Victims of Pedophilia=Holy Grail on JW.com

by LDH 92 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  LDH

  Well, since I've been rather "inactive" and haven't started any new threads in a coupla months at least, I want to get your thoughts on this subject.

  I've been reading a fair deal (since I'm a fast reader, I've always been able to keep up with most of the posts.) But lately (past month) I really haven't been feeling drawn to JW.com

  I have nothing but admiration for Simon, Ang, Bill and Shiela but I do have some questions worth raising. Till now, I've kept my mouth shut on the whole Fred Hall thing, because he really is a troll so I take 'em or leave 'em..... but fair is fair.

  • The accusation was made that Fred said something terrible to Jesika. I never read the words myself, they had already been edited.
  • In several emails to me, Fred denied saying anything terrible and felt his words had been taken out of context. He reminded me that he always posts about respecting women and didn't mean to hurt Jesika. This is an excerpt from an email he sent me when the shit hit the fan.

  Hi Lisa:
  
  
  I didn't get the qoute however, I did express my regrets of her being
  molested.
  
  But there is more to this. On Saturday (August 9,2002) morning she
  qouted
  (time 17:33)on Silentlambs post "Can Anyone Find This Article" that she
  was
  young, she was molested. When I saw that post, I felt sorry for her and
  that
  is when I posted it to her. This is not all. A couple a days before
  that,
  she was in the chat room and calling herself a B*tch and I told her
  that she
  not a b*tch.
  
  Lisa, I do not believe of degrading a woman and I do not believe a
  woman
  should not degrade herself! Moreover, there have been a couple of women
  who
  said that they have been molested on that site and I express my regret
  to
  them . There has to be a big misunderstand to all of this; unless I
  posted
  something else that I don't even know about!
  
  Plus, on the same date when I was posting, I been having problems with
  my
  keyboard. When I was posting some words, it didn't type in and being
  deleted. There is a posiblity that when I was posting, some of the
  words
  didn't get in when I enter it.
  
  What is so stupid about this. I was not warned about what I did. And
  down to
  this date, I don't know if I post it unless someone got of hold of my
  password. I wish others beside you would get the whole story.
  
  Fred Hall

  Then a week later I got this:

  It took me a whole
  week to
  find out that I suppose to make fun of Jesika because she was molested.
  That
  is sicking!!! It makes me sick to my stomach that I was accused of
  doing it.
  
  
  Fred Hall

  Now, I don't for one minute believe that someone got ahold of Fred's password. Since I forwarded this to Simon when I received it, and haven't heard back I'm not sure if Simon has proof positive.

  ON THE OTHER HAND.... I do believe Fred's words were taken out of context given the above information which should be easily proven.

  Frequent posters to this board know that FRED'S opinion of Bill Bowen is that he is trying to make himself famous.

  However, deleting his account while taking the above into consideration, seems to be a little unfair.

  • How many times was a poster named "Wonderwoman77" subjected to harsh words and being made fun of? Do y'all remember when she posted her picture how much flak she took for being pretty overweight? I don't remember anyone being deactivated over that.
  • How many times does YK come in here and blather about ALL OF US DYING at his God's hand? Is it ok for him to insult *all* of us just because he doesn't name any names???
  • How many times our openly gay posters were called names and ridiculed for being gay?

  And yet, we have one post that *appears* to ridicule a victim of pedophila and the board goes ape shit.

  IMHO, before a victim of a crime such as rape or other sexual perversions steps forward, they MUST understand that people's response will run the whole gamut from "I'm so, so sorry" to "Get over it" to "I don't believe you."

  If y'all wanted Fred kicked off the board, that's one thing. If he said something to Jesika that *you* wouldn't have said, so be it. But y'all saying or believing he disrespected women I just won't allow.

  Now, if Simon wanted he could easily pull chat logs and verify whether this chat room incident happened just before Fred made his offending post.

  It seems lately if you disagree with SL or don't feel that his issue is the most important one facing JWs right now, then you better keep your mouth shut.

  How bout that. We got our own martyr.

