Bill Bowen's Comments on Ray Franz (page 18)

Pathofthorns

The movie "Silence of the Lambs" was also the first thing that came into my mind when I heard of "Silentlambs". But I wouldn't personally criticize Bill's choosing that particular name. Imo it is just not something that needs to be an issue.

I do think that at this point in time though that a name change might be something beneficial to consider. Victims certainly are no longer "silent" and often they are not just "lambs". They have been empowered and are strong and have spoken out. At this point in time, the present name doesn't reflect the progress of the movement and can almost be perceived as a bit demeaning to survivors of this crime.

A name change also could signify a fresh start with a renewed focus. If the disorder of the past weeks has resulted in positive changes to prevent self-defeating mistakes a name change could reflect these positive changes. It would also place the focus back on the issue where it belongs and not on the person of Bill Bowen who seemed to be too synonymous with the name Silentlambs.

Just a suggestion for what its worth.

Path

waiting

Ok. I happened to watch Silence of the Lambs (for about the 6th time) last week.

Actually, the meaning of the phrase has nothing to do with Lector - and everything to do with a poor little girl trying to save a lamb being led to slaughter.

The imagery brought forth of a poor little orphan hearing for the first time the horror of a spring lamb slaughter would be indescribable, for the most part. Waking up to a strange noise from animals who weren't supposed to be able to scream. To hear the babies screaming in horror, killed by men who really were quite decent. To try and save at least one screaming baby, only to have it torn away.

And to never be able to silence the screaming of the lambs, even with sleep. Now, the movie might have made more of this than in actuality. But I've heard the *screams* of pigs in a slaughtering house as a child. It'll rattle the nerves of even a strong adult, if not properly conditioned to ignore their screams.

Now with the SilentLambs victims/survivors - they have been silenced by men (and women). But I'd be willing to bet for every single one of them who actually finds their voice ------- another 10/20/30 still can't speak. Some never will be able to, or want to. Social stigma and private pain are too great.

The name is unimportant - but the significance of the words are great.

Perhaps it's time to give this subject a break.

waiting

Mulan

Why attack Princess for her OPINION?

It is an odd name for the group. We have come to see it as a fitting name, but in the beginning, didn't everyone make the connection to the movie?

No one is saying he should change the name. It's just a comment, that got blown all out of proportion. Stop it already.

Princess

Thanks mom. I think it's easier for them to attack me than to defend Bill. I believe it was Charlie himself who said to Farkel in another post:

(Farkel) doesn't have anything better to say, so he's switched to personal attacks

That just about sums up the latest.

Rachel

(Princess Cinderella to GRITS)

teejay

In the fall of last year I placed a telephone call to Ray Franz. ... I asked Ray if he understood the extent of the abuse problem in the organization. Rays reply to me was he did not really think child abuse was a problem in the organization. I then went on to discuss my findings along with why I had come to my conclusions... Ray replied that in forty years he had not known of any cases coming up and that he thought the problem of abuse among JWs was no larger than in main stream religion. I said Ray you have it wrong it is far worse and gave further reasons. Toward the end of the conversation Ray agreed that the closed nature of the organization could cause problems, but he had yet to see evidence of it. I replied that the information on the silentlambs website provided a ton of proof, to which Ray stated it needed to be documented. At the end of the conversation I did not feel we were in agreement. So as a result I concluded with the comment, "Ray if you did not see this as a problem when you were in, it certainly has become a problem now, so if anyone asks you about this please make remarks that acknowledge this problem.... I simply asked him to not be negative to others about child abuse not being a problem. My primary reason for making this comment was in the event Ray was called by media he would not give them a negative impression regarding the extent of abuse in the organization. -- Bill Bowen / aka silentlambs [bold mine]

This is all any thinking person needs to read to get to the bottom of the idiocy of Bowen's mindset.

To start with, each of us--individually--are left to conclude whether or not Ray's admission (of not knowing of any child abuse cases in 40 years) is true or not. We don't need a Bowen to decide for us whether or not Ray's version is correct... or not. Knowing JW elders like I know JW elders, I choose to consider that Ray's version of past events is quite plausible.

