i tend to avoid the subject because it's too depressing, so i've probably missed lots of discussion about this issue.
but i read a comment on youtube yesterday that shocked me and made me wonder.
the person claimed that many years ago abusers in society generally identified jws as a safe haven for abusers and joined en masse order to exploit the situation.
If a women agrees to answer questions about her private life how is she not consenting?
Well...I will not go on and on about this, sbf. This is getting redundant. If you can't grasp that one simple concept of when consent is consent and when it isn't, and how it operates within the JW religion and their judicial process, then we are wasting our time discussing this further.
i tend to avoid the subject because it's too depressing, so i've probably missed lots of discussion about this issue.
but i read a comment on youtube yesterday that shocked me and made me wonder.
the person claimed that many years ago abusers in society generally identified jws as a safe haven for abusers and joined en masse order to exploit the situation.
sbf: You mentined murder earlier but there are specific laws relating to murder.
Huh? Did I? Please refresh my memory...I don't think I have mentioned murder.
Is there a specific law against three men questioning a woman if she is not being physically confined at the time? Is that sexual harassment?
Yes. It is. Especially when the questioning is sexual in nature. How can it NOT be?
Physical confinement has nothing to do with it...in other words...you are drawing a line in the sand as to where and how sexual assault is acceptable. By saying..."not being physically confined", you are implying that "she is consenting." That is like saying..."she was wearing a short skirt". You are advocating for implicit consent - defined and determined by those in power.
http://www.rapereliefshelter.bc.ca/faq/what-does-sexual-harassment-look
i tend to avoid the subject because it's too depressing, so i've probably missed lots of discussion about this issue.
but i read a comment on youtube yesterday that shocked me and made me wonder.
the person claimed that many years ago abusers in society generally identified jws as a safe haven for abusers and joined en masse order to exploit the situation.
sbf: The practice of interrogating women (or men - why just women?)...
For the purposes of this discussion...we have been responding to a previous post about "3 elders questioning a woman".
In a more general sense - it is because women in the JW hierarchal structure, have already been classified as the lowest social class. Therefore, the class most likely to be victimized. An adult woman even has less power than a minor baptized male. Women have the very least power within the JWs. Less than any male JW.
What law does it break?
Human rights laws. Sexual harassment laws.
i tend to avoid the subject because it's too depressing, so i've probably missed lots of discussion about this issue.
but i read a comment on youtube yesterday that shocked me and made me wonder.
the person claimed that many years ago abusers in society generally identified jws as a safe haven for abusers and joined en masse order to exploit the situation.
sbf: Maybe other practices like JCs will come under scrutiny too.
Actually, that is where the change has to start, not end. As far as I am concerned that whole system of judicial discipline needs to be dismantled. If the JWs chose to have an internal disciplinary system, it should abide by the same human rights standards that the secular law does.
I guess they can say no one is forced to attend a JC...
That is just a weak kneed excuse. Of course they are forced to attend - they have to attend or face discipline. That is no different than my boss making me attend an inappropriate hearing with the threat that I would be fired if I didn't. Only thing is...the JW women who resist the sexually intrusive questioning, don't just face losing their jobs...they face "eternal damnation".
i tend to avoid the subject because it's too depressing, so i've probably missed lots of discussion about this issue.
but i read a comment on youtube yesterday that shocked me and made me wonder.
the person claimed that many years ago abusers in society generally identified jws as a safe haven for abusers and joined en masse order to exploit the situation.
sfb: Has a secular court ever classed a JW judicial committee as assault? Or are you saying that they won't but they should? Or am I missing the point?
I don't know if a secular court has or not.
I am not saying they won't. I don't know if they won't.
I do know, however, that if the same thing happened to me, as a woman, in a work environment, or at a school, that I would have grounds to lay a sexual harassment charge. Without question.
So...I guess I am saying that "they should"...
i tend to avoid the subject because it's too depressing, so i've probably missed lots of discussion about this issue.
but i read a comment on youtube yesterday that shocked me and made me wonder.
the person claimed that many years ago abusers in society generally identified jws as a safe haven for abusers and joined en masse order to exploit the situation.
slimfatboy: I thought they get a free pass as a religion.
Yeah...I know. That is an attitude that has gone a long way in covering up sexual assault.
Sexual assault is sexual assault. Religion does NOT get a free pass. Rape is rape, regardless of the form it takes or where it happens. The only free passes that it gets are the ones given to it by the victims themselves.
Religion may get away with not ordaining gays or women...but they don't get away with sexually assaulting them.
i tend to avoid the subject because it's too depressing, so i've probably missed lots of discussion about this issue.
but i read a comment on youtube yesterday that shocked me and made me wonder.
the person claimed that many years ago abusers in society generally identified jws as a safe haven for abusers and joined en masse order to exploit the situation.
slimboyfat: Is that against the law? Has the procedure been changed?
