ways of the Good Family. I can be redeemed. She might also suggest various New Age Churches I might start attending.

I come to accept this, and I begin to denigrate anyone who does not accept this teaching of feel good, who does not disclose everything about themselves in a confessional manner, and who does not learn the concepts which legitimate the Good Family.

I let my therapist lead me in histrionic venting rituals which resemble exorcisms. I project everything back to infancy, and still earlier.

Never do I seek to redress the wrongs done to me, or to anybody else. Never do I seek to make common cause with others and act against people. Rather I seek nirvana and try to avoid conflict.

I become a recovery movement online forum moderator, so that instead of striking against actual perpetrators, those who use children in order to gain for themselves an adult identity, instead I can exercise arbitrary authority over anyone on the online forum who does not accept the premises of the recovery movement and who does not venerate the Good Family. This sort of power is my substitute for all the devestation and wreckage in my own life.

Becoming Other
Exploited Children United, new portal page:
http://theexploitedunited.onlinewebshop.net





Therapy and the Recovery Movement are things I am opposed to. It's all just preying on victims, profiting on their misery. It's the reason people don't fight back.
http://www.amazon.com/Against-Therapy-J ... rey+masson

****************************************************************************

BO to Forum, Further, What if I Cannot Act?

If I am to be a recovery movement neurotic, then what does that say about my ambitions in life? My highest life's ambition then is to ensnare yet another person into a co-dependent relationship. Why co-dependent? That's the only kind of relationship someone can have when they are not willing to lift a finger to restore their social and civil standing, to redress they ways they have been used; and such a relationship becomes the only thing they live for.

So if I am on my therapist's couch filling tissue papers with my snot, where then is my soul mate? Well, she would only accept my defeatist attitude towards life if she were doing the same. So she must be in the consulting room down the hall, with her own therapist. So we each confess and vent to our therapists. We meet each other and the dream is then that we each can be whole through the other. We each want to finally be "normal", be accepted. I don't really go along with the terminology of co-dependent, but this is what most call it. Been there, done that, many times.

Sad as it is, there is one saving grace. We are both so clingy and so marginalized, that it probably won't even work well enough for us to have children. If we did, then that would be even worse.

But never do we consider that it might be necessary to find allies and fight to restore our social and civil standings, that it might be necessary to vanquish foes, that demonstrating a willingness to fight could be the only way.

Some get lost in drugs or alcohol. For others its Born Again Christianity. For still others its psychotherapy or psychiatric medication. And then there is always the broader Recovery Movement. It doesn't matter because the effect is always the same, not being able to restore one's social and civil standing, not being able to fight back against the machinery used to exploit and oppress.

One is lectured to about the Good Family, and one turns their own experience into personal pathology. Some will even have children of their own. Like Daniel Mackler says, they do this so they can act out. And that pretty much sums up this current religious fundamentalist molestation case, as far as I can see.

Daniel Mackler might sound to some like a radical. But listen to him carefully and notice that he still believes in the Good Family. It is still the standard against which he measures human agency. He has just placed it so high that it is unattainable. So while I agree with much Mackler says, there are still big differences. Its like I've always said, there are serious philosophical problems with all of that which arises from a psychoanalytic background.

Some have suggested that I want to get involved in this religious fundamentalist molestation case in order to get a feeling of power. Nothing could be further from the truth. I don't want a feeling of power, or of anything else. If I wanted that, I'd be submitting to my therapist, as it is therapists who offer feelings. No, what I want is to demonstrate power by hurting someone so bad that I earn a name for myself and start to draw comrades instead of commiserators. I want to move myself out of the ranks of pillow punchers by committing some dramatic acts. I want bragging rights, and I want comrades so that we can move on to even greater deeds.

Its not just a "feeling", as that's back in the realm of nirvana seeking. Substituting feelings for tangible results is what keeps people locked into the arena of co-dependent relationships and personal pathology.

No, this defendant is younger than me and he could receive a state prison sentence which exceeds his life expectancy. His record is spotless. He had never even been in the county jail before. If I am to be involved, then it is to support the victim witnesses in following through with what they have to do, and then to support them to go further by filing a lawsuit. I want them to sue both of their parents, sue them right down to the fillings in their teeth.

