Thoughts on the new AAWA video and other things!! (page 3)

zed is dead

Marvin,

I wouldn't shun child molesters; I would report them to law enforcement and let them remove them from society. Wouldn't you?

I see now that you admit to speaking for AAWA. I have known that for a long time. I think your slip is showing.

zed

gingerbread

Thanks for jumping on the Rosa Parks "parallel" - wha happened.

Peaceful demonstrations during the 1950's and '60's against segregation is what Ms. Parks participated in. It was well organized to bring attention - through the media - to the Jim Crow laws. On the surface one might see a parallel between segregation and shunning.

The JW shunning policy is very simple. Issues of segregation were a bit more complex.

I hope AAWA leaders don't see themselves as martyrs to this faith. Nobody's getting imprisoned, shot, burned, strung up, beat or hosed...

Marvin Shilmer

-

zed is dead,

I answered the question you asked of me. I expect the same of you.

My direct question to you was this:

- I shun individuals I know to be child molesters by refusing to associate with one socially.

Question for zed is dead:

- Do you think that is wrong?

Well, zed is dead, do you think I’m WRONG for refusing to associate socially with individuals I know to be child molesters?

And your answer is:________________

Marvin Shilmer

Tater-T

Their is nothing wrong with shunning ... as long as it is YOUR decision..

there are people in my life, who I will never interact with again .. but it is because I made that call

Simon

do you think I’m WRONG for refusing to associate socially with individuals I know to be child molesters?

As with all things, the answer is not that black and white although most people find it convenient treating it as such.

There are studies that have shown that socialising with offenders is the best treatment to prevents future abuse.

Given that some were themselves victims and most people would want to prevent more victims in future then shunning can actually be counter effective and contribute to the problem.

Of course I think most people, me included, would find the idea very difficult to put into practice even if the evidence was that it was the most effective solution and I don't think the general public would ever accept it. It doesn't mean that crimes should not be punished or that dangerous repeat offenders should be given the chance.

But it does highlight that many things are never as simple as first imagined especially when it comes to social criminality issues. Real solutions are not always 100% about punishment but also treatment.

(I will post a link when I find / remember what it was called)

wha happened?

Mrv, shunning is hardly enough for a response to a known child molestor in your midst. Do u also just shun murderers? If the Boston Bomber was in your social circle would u mearly shun him? Or report him?

Shunning is seared into the minds of dubs that they don't realize it was just a tool of the WT to cut social ties, to those with opposing views. It's hardly a remedy for anything even slightly serious, and it certainly helps the pedo hide behind WT policy and be protected. Unlike the victim. Nice going.

wha happened?

It was well organized to bring attention - through the media - to the Jim Crow laws.

Bingo! See how that works? They knew that never in history, has the repression of one group ended because the perpetrators had a change in heart. It always took either civil action, or even a war to end it. The laws in this country didn't just appear from politicians who also had a change of heart. It took well organized, social action, and coverage from respected media outlets, to force those changes.

Simon

So it's called COSA - Circles of Support and Accountability

Two Canadian studies have focused on the relative rates of reoffending between COSA Core Members and matched comparison subjects who were not afforded participation in a Circle. [7] [8] In the first study, a group of 60 high-risk sexual offenders involved in COSA (Core Members from the original pilot project in South-Central Ontario) were matched to 60 high-risk sexual offenders who did not become involved in COSA (matched comparison subjects). Offenders were matched on risk, length of time in the community, and prior involvement in sexual offender specific treatment. The average follow-up time was 4.5 years. Results showed that the COSA Core Members had significantly lower rates of any type of reoffending than did the matched comparison subjects. Specifically, the Core Members had a 70% reduction in sexual recidivism in contrast to the matched comparison group, a 57% reduction in all types of violent recidivism (including sexual), and an overall reduction of 35% in all types of recidivism (including violent and sexual).

The second study consisted of a Canadian national replication of the study from the pilot project. [8] The same basic methodology was used — comparing COSA Core Members to matched comparison subjects. Participants for this study were drawn from COSA projects across Canada, but not including members of the pilot project. In total, the reoffending of 44 Core Members was evaluated against 44 matched comparison subjects, with an average follow-up time of approximately three years. Similar to the first study, dramatic reductions in rates of reoffending were observed in the group of COSA Core Members. Specifically, there was an 83% reduction in sexual recidivism, a 73% reduction in all types of violent recidivism (including sexual), and an overall reduction of 71% in all types of recidivism (including sexual and violent) in comparison to the matched offenders.

Marvin Shilmer

-

“As with all things, the answer is not that black and white although most people find it convenient treating it as such.”

Simon,

Respectfully, I don’t disagree that socializing with perverts might help those perverts and, by extension, potential victims. But that’s a red herring in response to the question I posed to zed is dead.

You’re dead wrong that the answer to the question I asked is not yes or no. It is one or the other.

Either…

- zed is dead thinks I am WRONG for refusing to associate socially with individuals I know to be child molesters.

Or…

- zed is dead thinks I am not WRONG for refusing to associate socially with individuals I know to be child molesters.

It’s that simple, in respect to the question I actually asked to zed is dead.

Insofar as the overall point you make, I have not suggested that how, when or where association with perverts is good, or that certain association with them is not wrong. That larger question is not something I’ve addressed, and it’s not part of the question I asked zed is dead.

Marvin Shilmer

-

“Mrv, shunning is hardly enough for a response to a known child molestor in your midst. Do u also just shun murderers? If the Boston Bomber was in your social circle would u mearly shun him? Or report him?”

wha happened?,

When you can show me where I’ve ever said such an idiotic thing as you attribute to me above then I’ll feel compelled to answer those questions.

In the meantime, try reading what I’ve actually written rather than trying to read my mind. The former is much more objective than the latter.

Marvin Shilmer

Thoughts on the new AAWA video and other things!!

Share this