can anyone give any details on what to expect next in barbara anderson's case?.
i just read about the questioning of how a woman got into a researcher position at bethel.
i have a few questions on this myself, based on the level of involvement i've heard claimed.
metatron,
I'm sure you are right. Even the proofreaders outside of the home office, most of the proofreaders in Factory 1, were sisters and it was pretty obvious that they could read between the line-o-type. In fact, they knew who had written the original articles and usually knew who was responsible for the edits.
Gamaliel
can anyone give any details on what to expect next in barbara anderson's case?.
i just read about the questioning of how a woman got into a researcher position at bethel.
i have a few questions on this myself, based on the level of involvement i've heard claimed.
Can anyone give any details on what to expect next in Barbara Anderson's case?
I just read about the questioning of how a woman got into a researcher position at Bethel. I have a few questions on this myself, based on the level of involvement I've heard claimed. It would have been almost unheard of while I was at Bethel.
My primary job at Bethel was related to illustrating and typography for the publications. However, I rarely saw a woman on the Writing floor or even in any of the Bethel or Gilead libraries, for that matter. Of course, that was back in the late 70's and early 80's. There were probably more, but I knew only one sister at the time who said she wrote an article for Awake! magazine. (It was about brushing your teeth, so I doubt it even needed much editing by the brothers.)
I also knew a sister in an important proofreading position who was therefore involved in certain editing issues that revealed some of the factional thinking going on in the Writing department at the time. I still have most of a revision copy of a JW book manuscript where some edits, corrections and suggested "clarification" is written on almost every page. (Requested edits can be revealing, and sometimes even the foreign translators would need to be involved when only slight differences in English meaning could result in bigger differences when translated.)
Karl Klein gave a presentation once around that time that supposedly showed just how humble the writers had to be, so he chose a manuscript that had gone through a couple rounds of massive surgery-slash-editing. Turns out that this was not really true of the better writers. At least one able brothers at the time rarely had even a single word changed in his typed manuscripts and I understood that this was evidently a point of jealousy for some of the others.
I also did some work at the Branch office in Greece in 1979 and sisters were handling a lot more of the work there at the Branch in Athens, but I have no idea if sisters were allowed any level of involvement in Branch writing, such as certain research assignments they are sometimes asked to do, or those offerings by "Awake! correspendent in [Branch country]."
A personal aside: I was once asked to do some Biblical research for a GB member, but no further such work ever came my way after I failed to find anything supporting what he wanted to prove. However, he kindly continued to let me use his office library for research.
Gamaliel
i am interested in hearing comments from you regarding whether you feel the child abuse problem is greater within the jw 'religion' moreso than other religions or identifiable groups.. i know some have made the comment that it is and others say there is no difference.
on what do you basis your belief either way.
is it strictly that the environment is conducive to pedophiles co-existing with the cong or based on empirical data?.
Kismet,
Good question. I think the problem IS bigger among JWs than average religions, but I would like to see a thread like this that just sticks to the known facts. I don't have any so I'll just ramble about a few opinions.
I think one of the most damaging statistics might be a comparison of the the number of cases reported to authorities in states where they don't have to report -- for non-JWs abusing JW children vs. JWs abusing JW children. I think that the number would show a problem, no matter how many actually cases there are. It wouldn't take too many cases to indicate to a court that the WTS puts pressure on elders and families not to report when it would bring "unnecessary" reproach on the congregation.
I've read the thread from Amazing about a survey extrapolation from several months ago. Bill Bowen also mentions in a post on his site that he has some surveys which might provide even more data. A full list of cases brought to Bill's attention to date, omitting duplications and without identifying names, times or places might be a more useful for both JWs and the public than the 23,700 number. Even if it's smaller than the 23,700 number, it would be more meaningful to everyone, especially since we could see it increase from week to week.
The WTS supporters tend to claim that the number of pedophile records Bill displays on the first page of his site is exaggerated, but they never propose a "real" number. The only believable excuse I have heard about the possible inflation of that number is the possibility that it contains all underage sex cases, even between two "consenting" underage adults. It may very well contain these because of increasing lawsuits between the parents and guardians of such children. I am still doubtful that they would include them, though. But I think they WOULD include accusations, which would even include non-JW parties, even if they considered them either false or unable to act upon (only one eye-witness in the case of denial by the accused). I can't imagine the Service Department not wanting a file that includes these cases.