I want to be able to claim a role in this. Its not for any sort of a feeling, its to build a name for myself, to build a resume. It's what I'd like to be able to call, "taking scalps". Becoming active instead of passive changes my relationship to our society. It makes for me a place, and it makes me worthy of issuing the call for comrades.

This defendant was offered a plea agreement. All things considered, I think it was quite attractive and that he was a fool not to take it. Problem is, he's getting sun rays rammed up his ass by his high powered sex offender defender. He actually thinks that some liberties police and prosecutors took with the evidence, bad as that is, somehow discredits the three witnesses against him, his own daughters.

He says that taking the plea would ruin his reputation. What he does not know is that his reputation is already ruined because I know about the matter and I will publicize it. I would do this for no other reason than that I want to fight back against his Christian Fundamentalist denomination.

Mackler talks about parental confrontations and I think he is right on. He does a very good job of explaining the defenses which will go up. Well what is happening here in this religious fundamentalist case is that the parental denial is playing out in the courts and with the high powered defense attorney fanning it, while lining his own pockets.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ua47SXnthxA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVrPgatTWS8

I think Mackler is right on about the parental denial. But beyond that I break with him. Mackler's overall message is that confrontation is too difficult to try and better avoided. I do not agree. You have to try it. More that that, you have to succeed. So you cannot act alone and it cannot be just words. There has to be some sort of muscle behind it. You have to win because otherwise you live in a perpetual state of exploitation and abuse. This is what "Recovery" is. People who accept the Recovery Movement denigrate others in order to discourage them from fighting back, so that no one in the movement has to face their own pain.

This muscle is what we have in this molestation court case, the possibility of a sentence in excess of 50 years. I want to add to it a lawsuit against both of the parents, plus large scale publicity and life long tracking on both parents.

These kinds of cases I see are not like other cases. He should have just thrown himself on the mercy of the court, without even waiting for a specific plea agreement. This remorse is about the only way he could have gotten a lesser sentence than the offer. But he is pig headed. Its just like in Mackler's videos. He blames his daughters. He confuses what police may have done improperly, with them. He is calling them liars, and so is the wife. This is what my anger feeds on.

There is complexity to this, and I have ambivalent feelings to be sure. In certain ways I like this defendant. I find him to be very intelligent and sensitive. There is also an existing web of social relations between me and he, and others of his church. This does constrain me.

There is also the issue of potential witness tampering and discovery. In making contact with the children I must not say anything which could be seen as trying to influence them. This is difficult. Also, just to protect themselves they might feel it necessary to turn over anything they recieve from me to police and prosecutors. I don't want to make this more painful for them. I also don't want to unnecessarily cause problems for myself in my already highly compromised face to face life.

Anything police and prosecutors receive should be handed over to the defense. This defendant has a high powered defense attorney who specializes in child sexual molestation and internet kiddie porn cases. A great deal of money has been spent already. Even more will be spent if this actually does go to trial, as it seems to be. One of the defense attorney's claims is that police and prosecutors have already mishandled evidence and failed to live up to the obligations of discovery. The defendant is praying that this is enough to have the case dismissed. I don't want to create another problem for the prosecution here by introducing communications of my own.

I hope the police and prosecutors did not do anything wrong and I hope that they never do such. But I have reason to believe that they may have. I still think it unlikely that this case will be dismissed. This defendant sees that in going through this, spending all the money, he is doing the world a service by exposing injustice. Maybe this is so, but I think he just has a martyr complex. He speaks of someday being able to write a book about it. Yes, police and prosecutors probably did do improper things, and I want them to stop. But I also want this guy convicted.

I return here now again to this subject of "Recovery" and neuroticism. Is there another option? Yes there is, its the one I'm trying to promote. Its to fight your way out, to break free by fighting, by doing damage.

See, if you say, well I'll just take care of myself and avoid conflict, then you have surrendered. You are making your parents right in everything that they did. You are living by self reliance and parental exoneration. So then every other person you have contact with has this parental authority over you. You have accepted the obligation of external social conformity. If I live that way then I am saying that all your parents did to you was right. Think about this! Understand now why I have zero tolerance for commiserators and do my best to give them zero material with which to work.

