|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: The Bishop Peter Ball Affair
|
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
It does look pretty damning, and is all the more concerning to me in that I personally crossed paths with some of the people named in these reports (not Peter Ball though).
That said, I have some sympathy when it comes to entertaining (or passing on) serious but unsubstantiated accusations against a colleague - especially if some of the accusations are from third parties.
As someone who oversees quite a number of individuals involved in ministry, I find it challenging to find the right balance between responsibly investigating complaints (thankfully none of this order!) and preserving my team against unwarranted, divisive attacks. I would certainly be less inclined to take an accusation made via a third party seriously if the victim is themselves in a position to complain.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
goperryrevs
Shipmtae
# 13504
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
What Adrian Plass says about him is immaterial to the case.
I disagree. If we want to understand what kind of a person Peter Ball is and was, then it's important to look at his behaviour and how he influenced those around him. Adrian Plass didn't just say Ball was a nice guy. He held him up as one of the most spiritual people he met; an inspiration in his own spiritual journey. He based one of the major characters in his 'Sacred Diary' books on him.
So, what happened? Did Ball just pull the wool over Plass's eyes? Is Plass just a bad judge of character? Was Ball just a contradiction (as we all are) of the light and the dark? Was Ball just a plain evil manipulator?
To stop stuff like this happening we need to understand the behaviour and personality types of abusers. So, how they can mislead those close to them is incredibly pertinent. I get you're probably talking about merely the criminal case against him, and yes, what Plass thinks is immaterial in terms of guilt. But in terms of sentencing, who this abuser was and how he operated is important, and character evidence is part of that. And in terms of preventing future abuse by spotting the signs early, and not allowing those in power to manipulate (or be manipulated), it's even more important.
--------------------
"Keep your eye on the donut, not on the hole." - David Lynch
Posts: 2098 | From: Midlands | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erroneous Monk
Shipmate
# 10858
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
quote:
Originally posted by Pyx_e:
I can not get my head around Carey's actions and words in this matter when aligned with his words and actions in others. Our ability to fool ourselves seems limitless.
Your last sentence is certainly true, but after reading the BBC report mentioned in the first post several times I would not rush too quickly to judgement before reading the original report.
I've now read the original report. I can't see that it puts Lord Carey in any better light than the press reporting.
His actions and inactions compounded the active attempts by others in the church to paint the victims as liars, trouble-makers and conspiracists.
--------------------
And I shot a man in Tesco, just to watch him die.
Posts: 2950 | From: I cannot tell you, for you are not a friar | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by goperryrevs:
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
What Adrian Plass says about him is immaterial to the case.
I disagree. If we want to understand what kind of a person Peter Ball is and was, then it's important to look at his behaviour and how he influenced those around him. Adrian Plass didn't just say Ball was a nice guy. He held him up as one of the most spiritual people he met; an inspiration in his own spiritual journey. He based one of the major characters in his 'Sacred Diary' books on him.
So, what happened? Did Ball just pull the wool over Plass's eyes? Is Plass just a bad judge of character? Was Ball just a contradiction (as we all are) of the light and the dark? Was Ball just a plain evil manipulator?
To stop stuff like this happening we need to understand the behaviour and personality types of abusers. So, how they can mislead those close to them is incredibly pertinent. I get you're probably talking about merely the criminal case against him, and yes, what Plass thinks is immaterial in terms of guilt. But in terms of sentencing, who this abuser was and how he operated is important, and character evidence is part of that. And in terms of preventing future abuse by spotting the signs early, and not allowing those in power to manipulate (or be manipulated), it's even more important.
I wonder if theological training courses deal with the tie-up and possible confusion between spirituality and sexuality. This is well known in meditation circles, and I remember the warnings we used to give people on Zen retreats, that you may well get a raging horn on. In fact, we had a ban on sexual activity.
But maybe this seems too oriental or too indelicate for the C of E?
