Church sued

[Robert F. Smith]

6 minutes ago, katherine the great said:

There's a lot of information coming to light lately that is very shocking. The most frustrating part of the documentary to me was how hard it was to get any justice! The State attorney calling the girls prostitutes? Seriously? 14 year old virgin prostitutes? And then generously offering to prosecute him on a misdemeanor solicitation. People astonish me sometimes.

Sounds to me as though the State's Atty is deeply demented (psychologically disturbed).  Is it that only the mentally disturbed are highly motivated to seek power?  Are they all narcissists?  We also have some judges out there who seem mentally disabled.

[Calm]

4 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Somewhat reminiscent of the false claims that a variety of techniques could be used to "treat" homosexuality.

Are you suggesting those with pedophilic attraction should make no effort to control their behaviours over their lifetime as it is impossible for them to do so and they will all end up acting on their attraction contrary to what the article is suggesting (that ongoing treatment is best to control such attraction so the individual does not act on it)?  Or am I misunderstanding what you are saying here?

[Thinking]

6 hours ago, smac97 said:

Okay.  But what does "come first" mean?  Should "the needs of the victim" supersede the perpetrator's right to due process?

I already admitted that I don't know the answer to this situation. I will say this. If a system affords more protection to the perpetrator than to the victims, perhaps that system should be reevaluated.

[katherine the great]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Sounds to me as though the State's Atty is deeply demented (psychologically disturbed). 

Or he was a good old boy. Or he was in Epstein's pocket. I'm not sure.  🤷‍♀️

[katherine the great]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

I think it is important to make the difference and identify offending pedophiles.

I agree. I hate the fact that all sex offenders are often lumped into one group. Sex offenders sit on a spectrum from some idiot who got drunk and peed in the parking lot to the most violent, psychopathic rapists imaginable. 

[Tacenda]

5 minutes ago, katherine the great said:

Or he was a good old boy. Or he was in Epstein's pocket. I'm not sure.  🤷‍♀️

I have a strong feeling that Epstein was murdered, because he knew too much. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/did-jeffrey-epstein-kill-himself-60-minutes-investigates-2020-01-05/

I know it may sound utterly crazy, but I think Trump was involved. Or maybe those in higher places that were on that long list of acquaintances. And now that woman, Ghislaine Maxwell that is missing who helped recruit and trafficked the girls, is missing, makes me wonder if someone is keeping her hidden or she's dead. 

[Robert F. Smith]

5 hours ago, Calm said:

Are you suggesting those with pedophilic attraction should make no effort to control their behaviours over their lifetime as it is impossible for them to do so and they will all end up acting on their attraction contrary to what the article is suggesting (that ongoing treatment is best to control such attraction so the individual does not act on it)?  Or am I misunderstanding what you are saying here?

It seemed to me that the PsychToday article was written by a committee, with some on the committee believing that the various treatments for pedophilia don't provide a good prognosis.  We need to be realists.  That is one of the reasons why we have some people classified as sex offenders -- for life.  We haven't really found a way to treat such obsessions.  Just like rogue animals, there are rogue people.

[Meadowchik]

4 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

It seemed to me that the PsychToday article was written by a committee, with some on the committee believing that the various treatments for pedophilia don't provide a good prognosis.  We need to be realists.  That is one of the reasons why we have some people classified as sex offenders -- for life.  We haven't really found a way to treat such obsessions.  Just like rogue animals, there are rogue people.

And with the prison system as it is and overwhelmed courts, the prospects on improving the way society deals with them are discouraging.

[Calm]

7 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

various treatments for pedophilia don't provide a good prognosis.

In terms of offending pedophiles reoffending or nonoffending pedophiles becoming offenders sometime in their lives?

[The Nehor]

14 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Sounds to me as though the State's Atty is deeply demented (psychologically disturbed).  Is it that only the mentally disturbed are highly motivated to seek power?  Are they all narcissists?  We also have some judges out there who seem mentally disabled.

