Up Front by Emma Hart

Read Post

Up Front: Fringe of Darkness

256 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 5 6 7 8 9 11 Newer→ Last

  • steven crawford, in reply to steven crawford,

    I understand that not everyone has yet adopted a world view that includes other genders. I’ve felt on the outer over a number of conversations, just sitting, afraid to contribute, waiting for someone to represent a view I identify with as the thread meanders down the well-hewn generic male vs female dichotomy track and is then closed.

    The subject we are discussing here, seldom sees the light of day. Its a difficult conversation. I would rather see people making compleatly irational comments than nothing at all. I can’t see how it’s possable to have a meaningful constructive conversation about this stuff without bringing male vs female experiences to the table. As difficult as that is.

    The news artical you linked to, is an example of how our society is gradually shifting. Just prior to us having conversations on public address system – 2005, the crime that person has been found guilty wasn’t prosecutable becouse of gender.

    Atlantis • Since Nov 2006 • 4414 posts Report Reply

  • steven crawford, in reply to Rosemary McDonald,

    Some victims/survivors of child abuse(in all its forms) do not go on to abuse others.

    In fact….make that most.

    Can we say that most people don’t sexually abuse children, but that some people should be viewed with suspicion?

    Atlantis • Since Nov 2006 • 4414 posts Report Reply

  • chris, in reply to steven crawford,

    I can’t see how it’s possable to have a meaningful constructive conversation about this stuff without bringing male vs female experiences to the table.

    As I said, I understand steven, and not wishing to derail the thread further, perhaps when we’ve moved on sufficiently from 2005 we’ll be able to have a conversation in which examination of psychological elements can be carried out with less recourse to physiological based assumption.

    Mawkland • Since Jan 2010 • 1302 posts Report Reply

  • Katharine Moody, in reply to chris,

    when we’ve moved on sufficiently from 2005

    I'm no good at interpreting innuendo, so really wasn't sure what you were hanging back from saying. But I think I might get it now. I had no idea until steven's above post that the crime of adult woman sexually assaulting a male child only became a crime in 2005? That it is such recent statute is almost unbelievable to me - do I have it right?

    Wellington • Since Sep 2014 • 798 posts Report Reply

  • chris, in reply to Katharine Moody,

    Sorry if that was vague Katharine, my inference was simply that we’re not in 2005 anymore. I’m not familiar with the law, and I’m not in a googling mood, but I’m prepared to trust that steven is correct and that the crime the person has been found guilty of wasn’t prosecutable because of *sex*.

    Mawkland • Since Jan 2010 • 1302 posts Report Reply

  • steven crawford,

    Gender is the more appropriate word here.

    Warning! Link contains a political debate

    In respect of sexual conduct with a young person aged under 16, the bill significantly toughens the law. The loophole protecting women against being charged with sexual offending against children is removed, and women can now be liable to prosecution for predatory conduct.

    Atlantis • Since Nov 2006 • 4414 posts Report Reply

  • Katharine Moody, in reply to steven crawford,

    And following that it went to Select Committee deliberations, and on the third reading the vote tallied:

    A party vote was called for on the question, That the Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) be now read a third time.

    Ayes 89 New Zealand Labour 51; New Zealand First 13; ACT New Zealand 5; Green Party 9; United Future 8; Progressive 2; Māori Party 1.

    Noes 27 New Zealand National 27.

    Bill read a third time.

    Unbelievable. Can they never join in to put right any legislative injustices in the manner of cross-party support? Sheeesh.

    Wellington • Since Sep 2014 • 798 posts Report Reply

  • Hebe, in reply to Lilith __,

    ...What the fuck?...

    With you Lilith.

    Christchurch • Since May 2011 • 2899 posts Report Reply

  • steven crawford, in reply to Hebe,

    "…What the fuck?…"

    With you Lilith.

    This isn’t helpfull.

    Atlantis • Since Nov 2006 • 4414 posts Report Reply

  • Katharine Moody,

    One thing that wasn't mentioned in the article in Metro, or subsequent discussion - is that Bert Potter had a first wife, Leteia, and she is the mother of John (and three other children, 2 by adoption);

    http://www.crime.co.nz/c-files.aspx?ID=1844

    The first wife divorced him because of his initial (i.e. before Centrepoint) pursuit of this path he was going down (i.e. trying to establish a legitimate outlet for his sexually deviant behaviour).

    This is my point about Centrepoint. It was never (to my mind) ".. a selection of average, normal people .. not monsters or freaks.” (as quoted by a victim in the article) - to my mind, her own "surrogate father" was/is a monster:

    Henry Stonex, who in 1992 pleaded guilty to indecent assault on an eight-year-old Centrepoint girl, told the service: ``Bert Potter was the most important person I met in my entire life''.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10805517

    Wellington • Since Sep 2014 • 798 posts Report Reply

  • Katharine Moody,

    For Russell: if any of these victims of historic child sexual abuse decide to bring cases against their abusers - and want to set up givealittle or other means to acquire donations for legal expenses - it would be good if PAS could do a follow up article giving us the where to donate details.

    Wellington • Since Sep 2014 • 798 posts Report Reply

  • Hebe, in reply to steven crawford,

    Agreeing with what Lilith said pages ago, therefore quoting her is not helpful?

    Christchurch • Since May 2011 • 2899 posts Report Reply

  • steven crawford, in reply to Hebe,

    Agreeing with what Lilith said pages ago, therefore quoting her is not helpful?

    Why don’t you explain what is that you are also what the fucking about, so I don’t have to go what the fucking back at you about ganging up on people.

