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.
otwo: OrphanCrow, Frosty has a magic hat. Mom and Dad must have missed that.
Actually...it was the 60s, and my mom came from a time when xmas was still celebrated in the JWs. My dad wasn't raised JW, he converted - that may have something to do with it. But, all the kids in our congregation sang along to Frosty. Times change, especially if you are a JW.
saw similar title in a google search so thought i'd read more and now simply have to share my experience if anything to hear that i'm not insane and it is that simple.. met and fell madly in love with a witness, and her with me.
what began as love at first sight turned into a 6 year relatiomship which simply ended very bluntly.
there were many painful twists and turns along the way, first from her inability to leave her husband, then my mistake in finding someone else as i simply couldn't take the pain of her coming and going with such simplicity, but in the end she got a divorce and suffered many consequences within 'the truth', and i sorted my issues which were many and admittedly dug with my own hands and stupidity in trying to protect a young girl who had done no wrong in this long affair.. eventually we found ourself on what i believed to be the home straight.
"her inability to leave her husband"
Well, there you go.
Ya shouldn't get involved with married people. If you have no respect for that...don't expect any respect back.
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: Can it be prosecuted? Does it break a law?
In the context of work or school, yes. The behaviour breaks the law. How far that legal arm extends...and if those same laws can be applied to a religion...I am not sure.
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.