More likely just a garden variety misogynist.

[The Nehor]

12 hours ago, katherine the great said:

I agree. I hate the fact that all sex offenders are often lumped into one group. Sex offenders sit on a spectrum from some idiot who got drunk and peed in the parking lot to the most violent, psychopathic rapists imaginable. 

The public urination sex offender thing is mostly a myth created by sex offenders to give them a harmless crime to explain why they are on a list. There are some cases that are pretty ridiculous. A 19 year old having sex with a 17 year old they are in a relationship with might be skeevy but it probably does not deserve becoming a lifelong pariah.

I admit part of me is in a “kill them all” mindset because I am peripherally involved in a case where two girls are now going to be in intensive psychotherapy for years because their dad was all but selling them to feed an addiction and mom just ignored it and even then with help the odds are they will seek out horrible relationships later on and suffer for a long time. Stupid fallen world!!!!

That being said our make them pariahs approach is also pretty insane and you have people trying to rebuild a life who literally cannot live anywhere once they are released. There have been some minor stirrings in the legal system arguing that residency restriction laws for released offenders may be constitutionally invalid.

[Robert F. Smith]

41 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

More likely just a garden variety misogynist.

Yes, but most of them have the presence of mind to hide their misogyny.

[The Nehor]

19 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Yes, but most of them have the presence of mind to hide their misogyny.

This has not been my experience. They deny it but are awful at hiding it.

[provoman]

6 hours ago, The Nehor said:

The public urination sex offender thing is mostly a myth ....

What do you base that on?

[The Nehor]

9 hours ago, provoman said:

What do you base that on?

The lack of evidence that it is a problem. In the states where it can get you on the list it usually requires someone to witness it or something of that nature and I do not see a lot of verified cases where the status was given lightly.

This is not a defense of sex offender registries. I think they need to go away.

[Calm]

57 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

This is not a defense of sex offender registries. I think they need to go away.

They are apparently not helping with reducing crime. 

Quote

Professor Ewing examined several studies and meta-analyses and concluded that sex offender registration and restriction laws “have not reduced the number of sex offenses in the United States or even that among previously convicted sex offenders who have been the direct targets of these laws.” Interestingly, Ewing reviewed several studies that did find minimal reductions in recidivism rates for sex offenders subject to registration and restriction laws, but those studies were offset by others that found the opposite—that registration and restriction laws actually worked to increase sex offender recidivism rates. Human Rights Watch (“HRW”) explained in a nutshell how sex-offender registration and restriction laws fail to reduce recidivism, and may actually increase recidivism, in a 2007 report, “No Easy Answers for Sex Offenders.”

https://www.criminallegalnews.org/news/2018/may/15/ex-offender-registries-common-sense-or-nonsense/

Edited January 12, 2020 by Calm

[smac97]

On 1/11/2020 at 6:13 AM, Meadowchik said:

And with the prison system as it is and overwhelmed courts, the prospects on improving the way society deals with them are discouraging.

The prisons and the courts are almost purely reactive, after-the-fact systems.

Part of the way we "deal with" sexual abuse is to instill moral precepts, including clear sexual mores, in society, such as will induce individuals to not commit these wrongs in the first place (or else not continue to commit them, and to repent of them, make amends for them, etc.).  The Sexual Revolution, increasing departure from religious institutions/beliefs/practices, and other developments and factors made that considerably more difficult.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited January 12, 2020 by smac97

[katherine the great]

8 hours ago, Calm said:

They are apparently not helping with reducing crime. 

https://www.criminallegalnews.org/news/2018/may/15/ex-offender-registries-common-sense-or-nonsense/

There is another purpose for them though. It allows the public to know where they reside and make informed decisions about moving location, transportation routes, etc. 

[katherine the great]

3 hours ago, smac97 said:

The prisons and the courts are almost purely reactive, after-the-fact systems.

