When talking about abuse becomes a ratings bonanza
Unfortunately, I don't think all of these 'experts' are really sincere
When talking about abuse becomes a ratings bonanza
Don’t cross the child abuse industrial complex if you know what’s good for you. Yes, I’m being tastelessly flippant. Yes, child rapists deserve to die as I said last week. And yes, child abuse of all forms leaves an indelible tattoo of pain on the heart and psyche.
But while a majority of people genuinely care about the welfare of sex abuse victims, including therapists, Grand Jurors, abuse survivors and even Catholic priests, there are others who love a good scandal so they can whip up the hysteria. They are the ones who host the cable news shows, like Dr. Drew Pinsky and Nancy Grace, the professional empathizers like Dr. Phil and Anderson Cooper, the Oprah wannabees on “The View” and “The Talk” and the political pundits who try to brand child rape as a uniquely conservative phenomenon, like the MSNBC crew.
With friends like these, the victims certainly don’t need enemies.
It’s very unpopular to say anything publicly that seems to put you on the opposite side of the victims, alleged or proven. My inbox over the last few weeks has convinced me that some people look at the phrase “presumption of innocence” as fighting words and assume that any time an accusation of abuse has been made, it’s absolutely improper to consider the possibility it’s false.
While I understand that the pendulum has swung so far in the pro-victim direction because decades passed before anyone took them seriously or gave them a voice, I also understand that some of what passes for sincere concern is a little less benign. Humans are inherently attracted to tragedy, both during and in the difficult aftermath, because we’re then given a chance to show just how noble we can be. Heroism is born in the darkest moments, as we saw after 9/11 with the first responders, during Katrina as the floodwaters rose and the Red Cross remained and at the Virginia Tech shootings when professors and students put themselves in the line of a madman’s fire.
And now, we’re looking for heroes in Happy Valley. Unfortunately, they seem to be in short supply. Which is why we need to be extra careful about just who we anoint to carry the banner for those victims of abuse. While it’s right and just to be repulsed by Samdusky and his alleged crimes, and I can even understand some frustration with-but not anger against-Joe Paterno, let’s not jump on the Child Abuse Bandwagon whose wheels are greased every time the media sniffs out a juicy story.
It happened with the Catholic Church, where every political cartoonist in the nation turned a Roman collar into a badge of shame. Earlier on it happened at the McMartin pre-school where over 60 cases of alleged sexual abuse were found to be lies planted in the minds of impressionable children by twisted therapists and the journalists who fed off of them for ratings.
And therein lies the problem. We are very close to that point where transparency and education, important as they are, become exploitation. The exploiters are not always easy to identify because they speak sweetly and, in some cases, out of both sides of their mouth while nodding their heads at all the right cues. From what I’ve seen over the past week, for every genuine and sincere advocate of children that you see on the news, there are at least two more who are thrilled at this moment in the sun, at this chance to make themselves the story.
One particularly blatant example is a CNN contributor who has been popping up everywhere in the wake of the Penn State revelations to talk about abuse that occurred to her when she was 4. When I first saw her speak, I was impressed by her story and presence. But then I continued to see her trotted on screen to comment with the other ‘experts’ about how children deal with abuse, as if she were giving an exclusive for CNN viewers. I’m sure it was great for the ratings.
I know that some people think that revelation is important, and that child abuse occurs primarily because of that special omerta` forced on humiliated victims by the abuser. I get that we need to talk about the issue, make sure that it doesn’t fade from our consciousness.
But this “We ARE Child Abuse” campaign,just like the "It Gets Better" campaign against bullying seems to pop up with particular ferocity only after some high profile cases of abuse, and the Penn State tragedy was tailor made for the situation. But the concern on the part of the media leaves a sour taste in my mouth because of its lack of authenticity.
So perhaps, out of respect for the victims, we should treat this seriously and drown out the Dr. Drews and Attorney Nancys. Because this is not the media’s tragedy to run.
