Jehovah's Witnesses, Voluntary Response Bias, and Other Questions

by TheClarinetist 9 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  TheClarinetist

  [Please forgive my math in this post. It is very inexact and used mainly as examples.]

  As many of you should know, I have a rather large axe to grind with regards to Jehovah's Witnesses. Okay, to be fair it is smaller than many of your axes, but I say that as a background for my next couple of thoughts. I was reading the thread on why elders ask so many personal questions regarding private details of peoples sex lives, and many people came forward with terrible stories of how they were mistreated. The question I've been wondering is how "normal" are the people who come forward?

  In an organization with seven million members, if 1 member in 1000 were mistreated that way, and of those 1 in 10 left the Truth™, then that would leave around 700 people with similar stories, and it wouldn't be unfair to guess that a dozen or so would end up on this site or one like it. I'm not going to lose sight of the fact that every single one of those instances was a terrible tragedy, but the question that bothers me is how do I know that the stories I hear on this site and other places reflect the true situation in the Watchtower Organization?

  Another item I see often damning the Watchtower Society is the large number of known child molestation cases. The number I keep seeing thrown around is 27,000. That is obviously a terrible number. That is at least 27,000 lives ruined or forever blackened. I also hear that the average molester has 10 victims, which means this number of 27,000 molesters could be as much as 270,000 victims! At the same time, however, according to the statistics I've read (I forget what the exact proportion and source... I've been sitting on this question for a couple of weeks now), there should be around 360,000 child molestation victims in the Organization, which would suggest it is possible that the Jehovah's Witnesses actually have FEWER child molesters/victims than should normally be found in an organization of such size. (That's a REALLY depressing thought. ) [As far as the handling of situations is concerned, see above paragraph]

  So I present a very simple question (though I would like to hear responses also the points I brought up): How do I figure out what is true of the JWs as a whole? Is it possible?

  By the way, this is completely separate from any doctrinal issues, such as disfellowshipping, the stance on blood, and rampant homophobia that I am sure exist in the organization because of their very own literature.
• 

  still thinking

  Please clarify what you mean by normal?
• 

  wobble

  "Show me a man who is normal, and I will cure him" Carl Gustav Jung.
• 

  jean-luc picard

  "which would suggest it is possible that the Jehovah's Witnesses actually have FEWER child molesters/victims

  than should normally be found in an organization of such size"

  It is not necessarily a question of if there are fewer or more.

  It is the coverups by an organisation who critisises others ( Catholics for example) for doing the same.

  They present a holier than thou attitude,

  actively preaching that they are better than other religions,

  giving this as evidence that THEY are the true religion.
• 

  Band on the Run

  The bias of people responding is highly documented. Many college and grad courses are devoted to understand it and trying to limit it. It was not mandatory in my days so I don't know the details. Anger is a strong motivator. I have no doubt those experiences actually happened. Are there so many Roman Catholics ready to lynch the church over pedophiles? The very act of sexual abuse transforms one. Typically, they were strong members of their parish -- and many remained active even after the church screwed them. It is much worse with Catholics than Protestants. The celibacy requirement breeds sexual deviancy. Lack of birth control guarantees a fresh supply of victims and the authoritarian nature of the church, and I believe the Witnesses are even worse, converge to create a toxic situation.

  What angers Catholics most is the not the act itself. Short of paradise horrid things will happen. It is the coverup. Children need protection, not priests. Only a fraction of the cases would occur if the church did not reassign and actively cover up. The sin is not a sin of omission or turning the other way. It is a serious sin of commission, actively creating a paradise for pedophiles, valuing priests more than the laity they are suppose to serve.

  When I read the New York Times or Vanity Fair or New Yorker,which I adore, I know the bias and can adjust for it. Several times I've chuckled as the NYT gunned for Elliot Spitzer, Charlie Rangel, or McCain. Few people believe in neutral sources (though many will suspend for a Bible that they have no idea how it came to be. Magic) today. Facts exist objectively but they can be slanted or explained in a certain way indicating bias. With the Internet, we have access to countless viewpoints. More and more people are creating their own newspapers by going to sources they select. Multiple sources become important.

  Just as with the Catholics, the Witnesses have a very bizarre view of sexuality. I would be stunned if men would be grilled this way. There is no justification for it. Details are not needed to decide whether one is prone to a practice and has repented. They used to question rape victims this way. Only Christ can see into people's hearts and minds. Everything they complain about the Roman Catholic Church the Witnesses magnify. I don't think they view the Vatican as evil as much as the Witnesses are jealous of its power. They ape it every chance they get.
• 

  jamiebowers

  You are asking your questions to the wrong people. Why not ask the governing body? If the Watchtower wasn't so deceptive and secretive, there wouldn't be people claiming all of the terrible things that they do about being a jw.
• 

  TheClarinetist

  Please clarify what you mean by normal?

  By normal I mean what the average Jehovah's Witness would find when they have a JC for fornication. The official guidelines, as was stated in the other thread, say that there should be no questions with regards to specific details. Are the reports we hear the average JW experience, or are they the outliers? If they're the outliers, are there outliers in the other direction? That sort of thing. Sorry if it was worded badly... I was half asleep.

  It is not necessarily a question of if there are fewer or more. It is the coverups by an organisation who critisises others ( Catholics for example) for doing the same.

  Thanks for that clarification. That makes a lot of sense to me and is far less biased than a lot of the rhetoric by [very well-meaning and knowledgeable] members of this board.

  You are asking your questions to the wrong people. Why not ask the governing body? If the Watchtower wasn't so deceptive and secretive, there wouldn't be people claiming all of the terrible things that they do about being a jw.

  The GB is a lot more biased than this board is. But seriously, part of the problem is I'm trying to figure out just how deceptive and secretive they are. You can't exactly go up to them and ask "hey! are you secretive and deceptive to your members?", and I have a LOT of bias against them myself. I want them to be an evil organization out to get me because it would make me feel better that way... Which means that unless I have good hard facts to go together with it, my opinion is completely worthless. I'm trying to move past the blind hatred and move towards more intellectually honest hatred.
• 

  Band on the Run

  You know the GB bias and people who voluntarily bother to come here certainly have a bias. There isn't a mathematical certainty to other side. I will say this from my experience. JWs are very insulated from the world and very trusting of the GB. They will sit there and bury their instincts. Power that is not checked always corrupts. These stories could be abberations. There was a very fast response of me, too.

  I am freely stating that I have a bias. Will the GB acknowledge their biases?
• 

  jamiebowers

  But seriously, part of the problem is I'm trying to figure out just how deceptive and secretive they are.

  Read Barbara Anderson's site watchtowerdocuments.com . There are court documents that go back to 1964, (I think that date is correct), that spells out the cover ups for and shuffeling of child molesters. Merton Campbell was involved with doing so for one of the most notorious child molesters in the organization, (James Henderson, if I remember correctly), and Campbell was featured as a faithful servant of Jehovah in the March 1, 2008 Watchtower. I mean, come on, even convicts hate child molesters, yet Watchtower higher ups cover for them. How much more do you need to know?
• 

  TheClarinetist

  I am freely stating that I have a bias. Will the GB acknowledge their biases?

  Of course they won't admit any bias. They're God's own chosen infallible messengers to mankind? Didn't you know? LoL.

  Read Barbara Anderson's site watchtowerdocuments.com . There are court documents that go back to 1964, (I think that date is correct), that spells out the cover ups for and shuffeling of child molesters.

  Thanks... Will definitely check it out.