Deleuze and Guattari understand this. They say the way is to become a nomad, to break out. You must do some real damage to the system. One they lionize is John Brown. He became other by becoming black, and he fought to make an escape.

Well it turns out that in a past time I invoked John Brown. Now I want to tell the story. I was acting against a financial pyramid scam. I wanted the harshest possible of penalties for those involved. This thing was huge. When pursuing such engagements, turning the people against each other is important. You need to find the existing fractures and open them up. When you can do that, it creates terror. All of a sudden no one knows where the leaks are, and who might be thrown overboard.

So I had identified one woman, N. as being the site of such a fracture. She was one of very few Afro-Americans involved. She was from Mississippi. She was college educated and intelligent. She was not really a principle, as she was their internal auditor. For her it was just a paycheck. When State and Federal regulators showed up at the door, she claimed she was sick and excused herself.

So I decided that she was a place to apply pressure. See, these sorts of scams are cults. The people involved only hear one story. The vast majority really believe that the whole thing is legitimate and that they are doing nothing wrong. They believe that they are spreading the Gospel. I was going to give another story, to someone smart enough to understand it and someone self protective enough to put it to use. But I needed a name, a name like Deep Throat.

So I thought about it and thought about it. Finally I hit on John Brown. It was perfect. That name conveyed at least as much as the specific message I would give. It told her who I was and what sort of intentions I had. At one level it said that I was not against her, and that she and I could be on the same side. But it also told her that I was not playing by Live and Let Live, and that there was not much I wouldn't do.

I knew I could probably have only one free flowing conversation with her, when I caught her totally off guard. So I waited until State regulators did something which caused another problem for her. Then I called her up on the phone and introduced myself as John Brown. I explained what was up, why what she was involved in was a criminal scam and how intent I was in bringing it down. We talked about a few specifics and I let her understand how high the stakes were. Then I revealed my alias, "And this is why I have assumed the name of the abolitionist John Brown, who was active in the Underground Railroad and at Harper's Ferry Virginia."

She said, "Oh, that wasn't lost on me."

Well if she knew that, then she probably also knew that working on the Underground Railroad meant facing armed slave catchers, and that after Dred Scott it meant armed Federal Agents. She also probably knew that before the armed raid on Harper's Ferry, Brown had positioned himself in Kansas Territory to take part in the ensuing conflict. Brown and his guerrillas pulled slave owners out of their homes so that Brown could hack them to pieces with a broad sword.

A few weeks passed and more things happened. N. had time to think about the message, about who John Brown was, and about what it would mean that someone assumed such a name. She knew now that there was no telling who else I might be talking too and how much I might know about what they were doing. She had been chairing damage control meetings, coaching people in how to deal with the regulators. These stopped. Finally I wanted her to act, to take some sort of decisive action. I waited for a new development and then John Brown called her up again. Of course she did not want to talk and she kept calling me "John" in every sentence. I still did get to deliver a second message. It was enough to make her act. She acted in a punitive and very self protective manner, against a key party in the scam. She went beyond what I was expecting. She did exactly what I could have most hoped for.

Overall this antipyramid-scam campaign was of only moderate success. These sorts of scams are designed to be hard to regulate, and they are cults. But the John Brown component of it, the part I cared most about, was an overwhelming success.

David Blight on John Brown
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4wCvPwigYw

So let me now return to this religious fundamentalist molestation case where the defendant could receive a sentence in excess of 50 years. Could I pull him out of his home? He has a beautiful home. He and his family have lived very high on the hog, fancy gas guzzling luxury cars, a motor home, and more. I don't understand where the money comes from. I think he is simply putting into practice his church's motivational and prosperity teachings. I want to understand this better, because I am completely opposed to it, yet it plays a huge role in our society.

Could I pull him out of his own home and then kill him on the sidewalk? If the answer is no, then I have no business asking the State to give him a 50 year sentence.

Our DA's Office over charges cases in order to pressure people into pleading guilty. This is inconsistent with what is called for in our Constitution. Police and Prosecutors like to have cases like this because it helps them court liberal support for a system which in the vast majority of instances targets the poor and already marginalized and amounts to using prison to try and solve complex social problems. I don't want to help them do this.