Christine always attacks those that she envies. For example, she envied Sotomayor because she went to a first rate law school and Christine went to that third rate law school that fraudulently inflated the grades and test scores of its students to increase its rating. In a similar manner, she envies Nancy Grace, Doctor Drew and the other pundits mentioned in this blog.— Ogey Oglethorpe- Chris, I came late to this party and so glad you are amused by the "buzzing". We do disagree at times, but not often, and to my knowledge, we have never lost civility.
Recall always, my dear, the words of wisdom of Polonius to his son Laertes:
"Polonius:
This above all: to thine own self be true,
And it must follow, as the night the day,
Thou canst not then be false to any man.
Farewell, my blessing season this in thee!"
Hamlet Act 1, scene 3
— Magistra 
retour, you focus on criminality. OK, by me. Let's focus. First, to be a criminal there must be laws to be broken. Agree??? Second, with the invention of laws (or codes as they have been referred to back in earlier days) we have progress. Note- that progress is change and change for the better.
Second, people fresh from the womb are naturally selfish. That helps one to survive. But, motherhood is also a gift of nature and mothers teach their children to coexist and be mannerly. Some mothers.
Enough mothers, such that we have a practicing society. Now, let me jump way ahead from the rule of Genghis Khan, where you lived by his code which was quite humane or you died. Swift justice.
Today we have a court system to slow things down. However, since the first codes (biblical teachings included) until today the intent is for more and better civility. Forget the exceptions as pushed by your "leftist" friends. That is an aberration along the path. I am addressing the intent.
You may be counting the numbers which mean something entirely different than intent and progress.
The difficulty with this type of forum as contrasted to the neighborhood bar, is that it take so long to calibrate both sides of the discussion, correct and proceed. You'll just have to take my word for it.
And as for Pinker, he always left room for much doubt. So, we cannot judge by his latest concoction.— PlumberJoe- Civic duty means that a citizen owes certain responsibilities to their government in return for the protections afforded to them. Examples of civic duties are- paying taxes, obeying the law, serving on a jury and voting.
sophy you, as usual, are barking up the wrong tree. It must be a real hoot in your house.
BTW, your petition is gone. It would be a real treat if you were gone, too.— PlumberJoe - @soph, let's see, you've labeled a conservative as "a danger to civilized society" because of his side of the debate, and later you stated he was clearly "scum" (though it appears that was censored), and then another as "a crazy lady." And don't forget "evil." Who is fomenting hatred here? Certainly an odd approach to "make the world a more loving, peaceful place." Perhaps you would enjoy Will Bunch's blog more and find more like minded individuals there. This is a blog of civility, even when opinions differ.— sadim
- When the evil Cons stop fomenting hatred of those with more liberal views, then I will stop seeking out the opportunity to set people straight. It is my civic duty, and my attempt to make the world a more loving, peaceful place. At least I try to help others!— sophistry
- soph - stop seeking out what you abhor. Leave us be.— sadim
- By the way, I have to say I'm flattered to be (again, ho hum) the target of a petition to get me off the web, off the air, and out of the paper. I must be doing something right. :)— Christine
- Retour, you know that I know you, and that you are a fine attorney. Ignore the buzzing of the annoying bee who pretends to be much smarter than she is, pretends at a career she may (or may not) have, although considering some of the wacks who teach at law schools it is a possibility, and remember that the only people who seek for others to be censored are those with no valuable thoughts of their own. You've posted many fine comments here, as have others, including those who disagree (including Plumber, Magistra, phillycc74 and Hamblin who often makes sense though I disagree with him.) Again, ignore what clearly is beneath you in both substance and lexicon.— Christine
- To all who loathe Christine's inflammatory and misleading columns and blog postings: Petition the Philadelphia Daily News. Sign the petition I started. Get this woman's nastiness off the interwebs.
www.change.org/petition/philadelphia-daily-news-cancel-christine-flowers-column-and-blog=postings.htm— sophistry - retour, I have to disagree with your disagreement. You see, behavior is a learned trait. And the controlling mechanism is the human mind which is fueled by the human brain which over time has a boatload of instances to mull over in the unconscious part before shipping it up (down?) to the conscious part for action.