If it's of interest, I've heard there is also a murders file. From my perspective it's just a rumor, but a Bethelite of note supposedly mentioned ot someone some years ago (before I had heard of a pedophile file) that the number of JW murder cases in a single year numbered in the teens and this relatively "low" number was unbelievable high to him. (He's still at Bethel.) I don't remember if that was international or US.
That said, I think it IS a bigger problem among Jehovah's Witnesses than the average religion. It doesn't take a huge number of cases reported or acted upon to show that it's a big problem for JWs. Just a few illegally unreported cases would be a huge problem. As some others have said, just a few proven cases is a HUGE problem when JWs are supposedly in a spiritual paradise.
I read somewhere here the opinion that the ratio could be worse among Catholic priests than among JW elders specifically. The priesthood tends to attract those (males) who think that a career in the priesthood will help them deal better with their own demons. But priests come right out seminary into contact with children. JW elders have to climb the ladder, and during that time, some sexual abusers have been known to get caught before reaching elder.
Also, the JWs get more from converts than most other religions, but I don't know if they draw from a cross-section that is less or more likely to be sexual abusers. I hear that the abused are more likely to grow up to be abusers, and I would think that the abused would be the most likely to turn to religious promises for answers. I also believe it's quite probable that a potential convert who was already a pedophile or sexual predator would be attracted to the crowds of children who are so extra trusting of adults because of the so-called "brotherhood." I know I'm not saying anything that hasn't already been said, but JW children seem especially vulnerable because they are taught subtly that they should be willing to give their lives for each other, that these tests may come upon them at any time. Parents are suckered into the belief that it's a spiritual paradise, partly BECAUSE of the cover-up of sexual abuse. Still, do we know enough about the mind of pedophiles and/or sexual abusers. Is it likely that they would suffer through the rigor and regimen of the WTS guilt filter. Would they rather ignore this potential pedophile paradise and go after easier prey, as child sports coaches or other such avenues which don't make you go to so many meetings a week and make you get up and speak hypocritically as often as they can.
If it is a genetic problem, then we'd have to find out if JWs are really capable of breeding more pedophiles than other religions. Of course, I don't think inbreeding was what Ray Franz meant when he said that he could see where the problem might be worse due to the "closed" nature of the religion.
I do know that many young males who accepted studies and baptism have long included those who came in just to try to marry a siste they had their eye on. The sister was often in on this "game" in experiences I was aware of. Still, it's hard for me to imagine the worst-case scenario, that a child abuser who is never caught until he makes "elder" having planned the entire religious career track just to get into a position of authority and trust, so that he can take advantage of children. From what I have heard of abusers, even the "opportunistic" abusers is that they have multiple victims, and therefore many chances of getting caught and losing privileges and therefore never making "elder."
You'd think that the protection of the reputation of JWs would incline them to be quicker to remove even those who might be suspected of causing a scandal, and who knows maybe some abusers are dealt with in this way too. That's what they do with murderers and apostates, they try to disfellowship them before much PR damage or religious damage is spread.
Still trying to put my thoughts in order on this one. Hope a lot more people weigh in.
Gamaliel
Edited by - Gamaliel on 25 November 2002 12:10:6
been browsing around...and i have to say it is alittle difficult to tell if this is a pro or anti jw site.
any takers on filling me in on what the attitudes are around here?
it seems there are quite afew inactive and df or da people but then there seems to be alot of chat about meetings etc.. for the record, i was raised jw from age 5, baptised at 15 and df at 17 and reinstated at 18. i would call myself inactive...most of my family are still active but talk and associate with me.
TIffany,
I'm a newbie here, too. Welcome. It's a lot from both sides of the fence, and plenty of straddlers, too. Ex-JWs/DA's/DF's outnumber JWs for several reasons:
1. because JWs are not encouraged by the WTS to participate in such forums or the Internet in general.
2. Also these forums provide some small part of what JWs lose when the organization turns them out.
3. Ex-JWs are often very clear and open about what their problems were with the JWs. Most JWs are still not ready for that kind of honesty, so they don't stick around very long.
Serious questions are taken seriously, but as you probably already know, if you come on here with a specific one-sided idea to promote or preach then there always be enough folks who disagree to keep things interesting. Seems to me that everyone is welcome as long as they play nice. Looks like your also welcome (up to a point) even if you don't want to play nice -- just be prepared for some heat.