  I also remember Mario Kempes and his lame ass story of his niece Stacy Stacey being molested, and how many of y'all fell for it. In no way do I roll out the welcoming mat for someone stating they are a victim. I'd much rather watch, observe and wait. If I'm not mistaken, Jesika was pretty new here at the time.

  Lisa

  "Can we meet with you for a few minutes after the meeting?" Class
• 

  Englishman

  Lisa,

  Fred said that 3 year old girls frequently lied about being abused. The post was adressed to Jesika.

  The post stayed up for a a while, other posters urged Fred to withdraw his statement.

  The post seemed very hurtful, so I edited out the offending sentence when it became obvious no withdrawal would occur.

  Simon later checked the edited portion, then decided to withdraw Freds posting. He said that Fred must apologise before he could post again.

  That's it.

  Regards,

  Englishman.
• 

  LDH

  Eman,

  Thanks for responding. You said:

  The post seemed very hurtful

  Shall I submit my list of posts which also made hurtful remarks?

  I am asking, if given the above information, the offending post should be taken in context?

  I didn't realize that's what Fred said. Admittedly, the post was pure Fred Hall. Stupid.

  But isn't that what we've come to expect and even allow of him? He makes 4,000 + stupid posts, then he makes one more stupid post, and he's removed.

  I would really like to see the chat log and find out what the conversation was between Fred and Jesika. Then we could ALL find out in what context he made the remark.

  Like I said, I'd like to see You Know deleted. He comes in here an spouts his shit about all of us being worthy of DEATH. You don't consider that hurtful?

  Previous to NYT's reincarnation as the newer, softer Mike Musto, he made some VERY harsh remarks, some of which were directed at me. I can handle myself, alright. But I didn't see anyone jumping up and down calling for his resignation!

  That's the point I'm making. There is a double standard in operation on this board. Hurtful remarks are ok as long as they are not directed at a purported victim of child abuse.

  Lisa

  Lisa
• 

  Englishman

  Lisa,

  When I first read Fred's post, my immediate reaction was that he must have mis-typed something, or slipped up over some simple grammar that made it worse than it was. That's why it was left up for a while.

  Eventually it had to go.

  I can't enlighten you with regard to a chatroom incident, I just haven't seen anything about that.

  I'm not aware that Fred has made any attempt at an apology re the post. I do take your point about people having different idea's as to what is hurtful, however this wasn't a reply to a post made in the heat of the moment, this was a post made specially to Jesika about 3 year old girls lying about having been abused.

  It seemed that he was also given plenty of opportunity to retract the statement or at least alter / delete the post.

  Englishman.

  Englishman.

  Edited by - Englishman on 1 September 2002 12:40:11
• 

  larc

  Lisa, there insults and there are worse insults. You and I are tough cookies and can take abuse. However, to attack an emotional person who is here to recover is just over the top. Now, Fred can come back and aplogize, and Simon will let him back in. He has chosen not to do that. Rather, he has gone to bboy's place and blasted Simon. Lisa, I saw the original and I and others asked Fred to delete his comments. He had hours to do so, but he did not. I think he was given a reasonable opportunity to make amemds, but he didn't. I just don't buy his computer problem story. He read what he wrote and he had plenty of time to change it. Instead of e-mailing you, Fred should be e-mailing Simon. He should apologize, but I doubt that he will. It is not within his nature to apologize. Lisa, you are usually a savy person. In this case, I think you got snookered.
• 

  LDH

  I just don't buy his computer problem story. He read what he wrote and he had plenty of time to change it. Instead of e-mailing you, Fred should be e-mailing Simon. He should apologize, but I doubt that he will. It is not within his nature to apologize.

  LARC

  Maybe I didn't make myself clear. I agree ONE HUNDRED percent with the above. I was pretty scarce around here when it happened, on vacation, etc. So I didn't have the chance to get the full flavor of what happened.

  I suppose I'm just pissed off that OTHERS have made and will continue to make hurtful remarks.

  I forwarded all of Fred's emails to Simon, along with some of my own. I hadn't heard back. So, I thought at least it would be fair to post the emails he wrote to me when it happened.