But on the other hand, I listen to this guy and I listen to the wife black sheeping the three daughters. The defendant confided in me because he sees me as pro-defense, as I am involved in other cases. He and his church members will be offended if I turn on him. So I am like the wife. She goes along with the molestation because she has a financial and social interest. I am restrained in acting because of other social connections. Not good. But I do not approve of their church, not at all. Yesterday I described them, all of them, as "creepy".

See, last Sunday people were in church, where children are conspicuously displayed. Likewise today, someone somewhere is walking into one of those big chain bookstores where they have lots of pedagogy manuals. They specialize in the liberal kind, which talk about empathy, nurturing, attachment, and communications skills, the same things which therapists talk about. But they also have the conservative James Dobson type, as there is also a market for such.

The upshot is that people will decide that the key to adult legitimacy is to have a child. Then they will use their handling of this child to advance themselves. As far as I can tell, this couple has done exactly that. Its woven into their religion.

Most people are just like their parents and will do anything in order to make their parents right. This case is special because the animosity is there. The child's animosity is simply a refection of the parents. Its there because the parents have lived in bad faith. The child expresses what the parent cannot. I read his published writings. As he was reaching the peak of his career, he was not tending to his career, he was off driving around the country side doing nutty stuff. He was having a midlife crisis. He also has lots of ideas about his own entitlement to privilege.

The wife saw that the sexual dimension of their marriage had expired. So this is when the massages started, with the eldest daughter, then age 8.

In the huge reports filled by his attorney he says that this girl "hates her father". He actually intends to try and use this as a defense.

When at the age of 16 she got involved in sex, drugs, and alcohol, he freaked out. No matter that he and most everyone else in their church seem to have histories with drugs and alcohol. He loaded the daughter and her boyfriend into his car and drove them to the police station. He alludes to this in his published writings. His attorney actually intends to try and use this episode to defend his client by making a case against the eldest daughter.

Am I to be asleep as this unfolds? Attending a 12-step meeting? Busy punching pillows and screaming at them? We often don't get many chances to act. What new chances I am given will likely depend on how I respond to this one.

A problem is that I don't have access to the animosity of the children. It is this animosity which I want to champion and vindicate. But since I don't have contact with them and am only hearing from the parents, I am still just having to imagine it. Having to testify in this with the sentence which is at stake must be very hard on them. I deal I would be there to offer support, to have offered it from the very beginning. But I am still learning here myself. I will do what I can. My greatest interest is in the lawsuit which I want to follow. That sort of a lawsuit should apply in this case an also in far far lesser cases.

One of the things I plan to communicate to them would be along the lines of:

"
If my father had been molesting my sister in that way, he would be dead on the floor before police could arrive to arrest him. I say this to you now and I realize that its easy to say this as it is only a hypothetical. If I had grown up in such an environment, and environment where such things were accepted, then I cannot imagine how that would have effected me. At this moment I feel for your bother, someone who has accepted a psychiatric diagnosis and been placed on medication. I am sure that his condition would not have existed had he not been in such an environment. Sexual molestation and psychiatric conditions are similar in that society always blames the victim, says that it is the victim who caused it. Everyone who grew up in that home was being used, exploited. Those who don't fight back will spend the rest of their lives in therapy and recovery. You are young and you are fighting back, so you have a chance. Yes, your father must go to prison. He deserves to spend the rest of his life in prison. But that alone is not enough ...
"

When John Brown was being held in Virginia awaiting execution he refused the consolations of all southern clergy. He refused such because they were pro-slavery. The southern religion was one of external professions and of conformity with the status quo. All attention was placed on the quest for personal salvation. What Frances Fox-Piven has written is that slavery only ended because abolitionists were able to split every Protestant denomination. Those splits are still with us today. This defendant's religion is the old southern religion of external conformity, repackaged as one of racial inclusion.