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
If the accusations are about harm to people over whom the person has authority of some kind, formal or informal, emotion and collegiality are interferences and must be factored out. Recusal required.
These things are invariably stressful. But empathy for the stress suffered by the person accused cannot be, shall not be, part of decision. It has to be this way.
The trend in self-regulating professions is to have a wide hopper in which complaints about professional conduct are received. The complaint must always be reviewed according to procedures which treats everyone the same, by people without a "dual relationship" with the person accused. There's a peculiarity when a bishop is making the decision because of a dual relationship with an accused clergy. I think clergy and clergy organizations will ultimately have to fall in line with other people-serving professions.
It is stressful as hell. And it is hell. Diabolical. And it does sometimes change or end careers if an unsubstantiated complaint is investigated. But what can you do? Do you let a Ball type person go because you have empathy? Is this what happened here? Looks so. How many more of these are there of which this might be tip of the iceberg? There is lots of data to indicate that a groomed person is likely to self-blame and that the majority are not reported.
But if we don't have procedures which factor out the personal empathy and relationship those in authority have with the accused, some people are more equal than others.
[ 23. June 2017, 13:43: Message edited by: no prophet's flag is set so... ]
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by goperryrevs:
So, what happened? Did Ball just pull the wool over Plass's eyes? Is Plass just a bad judge of character? Was Ball just a contradiction (as we all are) of the light and the dark? Was Ball just a plain evil manipulator?
The review specifically deals with this question:
https://www.churchofengland.org/media/3999908/report-of-the-peter-ball-review-210617.pdf
I quote:
"Ball achieved the high regard in which he was held by convincing many to recognise him as a deeply spiritual man – a monk committed to an austere and authentic practice of his Christian faith. But any strong personal convictions were combined with a capacity for self-delusion, denial and manipulation"
There's a longer selection of the quote at the first blog I link to - though you can also search through the report to find the entire section.
In terms of the 'judge of character' - this is as affected by human foibles as any other human judgement, some people are much more manipulative than others, but this doesn't remove agency completely. I think there is a glamour that certain very manipulative people cast around themselves that makes it harder to gauge their ultimate self, equally this is one of those areas in which people are prone to making mistakes, and each of us are likely to carry baggage/prejudices that make us prone to particular failure modes. It's far easier to see this institutionally, it's important to be aware of this tendency as an individual too.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Yes, just thinking about various gurus and 'spiritual teachers' that I've come across, and charisma can have a close link with spiritual expressiveness, and sexual drive.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
goperryrevs
Shipmtae
# 13504
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I wonder if theological training courses deal with the tie-up and possible confusion between spirituality and sexuality. This is well known in meditation circles, and I remember the warnings we used to give people on Zen retreats, that you may well get a raging horn on. In fact, we had a ban on sexual activity.
But maybe this seems too oriental or too indelicate for the C of E?
Hmmm. Between uni and work I did one of those year-out theological/volunteering courses (DNA, with Pioneer). Lots of teenagers and early 20's people getting together in quite an emotional / spiritual growth environment... They had a ban on new relationships for that year. I believe YWAM have the same rule for DTS. It seemed draconian at the time but I can see the wisdom of it.
BTW, thanks for the link, Chris S.
--------------------
"Keep your eye on the donut, not on the hole." - David Lynch
Posts: 2098 | From: Midlands | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Well, yes, young people don't need much incentive to hit the sack, but a charismatic/glamorous figure in a leadership role is a particular danger. Of course, there are plenty who are completely OK, but the link between spirituality and sexuality seems so obvious in a way. It's really a question of boundaries, or removing them, hence, let us be closer to God by removing our clothes, and so on.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
This has been an issue in psychotherapy as well, where you can get a charismatic therapist, who becomes important to his/her clients. This is fine, but of course, there are always those who abuse this position. The result has been a massive emphasis on ethics in therapeutic practice. Plus, also the need for supervision, so that if a therapist finds that the boundaries are slipping, hopefully his/her supervisor will point this out.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Midge
Shipmate
# 2398
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
It is stressful as hell. And it is hell. Diabolical. And it does sometimes change or end careers if an unsubstantiated complaint is investigated. But what can you do? Do you let a Ball type person go because you have empathy? Is this what happened here? Looks so. How many more of these are there of which this might be tip of the iceberg? There is lots of data to indicate that a groomed person is likely to self-blame and that the majority are not reported.