This gets us back to free will, which I do believe we have.
It is almost comparable to a committee (the unconscious thinking) that takes a vote and sends the result to the conscious mind for action. But nothing prevents the conscious mind from sending it back to committee for further review. That is the free will part.
Over a long period of time nothing is immutable.— PlumberJoe - Where is your evidence that human nature has improved over the course of history with a resultant lessening of criminality? Be forewarned: This is not an argument you are likely to win. But see: Steven Pinker's newest book (which I have not read, but think is WRONG)
http://www.amazon.com/Better-Angels-Our-Nature-Violence/dp/0670022950— retour - Plumber (and CF) I am beginning to wonder why "Sophistry" is not censored from writing comments. In a way, her irrational rage is entertaining, but she should not be allowed to call people common curse words, and accuse me of being a rapist. Isn't it time she was reported and deleted?
Plumber; I am gonna have to disagree with you concerning the permanence of criminal conduct. All historic evidence indicates that human nature is immutable. Violence, corruption and mayhem will always be with us. Here is a good quote:
"It is one of the tasks of civilisation to tame our inherent
savagery."
Theodore Dalrymple
— retour - Haven't you now written 2 op-eds and 6 blog posts on this issue? A saying about a pot and a kettle comes to mind.— Ed G
- retour, you raise vital aspects for a fuller and more accurate analysis of the dilemmas that confront our society. Clearly a column or two does not bring understanding and resolution to one of the many problems we, as a society, have the responsibility to deal with. Almost as important as the issue itself is the methodology we employ to become aware and bring to resolution institutions and solutions. The criminal justice system is as far advanced as the sling shot was compared to a ballistic missile. I am not condemning it, only pointing out the need for advancement. Criminal behavior is no more an essential part of our human makeup than is having 3 arms, eight if you were an octopus. It is a left over from long ago.
Let me offer an example. sophistry, always ranting, never offering meaningful contributions, is useless as a problem solving member of society, Yet, we must tolerate her, up to the point where her behavior becomes criminal. She consumes, but she does not contribute. There are in fact very few real leaders. Without leaders we flounder. In general, sound education produces sound leaders. Next to marriage, education is the bedrock of society. Till then we are stuck in this morass we deem as progress.— PlumberJoe - Chris: I don't think child rapists deserve to die. If child rapists deserve to die, then logically we should consider the death penalty for all rapists? I think you probably would agree the death penalty should be reserved for premeditated murder. Of course if the child rapist then murders his victim, he may deserve to die.
Wouldn't it be interesting to hear a truly serious panel discussion on pedophilia and/ pederasty? These seem to be a much more common sexual feelings than people are willing to discuss. How many people have these feelings and are repressing them? What allows some people to justify acting on their sexual feelings, even though they know their obsession is wrong and illegal?
I am surprised you haven't raised the issue of abortion in this context. Undoubtedly many of the liberal media Paterno attackers in the "PSU Child Rape Scandal" are people who would support aborting the very children they are now so outraged may have been allegedly abused. No?— retour - Actually, Christine, I have been saying something similar on the message boards ever since this started, haven't I?
Sensational stories sell (fill in the blank). I refuse to watch made for TV movies based on real life tragedies, for example. Is it not enough that we have seen the actual victims in the news? Must we also look at actors playing the victims all over again? Between commercials for hairspray?
In short, Chris, we have become a nation of voyeurs.
Any train wreck will do.
— Magistra - Christine, your transparent envy of the media spotlight is turning your column into jibberish.— montani semper liberi
Email Christine M. at cflowers1961@yahoo.com Reach Christine M. at cflowers1961@yahoo.com.