Gamaliel
has anyone heard of asperger's syndrome?
i was doing research the other day, for someone, and came across this disorder.
in reading it, i am positive both my youngest son and his wife have it.
pettygrudger,
No. It's a fight every year. The argument is always that he is doing fine academically and his behavior has been without incident for a couple years now. (All A's on report cards we just got yesterday!!) The teachers don't seem to get it at first, but he's taken out of class for an hour a day for work with the specialists. After a few days or weeks, the teachers start to see that he really is different and has special needs.
Of course, the District tries to keep costs down. My wife has been a school administrator and Assistant Principal for the last 10+ years and has a lot of political pull in the District even though she works in an adjacent district. Otherwise, we wouldn't win the fight.
I agree that he will continue to need services and we will continue to request them until high school if possible. He doesn't listen well to complex questions, so he'll need more work on that if he's going to continue to get good grades.
His biggest issue will be the teasing by the more athletic minded as he gets older. He's tall and thin and still has a bit of the toe-walking and "flapping" that will be misinterpreted. At home he still flaps his arms like a bird as he runs around the house. He's learned to control it in school so far.
Gamaliel
has anyone heard of asperger's syndrome?
i was doing research the other day, for someone, and came across this disorder.
in reading it, i am positive both my youngest son and his wife have it.
Mulan,
My youngest son has it. Wouldn't talk 'til he was three. Had the worst tantrums you ever saw when things wouldn't go his way or a routine was changed. Wouldn't respond appropriately socially. Couldn't understand why he couldn't also be the adult (give commands, demand obedience). His teacher told us yesterday that if he's interested in a subject, he learns it so well she'll let him teach the class (whales, ocean life, etc.). He'd constantly line things up. Obsessed on subjects like acorns, bugs, etc. Start a collection of something and never stop.
We started looking for help for him at about 2 but you couldn't diagnose anything until he was 3. Even then, not even the specialists had heard of the syndrome. We're still getting special services for him in school 6 years later, but they are about to stop because his symptons are almost gone in the opinion of the school. He'll still need some help socially, but fortunately he is very high-functioning academically. He's gradually adding a excellent sense of humor to his social repertoire. Almost 10, he's still a bit awkward with some of his friends. As an adult, he'll still have to learn to make up for a lack of social skills through his other intellectual resources.
Most importantly, he is very lovable now. At a very young age, he couldn't be held -- hated to be hugged. My wife knew something was wrong shortly after he was born, but it seemed that nothing could be known or done back then.
Gamaliel
to whom it may concern, .
i have contributed financially to the cause of silentlambs.org and have, to a smaller extent, even promoted the website.
it is difficult enough to fathom the depth of hurt heaped on humankind, but impossible for me to understand how such suffering can be compounded with injustice, as i read experiences on silentlambs.org.
Pleasuredome,
You asked:
can anyone tell me if Franz now believes that there is a problem of child abuse coverups in the organisation?
I personally don't know if Ray is aware of the scope of the current situation, but I know that he indicates that it must be a much bigger problem now than it was when he was a JW, 20 years ago. He said:
It is quite na[i]ve of persons to assume that the intense publicity on this issue in recent times necessarily means that the situation was similar in earlier periods.
I don't necessarily agree with the logic. I believe it is quite possible for something, like earthquakes, for instance to be as frequent in times past, but then, a lot of intense publicity can make people think they are now more frequent. However, in context, he seems to be saying only that current levels of publicity mean that the problem must now be worse. This is what he meant by it when he repeated something like it to me recently, but it is just as possible to mean that a lot of publicity now may be fooling us into thinking it is a much bigger problem than it really is. Maybe it was just that it was considered more of a shame and coverup in his day, and maybe the problem was common, but that's why so few of the issues were raised even to the level of the late Harly Miller (the J. Edgar Hoover of the WTS Service Department).
If the policies in place could be used to contain the issue, there was no reason to raise it to the GB level. (I know of cases of in an old congregation of mine where there were so many new problems in a six-month period that some of them were not to be brought up to the Circuit Overseer because they thought he might think it was a "reflection of how poorly Jehovah's spirit was working with the congregation." (I think it really translated to: some of the elders didn't want to be told that they themselves should spend more time in congregational field service" a typical solution by this CO).
I think that fits in with the experience of most of us. I was extremely surprised to hear of the large numbers reported on silentlambs.org, for example. Ray may not be personally aware of enough specific cases that have been proven and documented to point of being ready for publication. However, he is quite aware of the possibility of cover-up based on the misuse of the policies and the mistaken need to present the organization as a spiritual paradise.