There are those who are odd, socially awkward, don't fit in or eccentric who need protecting too. If there is a witch hunt looking for a paedophile in every bush or vestry then these are the people who tend to get caught on the ducking stool. Think of
Christopher Jefferies
--------------------
Some days you are the fly.
On other days you are the windscreen.
Posts: 1085 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
It does look pretty damning, and is all the more concerning to me in that I personally crossed paths with some of the people named in these reports (not Peter Ball though).
That said, I have some sympathy when it comes to entertaining (or passing on) serious but unsubstantiated accusations against a colleague - especially if some of the accusations are from third parties.
As someone who oversees quite a number of individuals involved in ministry, I find it challenging to find the right balance between responsibly investigating complaints (thankfully none of this order!) and preserving my team against unwarranted, divisive attacks. I would certainly be less inclined to take an accusation made via a third party seriously if the victim is themselves in a position to complain.
Sounds reasonable. Except for a few things: Some abusers are very careful, victims often fear to speak and it is only by a long-term pattern that they are found out.
And is this "Wait and See" approach almost always seems to be biased towards the authority figure.
quote:
Originally posted by andras:
St Paul's advice to Timothy that a bishop should be a married man with one wife (ok, I know the Greek is a little ambiguous, but that's the usually-taken sense of it) would seem to suggest that Norwich were taking the Scripture seriously. Certainly they saved themselves a lot of trouble.
A massive percentage of molestation is by men in heterosexual marriages. So, yes, Norwich saved themselves trouble, but not as you appear to mean.
quote:
Bishop Peter Ball has had his sins very clearly called out, and we know a lot about those whom he hurt; and now we know a lot about those who enabled him to keep doing so. God help us, most of us manage to fly beneath the radar with our own failings.
Yes, my penchant for chocolate cake and getting angry a bit too easily is exactly the same as raping children.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
quote:
Originally posted by goperryrevs:
But in terms of sentencing, who this abuser was and how he operated is important, and character evidence is part of that. And in terms of preventing future abuse by spotting the signs early, and not allowing those in power to manipulate (or be manipulated), it's even more important.
Yes. Too often it is "We caught the baddie, now look away. Nothing more to see".
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I wonder if theological training courses deal with the tie-up and possible confusion between spirituality and sexuality. This is well known in meditation circles, and I remember the warnings we used to give people on Zen retreats, that you may well get a raging horn on. In fact, we had a ban on sexual activity.
But maybe this seems too oriental or too indelicate for the C of E?
If he shagged consenting adults, then you might have a point. He fucked children. Not something one does simply because one is horny.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dark Knight
Super Zero
# 9415
|
Posted
Yes, what lb said last. Horniness is one thing, but someone who rapes children is broken. It's a totally different category of thing.
--------------------
So don't ever call me lucky
You don't know what I done, what it was, who I lost, or what it cost me - A B Original: I C U
----
Love is as strong as death (Song of Solomon 8:6).
Posts: 2958 | From: Beyond the Yellow Brick Road | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
this "Wait and See" approach almost always seems to be biased towards the authority figure.
It's easy to condemn and be wise after the event. The opposite extreme, of denouncing anyone and everyone, starting with colleagues, on second-hand testimony, does not appeal either. quote:
If he shagged consenting adults, then you might have a point. He fucked [children.
Libel risks aside (but please note that as Hosts we are monitoring this thread closely) I haven't seen anything to suggest that has been proven or indeed alleged.
Militating for transparency requires scrupulous accuracy; distorting the facts the other way is no better. This is especially true in the realm of sex offences which are far less comparable than is popularly believed.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
this "Wait and See" approach almost always seems to be biased towards the authority figure.