Part of the way we "deal with" sexual abuse is to instill moral precepts, including clear sexual mores, in society, such as will induce individuals to not commit these wrongs in the first place (or else not continue to commit them, and to repent of them, make amends for them, etc.).  The Sexual Revolution, increasing departure from religious institutions/beliefs/practices, and other developments and factors made that considerably more difficult.

Thanks,

-Smac

At first glance, I agreed with this post. But on further reflection, since we are talking about sexual abuse and not just sexual expression, doesn't society teach people to not abuse others? It seems like there is more emphasis on consent, avoiding underage partners, etc than there ever was in the past. Of course there was probably also much less reporting in the past. Women would have faced the possibility of losing their job if they reported. Children probably usually felt they did not have a voice and wouldn't be believed. It may be hard to really procure any reliable statics to compare actual sexual abuse before and after the sexual revolution. 🤷‍♀️

[smac97]

6 hours ago, katherine the great said:

Quote

The prisons and the courts are almost purely reactive, after-the-fact systems.

Part of the way we "deal with" sexual abuse is to instill moral precepts, including clear sexual mores, in society, such as will induce individuals to not commit these wrongs in the first place (or else not continue to commit them, and to repent of them, make amends for them, etc.).  The Sexual Revolution, increasing departure from religious institutions/beliefs/practices, and other developments and factors made that considerably more difficult.

At first glance, I agreed with this post. But on further reflection, since we are talking about sexual abuse and not just sexual expression, doesn't society teach people to not abuse others?

Yes.

But I think sexual misconduct can take many forms.  The worst, of course, is violent, nonconsensual sexual abuse.  But I think the consequences of the sea change in sexual mores are more pervasive, and hence very damaging overall.  See, e.g., here:

Quote

There is no denying the catastrophic effects of the sexual revolution. In the 1950s, before the onset of this revolution, there were two notable sexual diseases worldwide: syphilis and gonorrhea. Various other sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) were known only in the world of prostitution. Doctors have now identified more than 25 kinds of STDs. According to the World Health Organization, “More than 1 million people acquire a sexually transmitted infection (STI) every day,” and “Each year, an estimated 500 million people become ill with one of 4 STIs: chlamydia, gonorrhea, syphilis and trichomoniasis.”[ii] The effects of these diseases range from minor discomfort to chronic pain, infertility, and, in some cases, death.
...
Sociological research confirms that there are numerous negative social consequences associated with adolescent sexual relationships. Among sexually active American girls aged 12 to 16, there are six times as many attempted suicides as among virgin girls of the same age range. They are 18 times more likely to leave home prematurely, 9 times more likely to be arrested by the police, 5 times more likely to be suspended from school and 10 times more likely to abuse drugs.[ix]

And here:

Quote

Like any revolution, there were casualties left in the sexual revolution’s wake. Increased promiscuity led to marked increases in the number of out-of-wedlock births, single parent homes, people infected with sexually transmitted diseases, and abortions. People were getting married later in life than ever before and the demand for fertility treatments skyrocketed to help couples trying to start their families after their natural fertility diminished.

More than 40 years after these social and cultural changes, it seems that the ideals of the revolution are unquestionable in society. Free and open sex with whomever and however one desires is now an assumed right. Yet, ironically, there are signs that the revolution may have planted the seeds of its own destruction as our culture wrestles with the fallout of the #MeToo movement.
...
You see, if sex is nothing more than a biological urge that should be fed, like eating or drinking, then it really does not matter a whole lot where or how you feed it. If you released your tension, you’re good to go.  If, however, sex is an experience created to form deep emotional bonds between two individuals, a simultaneous physical and emotional activity, then one should not be surprised that it can be extremely volatile.
...
Intimacy comes from the security of a committed relationship coupled with the vulnerability of entrusting oneself totally to another, withholding nothing from the relationship. Such intimacy only survives in exclusivity. Monogamy may sound “backwards” and “stifling,” but a landmark study by the University of Chicago indicated that the most sexually satisfied people are those who are married to one another.