In fact, my first quote in this thread was from Ray, where he said:
Of the many sexual crimes, child molestation is unquestionably one of the most despicable. Those who shield child molesters certainly bear a very heavy responsibility."
I found some additional quotes from Ray, included the following phrases, which tell me he considers the current policy very wrong, and the reason they might be used in a cover-up:
Watch Towers twisted policy regarding the handling of child molestation cases
The fact that the Watch Tower Society distorts the purpose of that law principle referred to by Paul and Christ (which was to protect the innocent against a false accuser) does not justify ones distorting the meaning or intent of a quotation of that principle such as is found in the chapter of the manual referred to. As I have already expressed, I do not believe the Mosaic Law was designed to be rigid and "cut and dried."
What is here stated is in defense of the rightness of Gods law and the validity of citing its principles, not in defense of the misuse of that law by a religious system.
Similarly, to say that because one does not choose to align himself with a certain movement (whether Silent Lambs or any other anti-Watch Tower movement) he thereby can be labeled an apologist for the skewed Watch Tower policies is unjust and hence unchristian.
There is a more basic problem underlying not only these but all the legalisms promoted by the system here involved.
current policy is designed to maintain the image that the Watchtower is a spiritual paradise, which it is not.
In both books, COC and SOCF, Ray deals with this last issue: the fact that the JWs are willing to use a kind of double-think or double-speak to cover up the fact, even to themselves, that there are big problems with the JW policies. They won't see that there's "trouble in paradise." He says that policies are effectively given more importance than justice.
When I spoke with him on the phone a couple weeks ago, he told me much the same thing. I wish I could remember the exact quote, but the idea was that a policies can be made or twisted to fit the interests of maintaining a false pretense about the reputation of the Society.
This is in line of course with what he has been saying for 20 years, and it explains why everyone who has ever called him about it (save one person) gets the exact same explanation that fits consistently his larger set of beliefs about Law, legalism and WT policies.
Gamaliel
Edited by - Gamaliel on 22 November 2002 13:29:57
to whom it may concern, .
i have contributed financially to the cause of silentlambs.org and have, to a smaller extent, even promoted the website.
it is difficult enough to fathom the depth of hurt heaped on humankind, but impossible for me to understand how such suffering can be compounded with injustice, as i read experiences on silentlambs.org.
Gary1914,
I passed my suggestions along to silentlambs.
Also, you asked:
By the way, do you realize that in all your posts, even those that pretend to be conciliatory toward Bill, you couch insults and inuendos toward Bill in your speech?
I didn't check earlier posts, but I checked the last one and, no, it does not have any conciliatory pretensions, couched insults or innuendos. So, no, it's definitely not true of all my posts.
Sounds like you might be concerned about my ambivalence. I can assure you, I am both conciliatory and critical up to the point where I feel it is appropriate. Only my moniker is pretentious.
Gamaliel
Edited by - Gamaliel on 22 November 2002 13:36:4
to whom it may concern, .
i have contributed financially to the cause of silentlambs.org and have, to a smaller extent, even promoted the website.
it is difficult enough to fathom the depth of hurt heaped on humankind, but impossible for me to understand how such suffering can be compounded with injustice, as i read experiences on silentlambs.org.
Thanks to everyone for their comments. I know I didn't respond well to everyone although I'd still like to. Silentlambs is an important topic on this forum and I'm sure it will continue to be. In the future, if I bring up issues with silentlambs, I will definitely try to avoid spreading the "Bill v Ray virus." For now, I just have a few more feelings to express.
I'd like to clarify that I feel proud as an exJW, that another exJW, Bill Bowen has put as much work and money into the silentlambs organization as he has. I see it as a place that's easy for victims to reach. It already has a "marketable" and appropriate name and widespread recognition. Obviously, it offers a voice to victims, offers empowering examples to victims and offers an environment where their voice is accepted as credible. Importantly, true to its niche, I think it recognizes the specific issues that make victims in the JW category know that they are not alone in their feeling of being doubly victimized. (i.e., due to the WTS organization's twisted view of itself and twisted method of handling abuse cases) I'm no expert, but I believe these factors alone make it an important resource for JW and xJW healing, at least in the initial steps.
Some of the future things I'd like to see are already being addressed and it sounds like there are ambitious plans to expand. I'd like to see more of the following: more listings of (inter)national resources (support and legal), balanced discussions and information about: the various stages of recovery, victim mentality, credibility issues, the statute of limitations, consequences of false accusations, rules of evidence, medical issues, psychological issues, experts from both sides of the repressed memory controversy, more publications, reporting laws, book reviews, etc.