Kris has posted
born-again-christianity-substance-addiction-psychiatric-me-t126.html#p227

Becoming Other
Exploited Children United, new portal page:
http://theexploitedunited.onlinewebshop.net

Neil Young /w Crazy Horse, Santa Cruz California 1984
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWKNPbSvORE

Bad Company, reunion Wembley Stadium
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7vPjic5sRE

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Rodgers

Florida 2008, full concert
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VkILW9-Bpk

from Unforgiven
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SO5VO2ixWY

Clint Eastwood talks about Hackman's character Little Bill
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SO5VO2ixWY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_vtHFmx ... ure=relmfu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-B8T6UJl ... ure=relmfu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zlyZeYfo ... ure=relmfu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3WzeAz1 ... ure=relmfu

Gimme Shelter
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHlqv3A0pQc

Heart, Black Dog
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8pwfw9LY6o

10 most beautiful cars of all time
http://autos.yahoo.com/news/the-10-most ... -time.html

Right at this moment I am starting to write to journalists, see if they are interested in covering the trial. These are journalists I have been in the courtroom with, seeing and hearing for myself, while checking a couple of times per day for their reports. Though I cannot predict how they will see things in this case, I will certainly feed them my view.

Of course, what I will write will focus on the religious affiliation and how theirs is a doctrine of accumulation and breeding, and that central to it is the exploitation of children.

BO

Reply to a friend:

Yes we absolutely must put structures in place which can protect children. We cannot try to use the family to do it. What that has always amounted to is simply using children to try and control adults. We cannot play these kinds of games with children.

Living here in the US, I can say that the reasons we don't have such protections are things like religion, capitalism, and the self-reliance ethic.

I just today had to duck some religious fundamentalists, as well as someone who took it upon himself to try and lecture to me about the need for piety. He was clearly speaking to me in a parental voice. This is reprehensible person, someone who has conducted himself shamelessly in other arenas, someone I have nothing but contempt for.

A book I will be reading soon, which traces the history of attempts to install such child protections, and how these attempts were thwarted:
http://www.amazon.com/Childism-Confront ... s=childism

I am not really a fan of long incarcerations as a means of solving societal problems. Especially here in the United States, I feel that we do too much of it. Also, it may provide justice for the State, but not for the victims.

So while I want some incarcerations, what I really want to promote is civil redress, law suits for money. Whenever someone is exploiting a child in their care, sue them right down to the fillings in their teeth.

Some cases rise to the level where there can be criminal prosecution. But for every one of those, there are many many more which do not. Still, I want there to be lawsuits. Establish the principle that when you use a child, you will be held accountable.

The litmus test here is animosity. If the child feels animosity, then it is simply the parent's animosity being reflected back. It is there because the parent's have lived in bad faith. So hold the parents responsible. Make sure that they don't exit with a single cent.

Sure, the only way to prevent this exploitation is to offer outside social support. Make children into citizens by giving them social and economic resources outside of the family. Make sure they always have other places to go. Have other people appointed to look after them, and have still others to oversee their parents. Make sure that they don't spend to much time in familial domiciles. Make sure that conflicts and tensions are investigated and addressed. Make sure the children has opportunities far beyond what the family might provide.

The reason that we don't have this now is mostly the Self-Reliance Ethic. This is the ethic which the Family System exists to perpetuate. And then along with this, the parents are exonerated. People don't want to sue, because they feel they must prove their ability to take care of themselves. Without this demonstrated ability, the feel they have no right to speak. They also don't to talk anything from their parents because they feel that that would obligate them and that it would undermine their claim to self-reliance.

So here we find the crux of the problem. The Family System exists to instill the Self-Reliance Ethic. Its just like the hot coals and sharp stones uses by primitive societies. Rather than burns and scars which show on the flesh, its adherence to this ethic which is left. People feel they don't have a right to exist unless they adhere to this ethic. So the last thing they would want to do is turn against their parents. The Family System and the Self-Reliance Ethic are one and the same.

Parenthood is promoted to the bourgiose via liberal pedagogy. Ideas are used like Communications Skills, Nurturing, Empathy, and Attachment. Its offered via books, accessories, and pediatricians. Always the result is the same, the parent is using the child to gain adult identity and hence to avoid dealing with the ways that they know they were used. And the child is made to accept the Self-Reliance Ethic. Watch the following video:

Mayim Bialik
http://omg.yahoo.com/blogs/goddess/spot ... 13048.html

If one looks hard, really hard, one can come to see how they have been used and how Liberal Pedagogy provides the ideology with which to hide it. If the animosity is there, and if you've learned to trust it and not ot fear it, then you can come to see it. Like I have come to say, "They break you wings so that you won't try to fly."