As the prophet wrote, we have “sowed the wind and reaped the whirlwind.” The sexual revolution promised liberation, but instead brought enslavement. Women and men have all the sex they could want, but can’t escape the regret and the gaping lack of intimacy that the “hookup” lifestyle brings. For those trapped in such a mindset, there is still a way to get the intimacy back. All it takes is the courage to commit to one person, the conviction to renounce all others, and the selflessness to lay oneself down for the other.

And here ("Five Reasons the Sexual Revolution has Been a Disaster") (emphases added):

Quote

First, the destigmatization and mass adoption of artificial contraception, beginning in the 1960s, followed by widespread legalization of abortion, has radically changed the world in which we now find ourselves.
...
The explosion of sexual activity thanks to contraception has been accompanied by levels of divorce, cohabitation, and abortion never before seen in history. And as the MeToo movement shows, the same shift has contributed to a world in which on-demand sex is assumed to be the norm, to the detriment of those who resist any advance, for any reason.
...
Second, the revolution is having deleterious consequences—and not only on the young—in the form of broken families and the attendant disadvantages conferred by fatherless homes, as has been excruciatingly well-documented by social scientists for many decades. 
...
Third, the libertarian conceit often embraced by the sexual revolution’s supporters, that pornography is a harmless activity, is no longer viable. The damages caused by pornography are legion: Pornography use is frequently cited as a factor in divorce cases; therapists report increased demand for treatment for pornography addiction, including for children. 
...
Fourth, we can no longer pretend that the sexual revolution operates in any other way but as the world imagined by Socrates’ interlocutor Thrasy­machus: It empowers the already strong and makes the already weak even more vulnerable.

This is true, for example, of the young women recruited for so-called egg harvesting, who put their own fertility and health at risk either to keep their own future childbearing options open or to earn money for selling their eggs. It is true of the women and children exploited, drugged, beaten, and otherwise abused who are now victimized once more by the frightening effort to normalize prostitution as “sex work.” And it is true of the young women damaged by the diseases acquired from buying into the promise of sex without consequences. Although teen pregnancy rates have declined in recent years, rates of sexually transmitted disease continue to rise.
...
Finally, the MeToo movement offers an opportunity to bridge ideological divides as the traditional cheerleaders of the sexual revolution reckon with the empirical record. The recent scandals have produced powerful new evidence for everyone to weigh. What are the two common denominators among the alleged offenses? One was the assumption that all women are sexually available at all times—what might be called the sexual revolution’s first commandment. The other is that many exploitative men have taken cover in venues closely identified with pro-revolutionary politics: Hollywood, mainstream print, radio, and television journalism, Silicon Valley—and even the New York attorney general’s office.

And here:

Quote

“The sexual liberation liberated a generation,” Nicholson writes. “But men most of all.” So how, last week, did we arrive at the conundrum of young male celibacy?

According to the University of Chicago general social survey, a key barometer of US social life, nearly one in three American men aged 18 to 29 said they did not have sex in 2018. (And we have to take them at their word.) Among young men, the figure in the past decade has tripled to 28%, while young women have seen an increase since 2008 of 8% to 18%.

You might think I, being a Latter-day Saint, would be thrilled at the increase in abstinence over the past decade.  Well, the increase appears to be associated with dysfunction and unhappiness.  Back to the article:

Quote

Research says that in the US, if you are married, share the chores in an equal relationship in which both partners work and go to church at least once a month, you are probably both happy and have a satisfactory sex life, although quality might matter more than quantity. If you are none of the above and celibate, you are also probably unhappy.

In 2018, the share of Americans aged 18 to 34 “very happy” in life fell to 25%, the lowest level the survey has ever recorded. (In 1972, 59% were “very happy”.) In addition, last year, 51% of 18- to 34-year-olds in the US said they did not have a steady romantic partner (33% in 2004).