    Atlantis • Since Nov 2006 • 4414 posts Report Reply

  • steven crawford, in reply to Katharine Moody,

    if any of these victims of historic child sexual abuse decide to bring cases against their abusers – and want to set up givealittle or other means to acquire donations for legal expenses – it would be good if PAS could do a follow up article giving us the where to donate details

    I don' t think that's such a good idea.

    Atlantis • Since Nov 2006 • 4414 posts Report Reply

  • Katharine Moody, in reply to steven crawford,

    I don’ t think that’s such a good idea.

    Sorry, too late now for me to delete/edit but very happy for Russell/site admin to delete it as I trust your judgement - you are really well read on the topic. BTW. Meant to say, I found that very first link of yours on intergroup dynamics really useful too.

    Wellington • Since Sep 2014 • 798 posts Report Reply

  • linger, in reply to steven crawford,

    Why don’t you explain…

    I know this topic evokes strong feelings, with good reason, but that phrasing is not helpful. To rephrase: it is counterproductive to keep piling on in disagreement to a statement that has already been clarified by the original poster. (Kind of like I'm doing now. Er.)

    Tokyo • Since Apr 2007 • 1931 posts Report Reply

  • steven crawford, in reply to linger,

    Piling on

    That's what I should have said. That's what I mean.

    Atlantis • Since Nov 2006 • 4414 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca,

    Was wondering Anke or Emma. Is Angie ok, had surgery, and back from Bali? Cos it would be pretty horrible after all she’s contributed to your story, to be left there suffering .

    ETA, I'm just flabbergasted at the sheer size of Potter's influence on other commune adults. To convince so many to allow such abuse of so many in a place that I thought of just being a hippy commune. I now wonder about the women I knew who stayed there. :(

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • Moz, in reply to chris,

    I appreciate that you and others have the best intentions Katharine, but incessant genderising leaves me feeling unwell.

    Thanks Chris. I've been reluctant to read the thread and was not going to engage, but I feel it's useful to say: thank you for reminding people of this.

    Sydney, West Island • Since Nov 2006 • 1232 posts Report Reply

  • Moz,

    The gender-essentialist nonsense is triggering for many of us. We have been exposed to it in very trying situations and sometimes from people who explicitly see our suicides as a positive outcome. Because "one less probable abuser". So please try to avoid saying those things.

    But I havn’t been able to find much academic awareness about male victims of childhood abuse who are not convicted pedophiles, in New Zealand.

    I hope that out of the various inquiries in Australia on this topic we will gain a cohort of men who can be studied. I don't know about NZ, but in Oz we have a whole lot of historical institutional child abuse coming out and being discussed (as well as litigated).

    Sydney, West Island • Since Nov 2006 • 1232 posts Report Reply

  • Rosemary McDonald,

    Okay...help me here. I get the basic idea of "gender essentialism", but my academic reading in Women's Studies began (and formally ended) in 1981 with the foundation WS paper at Uni.

    So, rather me dive blindly into the myriad of hits the google offers on the subject....could recommendations be made as to a sound (not tooo fringe!) website that could bring me up to speed?

    Waikato, or on the road • Since Apr 2014 • 1344 posts Report Reply

  • Katharine Moody, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,

    I’m just flabbergasted at the sheer size of Potter’s influence on other commune adults. To convince so many to allow such abuse of so many in a place that I thought of just being a hippy commune.

    Yes. Watching the TVNZ documentary done in the early days gives some real clues as to the methods of indoctrination used - aligned in many ways to some of Hitler's propaganda methods/techniques as he outlined in Mein Kampf. Aside from the paedophiles who are interviewed in that video - many/most of the other adults display symptoms of prolonged exposure to indoctrination/torture techniques.

    Wellington • Since Sep 2014 • 798 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to Katharine Moody,

    I grew up with Artist parents. Great people with great friends who started the Browns Mill market. The place was one big family. People from Albany, People who lived at Centrepoint also. I never saw anyone at the Markets as anyone who wasn't creative artistic people. We had so much fun. One jeweller left his wife and kids for a 17 year old daughter of one of the people at the Markets. That was considered risque. It's the forcing children that I find so abhorrent. I just would expect any parent to want to protect their kids. It really says to me that the parents were really screwed up to begin with. Which as a bigger picture, was it repetitive behaviour on their behalf? Were they already repeating what had happened to themselves? And seriously, there needs to be more of them answering questions and being charged collectively if need be. This is absolutely not acceptable. This should be a class action. :(

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • Katharine Moody, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,

    I just would expect any parent to want to protect their kids. It really says to me that the parents were really screwed up to begin with.

    I think the answer to that might only be found in academic-style research. I doubt many of the parents who might have been there, and could be seen to have been enablers could answer why themselves. When indoctrination and torture techniques are combined with psychoactive drugs – people (I am guessing) became not their rational (or moral) selves. It also seems to me (and this is totally a guess from a non-professional) that part of the routine of ‘life’ on the commune was aimed at creating attachment difficulties between parents and children (attachment explained by Kyle McDonald here);

    http://psychotherapy.org.nz/when-love-is-difficult/

    In other words, my unqualified assessment is that everything done there by Bert Potter was aimed at dehumanising individuals and severely disrupting familial relationships. Many/most parents became victims, just like their children.

    Wellington • Since Sep 2014 • 798 posts Report Reply

  • Lucy Telfar Barnard,

    Based on my experience of commune hippies, I would say that the parents were not necessarily "really" screwed up to begin with so much as really, really naive. They went to communes thinking it was all going to be flowers and love, and that everyone else there was also there for flowers and love. And many of them were. But sociopaths and paedophiles are good at recognising potential victims and ideal environments for acting on their paedophilia, so would have instantly recognised communes as easy pickings.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 585 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 5 6 7 8 9 11 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.