  I haven't heard from Fred for a while, now.

  We all know Fred is narcissitic, of course it's not in his nature to apologise. You are a Psychologist, of course YOU should know that, LOL.

  Lisa
• 

  larc

  Lisa, I think that Simon is doing his best to maintain some semblance of order here. If you bring up past injuries, I think you need to keep in mind two things. One is the fact that in the past Simon was very reluctant in interfere. He generally let us censor those who were disruptive. That hands off policy generally worked. It is only recently that Simon has edited and deactivated some people. I don't think he had any other choice. The place is bigger now, and has more potential for things getting out of hand. So, I don't see this as a double standard, but as a necessary change. Well, I spent so much time on my first point, that I forgot what my second point was. If I think of it, I will be back.
• 

  LB

  I suppose I'm just pissed off that OTHERS have made and will continue to make hurtful remarks.

  I have a feeling that hurtful remarks are on the decline here. So lisa, you want things to be fair? You want freddie back or do you want others removed?
• 

  Simon

  I get the impression that you are more aggrieved that others, that have said hurtful things to you, have not been treated the same as Fred Hall rather than Fred hall not being treated the same as them.

  Fredhall has made thousands of posts and the number of meaningful, useful contributions could be counted on one hand. He finally stepped over the line and I don't think he will be terribly missed.

  As I have said before, I am not a omniscient robot so will not make 100% consistent and immediate decisions all the time in each situation. Some people get caught, others don't ... but anyone who is making personal attacks like that will most likely be caught and dealt with in the end.

  Please be patient with emails you send me as I do get a lot and also have regular work that I have to take care of too but I promise I will address them.
• 

  hillary_step

  Lisa,

  I think that your thread title merits discussion.

  Only a person who has been sexually abused can truly understand the enormous damage it does to a persons life. On this Board there are perhaps ten participants who have been sexually abused, and understandably all the rest of us, perhaps numbering thousands, tread very carefully where they are concerned lest we add to their suffering in any way. Yes, dare I say it, we 'moderate' what we say because of these special circumstances. Fred crossed the line of decency where this issue was concerned. I happen to agree with you that it was a thoughtless and silly comment, the exercise of which Fred seems to have turned into an art form. I also agree that Fred is usually very gracious to the ladies on the Board, and probably did not design his comment to have the effect that it did have. In view of the reaction that his comment may have on the few who are on this Board who re-live their nightmare each day, Fred was asked to apologize. So far he has not, but the offer is still on the table.

  What worries me a little, and that is perhaps hinted at in the title to your thread is that the whole issue of child-abuse within the WTS can sometimes appear to be crystallizing into a Bill Bowen takes on the WTS battle, like some world heavy-weight title. I find it disturbing for example that the work of many to overturn the no less murderous WTS Blood policy has not found similar momentum because it is less news-worthy and has no public personality attached to it. Personalities played a great part in our lives in the WTS. They became power to some, and knowledge of 'who you know' became an influential weapon. The experience of history teaches us though, that no personality should be bigger that its issue, to elevate a person beyond reality is treading on very thin ice.

  What happens when movements are built on personalities is that revolutions invariably devour their children. This is beginning to happen with Ray Franz, who I have noticed is increasingly criticized for not doing enough by not publicizing facts that he knows about GB personalities, for the decisions he made while a member of the GB, and for not apologizing to the extent that many feel he should. Bill will suffer the same fate if the personality is made bigger than the issue. For example, I have seen frequent demands on this Board from some questioning as to why he tried to avoid disfellowshipping, which is frankly no persons business but his own.

  While the issue of child-abuse is deeply disturbing, we must not feel that we dare not discuss its important implications by only presenting the side of the issue that may meet with everybodys approval on this Board. This is the first step on the cold road to ignorance and the mob and it has and does result in people being scurrilously labeled for even presenting a criticism of Bill, Silentlambs. By all means discuss the issue from every angle, but do so in a way that does not damage child-abuse victims, or in a way that imputes bad motives to those presenting less popular opinions.

  Long post - my apologies - HS

  Edited by - hillary_step on 1 September 2002 14:20:33