In December 2018, Kate Julian in the Atlantic magazine described what she called “a sex recession”. Sex has gone from something most high-school students have experienced to something most haven’t. Is that so bad?

Well, no, I don't think it's a bad thing.  But people can do the right thing for the wrong reasons.  

Quote

The accessibility of pornography is also seen as a problem. Fear of phallic failure is arguably easier to manage in a room on your own but it may make healthy relationships that much harder to negotiate, while dating apps are frustrating except for the Kardashians and their ilk.
...
Religion also figures. Saving oneself for marriage is far more common in the US than in the UK.

Or, a more positive analysis of increasing sexual abstinence may also be part of the mix. Sex matters, but now it’s so ubiquitous, so too do hobbies, career, friends, children, community, sudoku. Some individuals may also be happily asexual – hardly a tragedy.

Today, sex sells almost every product. It overwhelms popular culture, invades childhood. Are we satiated? As a commodity, is junk sex now on the wane, just like shopping on the high street? Are the young beginning to recalibrate sex and also understand its invaluable connection with intimacy, social skills, self-awareness and mutual self-respect?

I would like to think that we are experiencing such a "recalibration."  Alas, I think it may be more attributable to other factors, such as distorted perceptions of sexuality (see here), fear, alternative ways to spend time (to the exclusion of building a healthy relationship with a member of the opposite sex), and so on.

These are not good for our society.

6 hours ago, katherine the great said:

It seems like there is more emphasis on consent, avoiding underage partners, etc than there ever was in the past.

Yes.  And I'm glad of that.  And yet rape statistics seem to be getting worse (from September 2019):

Quote

FBI data released Monday suggests that the violent crime rate in the U.S. remains on a decades-long downward trend, falling by 3.9 percent in 2018. Overall, the violent crime rate has plunged by more than 50 percent since the highwater mark of the early 1990s.

The drops came across categories of violent offenses, including murder, non-negligent manslaughter and robbery, and property crimes like burglary, larceny and vehicle thefts, while aggravated assault numbers remained about flat. The rate for rape bucked this trend however, up slightly for 2018, and in each of the last six years.
...
Violent crime did not decrease across the board in 2018, however, and one category is in the midst of a slow but persistent six-year upward swing: rape. For the 2013 statistics the FBI changed its outdated parameters of rape—then defined as the forcible “carnal knowledge of a female”—to a more modern definition structured around consent, rather than force. Ever since, the rate has been on a steady surge, up more than 18 percent in that period.

Grawert and Rosenfeld agree that the rape numbers are attention-grabbing. “Rape increasing every year since the definition change is not just statistical variation. That's a trend that's worth talking about,” Grawert said. Rosenfeld added, “I think the increase is real. I don't think it's just some measurement artifact.”

Thoughts?

6 hours ago, katherine the great said:

Of course there was probably also much less reporting in the past.

From the above link:

Quote

It’s not yet clear why rapes have risen so swiftly. It’s a notoriously underreported crime and many have theorized that the changing social atmosphere, including the #metoo movement and increased awareness around campus rape, may be prompting survivors to report at a higher rate. That was an especially popular thesis after the 2017 edition of the survey showed that more than 4 of every 10 rape victims said they reported their attack to police, following years in which the percentage of respondents who said they reported their rapes hovered in the 20s and 30s. But the latest survey throws that theory into question after finding a reporting rate that plummeted back to about 25 percent.

Pretty troubling.

Thanks,

-Smac

[katherine the great]

2 hours ago, smac97 said:

Pretty troubling.

Thanks,

-Smac

Indeed--especially the rape statistics, although it may be related to the change in the formal definition of rape. Still, drunk rape is still rape. (and why aren't the experts talking about the HUGE problem we have with underage drinking?)