In entering into this Christian fundamentalist case, I cannot do anything which could be construed as witness tampering. That is, I cannot say anything which could be seen as trying to influence what the victim - winesses say.

http://www.amazon.com/Rocking-The-Cradl ... the+cradle


http://www.amazon.com/Childism-Confront ... s=childism

Todd Akin, "legitimate rape"
http://www.democracynow.org/2012/8/21/t ... ment_sheds


Becoming Other
Exploited Children United
http://theexploitedunited.onlinewebshop.net

BO to Forum, Moved Off Of the Fence


What follows is a message sent to someone I knew face to face, who is now living overseas. I present it here in order that there might be original discussion:

********************


Yes, I have moved off of the fence. My last likely chance for conversation with the defendant has passed. Probably he is terrified and doesn't know what to do. He may even be in custody for
psychiatric evaluation. This is a guy who went from drugs and alcohol to Born Again Christianity and psychiatric medication. This guy has never dealt with the violence and abuse he grew up with. Instead he has tried to hide behind a parental role. We see how this has gone. Trying to make the Ideal Family means using children, exploiting them.

His main defense is still to say that all 3 girls are liars. This more than anything compels me to act. I have to stand with the children.

His defense lawyer is someone who specializes in child sex abuse and internet kiddie porn cases. He claims to be a civil libertarian, but really he is an arch reactionary. I already have the deepest of hatred for this lawyer. I would like to see him eliminated from the world of the living.

The lawyer has got the defendant convinced that because there is some contradictoryness in the statements of the younger girls, that the case should not have been charged.

I our last conversation I explained to the defendant that there is no strict formula. In many criminal investigations there is going to be some contradiction and some culpability in the victims. The DA's Office has to use its best judgment in deciding how to proceed. In the case of family molestation it is likely that victims will not even have the understanding of what has happened. I think this defendant has not really comprehended the implications of the concept that minors cannot be consenting. Think about the ramifications of this, an abusive parent blames what happens on the minor's own agency. It's not just in sex abuse cases but it's for anything. In his published writings he speaks of he and the wife "having trouble with one of their children", and having to have contact with the police. This was the oldest daughter and alcohol, marijuana, and sex. He blames her for all of this!

The police officer who wrote the report for this defendant's case is someone I have met long ago and took most positive notice of. I have a very high opinion of him. This defendant says, "he is a dirty cop".

The case surfaced because the youngest girl, then in the 8th grade, was talking with a youth councilor. She said somethings which alerted the councilor, an intern. So she pressed further. Then she did exactly what the law requires. She wrote it up and faxed it to Police and Child Protective Services. Soon Police were tracking people down and using a different detective to interview each family member.

Many in this guy's church blame the police for making something where there is nothing. Again, they go along with the black sheep interpretation of the eldest daughter. So she, being unsaved, is not to be listened to. She doesn't support the familyism. She has not made the professions which they want.

I think in showing my skepticism I may have helped to pressure him to plead guilty. This would probably mean a shorter sentence. It would mean less money going to the high power sex offender defender. I want the children to sue for all the money. I don't know that they have even considered this as a possibility.

I also told him and the wife that any talk about "The Family" or "Family Values" is always at the expense of children. It is children who pay the cost of this, children who are being used. It amounts to sacrificing children on the altar of the Family System. This probably is why the two of them have vanished, as they don't want to talk to me anymore.

I try not to be unfair in blaming the wife. But truth is, I can't stand to be around her, I can't even look at her. I find myself trying to pretend that she is not there. She has not been charged.

We learn by doing, by engaging with situations and handling the conflict well. We don't learn by confessing to a therapist or by letting a therapist instruct us. We don't learn by histrionic venting either.

Anyway, I have crossed the line, in sending them an email stating my interest in this, trying to sound open minded, and asking if they would be "offended" if I attended some of the trial. At least this way they won't be surprised. They won't feel so much that I have stabbed them in the back. I mean really, this guy has talked about writing a book about it. He seems to have a martyr complex. This message from me could also press him a little harder to plead guilty. The sentence he gets, especially if he does not plead guilty, could be in effect a life sentence.