Even if I didn't... even if I were completely Bowenized like some seem to be (meaning: unable to allow even the faintest criticisms of Bowen no matter how valid), the fact remains that I would have no proof (as Bowen has no PROOF) that would allow me to ASSERT PUBLICLY that Ray wasn't being truthful. Bowen made a bad situation even worse when he went on to suggest that Ray was part of some nefarious conspiracy in covering up something "he did not want to reveal." Bowen is out of his freaking, backwater Kentucky mind, is what! It seems to me that his (that would be Bowen's) reality is the only reality he will consider, and that's very sad.

Secondly, the really ludicrous thing is that Bowen--by his own words!--actually had the nerve to try to direct how Ray was to answer questions that might be put to him at a later time.

Repeating:

"... if anyone asks you about this please make remarks that acknowledge this problem.... I simply asked him to not be negative to others about child abuse not being a problem. My primary reason for making this comment was in the event Ray was called by media he would not give them a negative impression regarding the extent of abuse in the organization." -- Bowen's directive to Ray Franz

"If someone asks you such and such, don't tell them what you really think but answer this way."

Ray shows himself to be far superior to me because if it had been me, I woulda hung up on the fool right then and there! Don't tell me how to answer a question, Dumbass! Somebody asks *me* a question, I'm gonna freakin' answer it however I bloody well please and not allow somebody to put words in my mouth. It's bad enough that Bowen had the gall to make that request/demand in the first place. What's worse is that it seems that Bowen actually thought that Ray would/should do what he was told. If that's the case then Bowen is more delusional than I thought. I mean REALLY.

Prisca

Teejay,

Bill Bowen was an elder up until a year ago. His comments to Ray, trying to tell a man almost twice his age what to do, reveal that Bill is still in the elder-mindset. Elders are used to directing congregation members, telling them what they should do and say. Bill's obviously hasn't lost that mentality yet.

Time will tell if he ever does.

minimus

Prisca, I don't think that this is necessarily an elder mind-set. I know a lot of elders that wouldn't act as BB has. BB is simply a person that sees things his way, which he believes is the right way. A lot of people call this arrogance. And you don't have to be an elder to be arrogant.

Focus

Prisca .. she called them "wankers" .. she emailed out her photo .. Prima Donna Class [edited by means of deletion, as I agree with Mulan below that she is a distraction here]

Here, Prisca claims Bill has an Elder mindset and is dictating to Ray.
She is a reliable guide, indeed.

Bill was not, from what I have read on JWD, trying to tell Ray what to do. I have not yet explored the new Silentlambs website.

Bill was trying to give Ray information that Ray apparently did not have - and which, JUDGING BY THE AMAZING ACCOUNTS HERE, Ray perhaps did not want to hear.

Bill was very likely not subtle enough, not tactful enough, and so close to the painful issue that he was not his own best advocate. Bill is not in the Ray league of Communication and Wordplay Skills, and does not claim to be.

Here is a link to a PARABLE that illustrates (with deliberate blur) the real issue - COMPLETELY MISSED BY (ALL?) THE POSTERS TO THIS LONG THREAD: Click HERE for the Parable

If the Parable is still not clear enough to explain what is REALLY going on, CLICK HERE for the key to the parable - PLEASE DO NOT PEEK WITHOUT FIRST READING THE PARABLE. I really would prefer if you would think it out for yourself. If you look for the 10-word long line in red all by itself in my post of Oct 31, 2002 00:54, with the words "RAY FRANZ" and "TWO WITNESSES" in it, you have found the heart of things.

Sorry for the red faces when the penny eventually drops.

--
Focus
(Face The Facts! Class)

Edited by - Focus on 31 October 2002 13:35:29

Mulan

Will everyone PLEASE stop picking on Prisca?????

Let us not get into the "kill the messenger" mindset. Haven't we all had enough of that nonsense?

Edited by - mulan on 31 October 2002 13:28:7

ballistic

Simon, can we have an ignore feature for these repetitive BB / RF threads which don't seem to drop?

Bill Bowen's Comments on Ray Franz

Share this