I am assuming you are referring to "3 elders questioning a woman about sexual matters".
I don't know about law in other places...but, if that happened in any other environment (work, education, etc...) where I live, sexual harassment charges could definitely be investigated. It is a clear violation of human rights and could, indeed, fall under sexual harassment.
I cannot say definitively, because I don't think it has ever been pursued in a court of law, and, I am not a lawyer...but, I am familiar with harassment laws as they apply to the workplace - and there could very well be human rights laws being broken when 3 men question a woman about sexual matters. That is sexually assaultive, regardless of the environment.
i tend to avoid the subject because it's too depressing, so i've probably missed lots of discussion about this issue.
but i read a comment on youtube yesterday that shocked me and made me wonder.
the person claimed that many years ago abusers in society generally identified jws as a safe haven for abusers and joined en masse order to exploit the situation.
Slimboyfact, I do not find your proposition, that there are "networks" of pedophiles who target the JWs, at all improbable. Evidence for it, though, would be something that would be hard to come by.
In fact, it would not surprise me one little bit if investigative units of some kind have had their eye on the WTS for some time now. Of course the JWs and the WTS are being scrutinized and watched for that exact activity - being targeted by pedophile networks. Police investigative units are pretty sophisticated when it comes to tracking down pedophile rings and there is no way that the WTS has managed to fly under that radar.
On another note, and somewhat related, forums like this are targeted by pedophiles/predators all the time. This is a prime environment to find victims - by people's own admissions, they have already been groomed. And, without a doubt, individual pedophiles/predators are quite aware, now that the JWs have hit the news, that there is an environment to take advantage of - both within the JWs and in places where exJWs hang out.
Someone had said that they would doubt that a pedo would go to all the trouble of being a JW "just to access children". Yes, they would. They would do that and more. In fact, becoming a JW to access children is probably a lot less work than becoming, for example, a hockey coach.
*to add - how many of the Australian cases did Toole et al, claim had convictions/allegations of pedophile activity before they became JWs? It was quite a few, wasn't it? And, those were just the ones they knew about...
Lostandadrift: Let's face it the borg 3 men quizzing a lone woman about sexual matters etc was acceptable and not deemed abuse till some of us woke up and got out. ...so God knows what else we missed spotting lol
This is so true. The ordinary JW has little knowledge of their legal rights and obligations under the "law of the land". They know so little about "the world" - and have been deliberately kept in the dark, that they don't even know when a law has been broken. They only know the law of the WTS. They have deliberately been made unaware and vulnerable.
out at the mall with mrs. otwo, she sees a shirt on the rack that was marked down from $25 to just $4.
she holds it up and says, "should i buy this as a workout shirt?".
i tell her "no, because as soon as you figure out what it means, you won't wear it anymore.
onthewayout: I have said many times that Jingle Bells has no mentions of Christmas whatsoever.
When I was a kid, we were allowed to sing "Jingle Bells" and "Frosty the Snowman" at xmas because mom and dad said that they "weren't xmas songs". I used to love it when those songs came up in the xmas sing-a-longs because it meant that I could sing just like everybody else...at least to those two songs!
pdf.
why won't watchtower tell abusers "i'm going to tell on you!
" and follow through with the proper authorities?
steve: By cleverly including two references to earlier magazine articles, the organization is trying to dupe the secular authorities into concluding it did include clear information on how to keep themselves safe from predators.
But what an odd "game" for parents to play with their children - and no organizational guidance on what those scenarios should appropriately consist of.
The only ones being duped are themselves. The secular world doesn't buy their bullshit.
And yeah...it is an odd game. What is really bad about it is that if a case ever does make it into the legal arena, those "games" can be cast as activities that give suggestion to the child and corrupt evidence. I could see some defence lawyers trying to toss out the child's testimony by saying that the parents were leading the child to only think they had been molested, and that the questions set the child up to make up a story for attention - you know...play games.
*to add - imagine this line of questioning to the child "did your mommy or daddy tell you what to say?" and the child responding "yes...we played games so I knew what to say...we practised" and the lawyer saying to the judge "I move to have this testimony stricken on the grounds that it has been contaminated by the parents' suggestions."
Questioning small children about sex abuse has guidelines that most professionals try to diligently follow - some times, not questioning children properly has harmed both the evidence for court cases and the child involved. I can think of one notable and prominent case from my neck of the woods that had countless problems because of the way the children had been questioned. It was a horrible mess with far reaching consequences.
For Jehovah's Witness parents who are scared to report suspected abuse to elders, or don't know what to do...maybe scared that if they report it they will be shunned...here is an "out" that may help: take your kid to a child psychologist or counsellor. If there is mandatory reporting, then there is a chance that it will be taken out of your hands.
Which, of course, goes a long way to explain why the WT is so against outside professional help for mental health issues. And why the religion is so insular.