I am almost done composing a message to publicize the case to journalists and activists. Of course I don't know how they will respond to it, but these are the same people I sat in the court room with during the ********* trial. My message emphasizes the religious fundamentalist aspect of this, trying to show that this is almost built in to the "familyism" of their religion. I talk about how most of the members have serious histories with alcohol and drugs, including this defendant. I talk about how he freaked out when his daughter at 16 started using drugs and alcohol, and how this is also when she got out of the home and when the molestation stoped. My message to these journalists is intended to make the hair on the backs of their necks stand up. I try to make this guy sound like the wacko which he is.

I explain how in their church they talk about the Second Coming and how "there is still time for more people to Get Saved", and how they say that dinosaurs must be mentioned somewhere in the Bible. The first time I ever met him, I felt that he was a wacko. I even told other people this, and cited specifically absurd things he had said.. This was long before I knew anything of this ongoing criminal case.

He is sensitive and intelligent. This is a reason this has been hard for me. But he is blaming his daughter. The lawyer wrote that she "hates her father", and this is supposed to make her a liar and the defendant innocent. I believe that she doesn't think any better of her mother, but the mother is not this lawyer's client. I have to stand with the child, and make this guy pay.

The oldest boy was diagnosed with a psychiatric condition, placed on medication, and also removed at the age of 16. I also see this as a related type of abuse. I want to make the parents pay for this too.

So I have already acted in announcing to him that I will attend the trial, and I am close to sending the message to journalists and activists.

Sometimes plea agreements are only reached on the morning of jury selection. This is what could happen in this case. At the right point I will be contacting the children, addressing my message to all of them. I have already made investigations to figure out how best to contact them. I will tell them that those who never act will forever be subjugated by the same sorts of abuse. There are real people behind it. The purpose of the abuse is to prevent you from being able to strike back. If you decline to ever strike back, then the abusers win. About the family what I always say is, "They break your wings so that you won't try to fly."

Attending the trial will deepen me in every possible way. In moving from passivity to action, I am forced to look harder at my own experience. I am already influencing this in some ways, in having stated my intent to attend to the defendant.

I want to be and need to be Man of Action.

Additional reflections on what it means to be unable to act.
speaking-in-tongues-t124.html#p229

What Louise Armstrong says is that the problem starts by turning it into personal pathology, an individual experience, and then following the therapeutic model. She also points out how religion and psychotherapy used to be seen as enemies. Now they have become one and the same, and that this is most alarming.
http://www.amazon.com/Rocking-Cradle-Se ... the+cradel

I also have to credit Deleuze and Guattari here. Writing back in 1972, the sameness of religion and psychotherapy is one of their primary points.

Reading:
Childism, confronting prejudice against children,
Elisabeth Young-Bruehl

She also maintains:
http://whosafraidofsocialdemocracy.com/

Young-Bruehl also emphasizes how the real problem is turning it into personal pathology. Once one does this, then action is impossible. Of course this has always been one of my primary objections to religion as well.

She writes about the large number of youth in detention. I think about this. I think about my own adolescence. I can see now that if I had ended up in some sort of juvenile jail, my parents would have loved it. They would not have admitted it. On the surface they would have been outraged. But they would be outraged at me, not standing with me. They would come to love it because it would exonerate them. They could say that I was defective and destined for such. Its just like this guy, the son getting a psychiatric diagnosis and him and the wife lamenting in their writings that he must be removed from the home. And then the daughter, supposedly "having a problem with sex, drugs, and alcohol", and then blaming her now for turning the two younger ones against them. I must stand with the children.

Again, I think of my own adolescence. There were troubles. Well into my 20's and 30's I completely blamed myself for the grief of my parents. Even now, I don't really understand what happened and why. But I believe that all of it came down to the ways in which I was used. They way I will come to understand more is by standing with children in exactly situations like this, I mean actually helping them get tangible redress. So here in this case I need to tell these children that those who don't learn to fight back will spend their entire lives in avoidance venues, while the same dynamics play out over and over and over.



*********************************

John Brown
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4wCvPwigYw
When he was being held in Virginia awaiting execution, he refused consolation from any of the Southern clergy because they believed in the religion of external conformity and support for the status quo. Hence they supported slavery.