It's easy to condemn and be wise after the event. The opposite extreme, of denouncing anyone and everyone, starting with colleagues, on second-hand testimony, does not appeal either.
Who said anything about going to the opposite extreme? I do say err to the side of the victim, however.
quote:
I haven't seen anything to suggest that has been proven or indeed alleged.
Though it isn't the same as proven, it has been alleged.
Link from earlier in the thread.
What has been litigated is bad enough to make my point about not giving the benefit of the doubt merely because of position.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mark_in_manchester
not waving, but...
# 15978
|
Posted
It's different in terms of the object of sexual desire; different in terms of the reciprocity of sexual desire; different in terms of the power relationship wrapped up in that sexual desire; and for those reasons and probably lots of others we find it a repugnant and abusive sexual desire. But it is still a sexual desire, isn't it? If so Qs points about sex and spirituality might be pertinent.
I have personal reasons to echo the points made up-thread about the family as a context for abuse. ISTM that sex drive is a strange, strange thing. Its abusive expression is a tragedy. FWIW, I am increasingly no longer surprised by inspiring goodness and breathtaking evil co-existing in the same person.
x-post, responding to Dark Knight
[ 23. June 2017, 17:46: Message edited by: mark_in_manchester ]
--------------------
"We are punished by our sins, not for them" - Elbert Hubbard
(so good, I wanted to see it after my posts and not only after those of shipmate JBohn from whom I stole it)
Posts: 1596 | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mark_in_manchester:
It's different in terms of the object of sexual desire; different in terms of the reciprocity of sexual desire; different in terms of the power relationship wrapped up in that sexual desire; and for those reasons and probably lots of others we find it a repugnant and abusive sexual desire. But it is still a sexual desire, isn't it? If so Qs points about sex and spirituality might be pertinent.
Only if if you think that a consensual relationship with teens and possibly children is an OK thing.
Having had sexual and spiritual desires and experiences, I concede their can be a link/crossover. Indeed, there are Eastern religions which blend the two.
However, to imply that dealing with sexuality in training courses would prevent abuse happening is ludicrous.
If that is what quetzalcoatl was saying.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
I do say err to the side of the victim, however.
And therein lies the problem. In many cases you don't know if you've got a victim. You have a complainant and an alleged perpetrator.
Go read up on the Outreau affair. Of the fourteen accused, six alleged perpetrators appealed and were acquitted after time spent on remand in prison - a seventh innocent person died in jail before the case got to trial.
I know two of the people involved in this case.
What the English summary doesn't tell you is that the acquitted were originally incriminated, essentially, by the testimony of one person, and it was only because that person retracted their wholly fabricated testimony at the appeal hearing that the case collapsed.
quote:
Though it isn't the same as proven, it has been alleged.
See above. There is a world of difference between proven and alleged. Innocent people have died in jail by effectively being presumed guilty on the basis of unsupported allegations ![[Mad]](angryfire.gif)
Not only that, you simply cannot fairly describe the whole gamut of sexual abuse of minors as "fucking children". Fortunately most jurisdictions have the sense to factor that in, as I hope you might. quote:
What has been litigated is bad enough to make my point about not giving the benefit of the doubt merely because of position.
True. But I would also like the benefit of the doubt not to be withheld due to any lack of position, something I see far too often.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
I do say err to the side of the victim, however.
And therein lies the problem. In many cases you don't know if you've got a victim. You have a complainant and an alleged perpetrator.
Yes. My point is that you investigate every accusation, not that you immediately conclude the accused is guilty.
quote:
There is a world of difference between proven and alleged. Innocent people have died in jail by effectively being presumed guilty on the basis of unsupported allegations
And there are many more victims of abuse that were intimidated, shamed, hushed and shoved aside. Even greater
Innocent people are sent to prison all the time for all manner of crime. The solution is not to ignore real crime, but to better administrate it.