Having said that, I believe my concerns over the future of this organization are still valid. I think Bill, in straining his own personal credibility, has also managed to strain the credibility of the silentlambs organization -- but not beyond fixing. Bill has already shown that his organization has good potential. Therefore, I don't think it's ever too early to begin discussing a "backup plan" to help assure the continuity and expansion of that potential. This "backup" might be necessary in the case of serious organizational issues, financial issues, illness, credibility loss, WTS lawsuit, etc.
By a "backup plan" I actually mean two things:
First, I'd like to see evidence that Bill is making more use of other people in the decision-making process, such as experienced legal, marketing and PR strategists.If he already is then it is merely that my opinion doesn't coincide with their recent advice, and perhaps Bill was doing much better without them.
Second, I mean a "co-existing alternative" meaning another organization with another website, run by different people. Resources could be very similar, but perhaps it would play in a quieter niche for now. It also could be a JW-related extension to an existing legal or support organization.
I must admit that I also have concerns that if another group or organization competes in the same JW/xJW niche and becomes successful that Bill may expend too much negative energy on it. I hope I'm wrong, but it seems to me to be part of his revealed nature. Still, it's not such an uncommon or unexpected personality flaw in those who manage to create highly successful organizations.
I've written that I have further evidence of that same personality flaw and I also have evidence of dishonesty, but I don't have proof, and I don't feel I should risk further tearing down beyond what I have already done. Care with evidence is necessary because others may re-use it for a different purpose from that which was intended. I do believe we have an obligation to tear down and criticize to the point where we believe we are trying to accomplish something useful or good in the long run. Silentlambs is in its beginning stages and if we wish to be truly loyal to its cause, we will all do what we can to help put it on a surer footing.
I should also clarify that I do not, as it has been suggested, have any "evidence" from Ray Franz or any of the other people that Bill has referred to as "the GB of the xJWs." Perhaps it's not even fair to imply that I have more evidence than I have divulged. Then again, others in this thread have already offered evidence of the same type. I have nothing substantially more to add than what has already been expressed in various places.
Gamaliel
Edited by - Gamaliel on 21 November 2002 13:48:2
to whom it may concern, .
i have contributed financially to the cause of silentlambs.org and have, to a smaller extent, even promoted the website.
it is difficult enough to fathom the depth of hurt heaped on humankind, but impossible for me to understand how such suffering can be compounded with injustice, as i read experiences on silentlambs.org.
Mulan,
I've seen your posts on this subject before. I appreciate your reasonable approach. I also don't think Ray has an agenda.
The following is just my perspective on the issue, based in large part on evidence that's already been presented on the board. It happens to agree with evidence obtained outside the board, which I am not invoking:
In my opinion, Bill has as well as admitted that he hyped this up out of almost nothing. But out of frustration for not getting the response he hoped for, Bill as recently as Sunday continues to promote the idea that "Ray wants a war." The only problem is Ray never got involved. In fact, that seems to be exactly the problem. Bill says he wanted Ray to support his efforts and Ray seemed understandably cautious. Not that Ray wouldn't be amenable, in my opinion, to offering or even helping to expose documentable evidence. It's just that Ray didn't have any documentable evidence that fit Bill's agenda. And that's from a version of the story we could once get from Bill himself. End of story. Then, after releasing hints and insinuations for months -- like trial balloons --Bill changes the story to such an extent that Ray believes it best to defend himself publically. Now Bill can hype the defense as an attack. People believed him. Thus, he can pretend he's slaying a dragon, in a story that can now "dragon" quixotically ever after.
I wanted to comment on one other thing you said:
RF is an old man. He is a bit younger than my own father. I would absolutely hate it if people were talking to him and, about him, like some are about RF. Dad has a little dementia, and doesn't remember things clearly, from the past. Some things are completely in fantasyland too. Leave Ray alone.
You may have good personal reasons to associate dementia with your father and, perhaps Ray, by extension. I'm sure you meant this in the most positive light possible. This was attempted by Bill in the title he gave to his recent post about his "war" with Ray. ("Denial, Dementia or Criminal Intent") I'd mark him with a "G" if he was working on "Insinuation Skills."
I think you've mentioned trustworthy friends of you or your husband in previous posts who have known Ray personally. You may be able to sort this out better for yourself by contacting him/them. Perhaps he/they even have more insight into what is happening.
Gamaliel
Edited by - Gamaliel on 20 November 2002 13:41:15