I've been trying to stay on topic with the abuse aspect of this but since you brought it up...I don't think we can really separate the sexual revolution from the women's rights movement. I've always felt that the fact that women now have the choice to have a well paying career is an underestimated variable in the divorce rate. Women often stayed in unhappy and/or abusive relationships because they couldn't afford divorce. Women being in the workplace also, of course paved the way for more infidelity, but it would be just as immoral to force women back into the 50's housewife mold when we clearly don't want to be there (speaking generally of course). We need to learn to balance our need to have marketable skills and/or a career with our desires to have a family.

One thing I fully agree with in the article is the fact that having sex before people are mature enough to handle it is very damaging--especially to our daughters mental and physical health. The consequences to our sons include undue possessiveness and an inability to handle their feelings in a healthy way. It makes me sad.

[smac97]

8 hours ago, katherine the great said:

Indeed--especially the rape statistics, although it may be related to the change in the formal definition of rape. Still, drunk rape is still rape. (and why aren't the experts talking about the HUGE problem we have with underage drinking?)

I think this is getting some attention.

8 hours ago, katherine the great said:

I've been trying to stay on topic with the abuse aspect of this but since you brought it up...I don't think we can really separate the sexual revolution from the women's rights movement.

Nor do I.  Sexual libertinism (by women) is, in part, an unfortunate outcropping of that otherwise admirable movement.  Other factors include the Pill, the legalization of abortion, the Sexual Revolution, and others.

8 hours ago, katherine the great said:

I've always felt that the fact that women now have the choice to have a well paying career is an underestimated variable in the divorce rate. Women often stayed in unhappy and/or abusive relationships because they couldn't afford divorce. Women being in the workplace also, of course paved the way for more infidelity, but it would be just as immoral to force women back into the 50's housewife mold when we clearly don't want to be there (speaking generally of course).

Nobody is talking about "forcing" women to do that.  The closest we get to such compulsion is, ironically, from the radical feminists to seek to disparage and stigmatize the choice of women to stay at home and raise their children full-time.  

8 hours ago, katherine the great said:

We need to learn to balance our need to have marketable skills and/or a career with our desires to have a family.

I quite agree.

8 hours ago, katherine the great said:

One thing I fully agree with in the article is the fact that having sex before people are mature enough to handle it is very damaging--especially to our daughters mental and physical health. The consequences to our sons include undue possessiveness and an inability to handle their feelings in a healthy way. It makes me sad.

Our sons are also getting messed up by all of this.

Thanks,

-Smac

[katherine the great]

2 hours ago, smac97 said:

Our sons are also getting messed up by all of this.

Yep!

[The Nehor]

Remember that divorce statistics are a little warped. I was always told that 50% of marriages end in divorce which sounds really bad but most of us know codependent or horrible people that get married four or five times and die divorced and that means four or five couples that stayed married to make a 50% stat work out.

[Tacenda]

“A Boise, Idaho, father [Eugene Eliason] sued the [LDS] Church for $28 million in 1983, claiming the Church’s strict moral teachings against masturbation had so depressed his adolescent son [Kip Eliason] that the boy tried three times, with eventual success, to commit suicide.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Church_of_Jesus_Christ_of_Latter-day_Saints_and_masturbation

2018 – A first-hand account of an experience with masturbation interviews growing up in the LDS Church was published by KUTV. In it Kip described his experience as a 13-year-old of confessing masturbation to his bishop. His bishop then had him confess to his father and then mother. Much later, a different bishop gave him the paper "Steps In Overcoming Masturbation" attributed to the LDS apostle Mark E. Petersen, which recommended aversive techniques such as imagining bathing in and eating worms while masturbating in order to stop. Kip stated that all of this made him feel he was disgusting and awful for masturbating and he reported feeling depression and self-loathing.^[99]

https://childfriendlyfaith.org/2019/06/the-homophobic-teachings-of-the-mormon-church-killed-my-son/ Another case of suicide. I think bishop's interviews might be helpful in some instances, but it's playing Russian Roulette as well. Is there something the church can do to fix this, is what I want to know.