We are not anywhere near the point of more falsely accused going to lockup than abused being maltreated.
quote:
Not only that, you simply cannot fairly describe the whole gamut of sexual abuse of minors as "fucking children". Fortunately most jurisdictions have the sense to factor that in, as I hope you might.
The point of that was that abuse was being portrayed as a libidinous over-reaction rather than the violation it is.
quote:
But I would also like the benefit of the doubt not to be withheld due to any lack of position, something I see far too often.
The benefit of the doubt is not assuming guilt during the process of investigating, not in determining whether one will investigate. Too often, especially for the religious, the latter is the case.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Though it isn't the same as proven, it has been alleged.
See above. There is a world of difference between proven and alleged.
There is also a world of difference between allegations that are never tried because of weak evidence and allegations that are never tried because powerful people engaged in a cover-up, as seems to be the case here. (That is itself not a conspiratorial untried allegation but the conclusion of the independent review mention in the article from the OP.)
The idea that if you cover up abuse effectively enough it never really happened seems to be the pernicious root of most of these kinds of situations.
[ 23. June 2017, 19:09: Message edited by: Crœsos ]
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Yes. My point is that you investigate every accusation, not that you immediately conclude the accused is guilty.
Confusing the terms "victim" and "complainant", or suggesting "proven" is equivalent to "alleged", does not suggest that point. quote:
The benefit of the doubt is not assuming guilt during the process of investigating, not in determining whether one will investigate. Too often, especially for the religious, the latter is the case.
The latter may be true, but I think the question in this case is who should be doing the investigating and in what circumstances.
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
There is also a world of difference between allegations that are never tried because of weak evidence and allegations that are never tried because powerful people engaged in a cover-up, as seems to be the case here. (That is itself not a conspiratorial untried allegation but the conclusion of the independent review mention in the article from the OP.)
I've no reason to doubt the report's conclusions (I haven't yet read the report itself); rather, I'm querying the BBC's reporting of them. Specifically, I don't think that the claim made in the BBC article that Carey failed to forward certain letters of complaint he received from third parties is a good example, in and of itself, of such a cover-up.
An error of judgement, with hindsight, undoubtedly. But not necessarily a deliberate cover-up.
[ 23. June 2017, 19:23: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
The idea that if you cover up abuse effectively enough it never really happened seems to be the pernicious root of most of these kinds of situations.
Institutionalised compartmentalism?
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
I've now read the original report. I can't see that it puts Lord Carey in any better light than the press reporting.
Having now read it, I agree, but I think the picture is much more complex than the BBC article suggests.
I don't think the decision not to pass on the letters was Carey's alone and I don't think it's the worst aspect of what he did or didn't do.
I also note the report acknowledges that the early 1990s were not 2017 and agree that this must be taken into account in analysis.
I'm also gobsmacked by Ball's ability to manipulate (as the report has it).
quote:
Originally posted by goperryrevs:
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
What Adrian Plass says about him is immaterial to the case.
I disagree. If we want to understand what kind of a person Peter Ball is and was, then it's important to look at his behaviour and how he influenced those around him.
I've dug out some of the relevant bits of Plass' writings.
Ball's first words to Plass, from his car, were "Hello Adrian, have a Mars bar". The parallel with a strange man offering sweeties to someone as they are about to climb into their car is painfully obvious - with hindsight.
Plass also describes Ball as "widely regarded as one of the wisest and most godly men in the Christian church". Those pedestals are dangerous things.
Plass further quotes Ball thus: "there are only two things I am really good at. One is squash, and the other is making people feel that they are special to me, and of course they are... It gets very complicated..."
"...If I was to go out today and commit the foulest crime possible with every single person in the village where I live [what crime was he thinking of?], and then went to prison as a result, then repented, and said sincerely to God, "God, I'm so very very sorry", he would say... "Great! This prison is full of people who you can love with me...""
"I'm not just a celibate. I'm an extravagant celibate!"
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
(from The Growing Up Pains of Adrian Plass, chapter 6)
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
dyfrig
Blue Scarfed Menace
# 15
|
Posted
Isn't there a bit, whilst filming the tv show they we're both on, where Plass describes Ball as bibg very depressed and saying, "All I know is that I'm a sinner"? I wonder what was on his mind.
Still, now we know that it's useful to have a twin who's also a bishop.
--------------------
"He was wrong in the long run, but then, who isn't?" - Tony Judt
Posts: 6917 | From: pob dydd Iau, am hanner dydd | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dark Knight
Super Zero
# 9415
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mark_in_manchester:
It's different in terms of the object of sexual desire; different in terms of the reciprocity of sexual desire; different in terms of the power relationship wrapped up in that sexual desire; and for those reasons and probably lots of others we find it a repugnant and abusive sexual desire. But it is still a sexual desire, isn't it? If so Qs points about sex and spirituality might be pertinent.
I have personal reasons to echo the points made up-thread about the family as a context for abuse. ISTM that sex drive is a strange, strange thing. Its abusive expression is a tragedy. FWIW, I am increasingly no longer surprised by inspiring goodness and breathtaking evil co-existing in the same person.
x-post, responding to Dark Knight
Yes, I agree with that, and think it is well said. As I said, I think someone who abuses children is broken, and by that I mean very psychically unwell. So, I particularly resonate with your statement that this is an abusive expression of desire.
I've met some offenders - before I did so, I was pretty hardline about what should be done to them. But when they told their stories, they all spoke about something that happened in their own childhoods that had left them stuck there.
Now - that never justifies abuse of children, who need to be protected from offenders. That has to remain the first priority. And I'm also not saying that my anecdotal experience is universal. But it did help to see offenders as broken, rather than inhuman monsters.
Anyway, as Eutychus said none of this may actually be relevant in this particular case.
--------------------
So don't ever call me lucky
You don't know what I done, what it was, who I lost, or what it cost me - A B Original: I C U
----
Love is as strong as death (Song of Solomon 8:6).
Posts: 2958 | From: Beyond the Yellow Brick Road | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Huia
Shipmate
# 3473
|
Posted
Chris Styles, thanks for linking the report, which I have just finished reading.
I am struck by the courage and persistence of the men who were victimised ![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif) .
I hope they get the support they need in order to heal.
Huia
--------------------
Charity gives food from the table, Justice gives a place at the table.
Posts: 10382 | From: Te Wai Pounamu | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
My impressions, gained from looking at the law reports over many years:
a. Most offences against boys and male youths are committed by those outside the extended family, and almost all the offenders are male.
b. Most offences against girls and female youths are committed by those inside the extended family, with a trend in the last decade to being the new partner of the mother; I cannot recall off the top of my head when an offender was not male.
c. Increasingly, those being sentenced report that they themselves were abused themselves, regardless of the sex of their victim.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
Posted by GeeD:
quote:
a. Most offences against boys and male youths are committed by those outside the extended family, and almost all the offenders are male.
That doesn't seem to match the European experience where the vast majority of perpetrators are still family members. I haven;t seen the very, very latest figures but I'd be surprised if there has been an incredibly dramatic shift in the last five years.
quote:
b. Most offences against girls and female youths are committed by those inside the extended family, with a trend in the last decade to being the new partner of the mother; I cannot recall off the top of my head when an offender was not male.
One of the most difficult things for society here in Ireland to come to grips with in the last decade and after many inquiries, reports and studies into sexual abuse in Ireland has been the shocking oversight in regards to the role of women as perpetrators. There is a social and cultural barrier to overcome that seems to automatically assume that women do not generally commit such crimes. What has been discovered here is that the reporting of such crimes by women seems to have a greater level of stigma for the survivor to report. The various reports and studies of course include child abuse to mean more than just sexual abuse, but the reports acknowledge that there may well be a very significant under-reporting in this area. One of the more positive aspects of all of this has been the acknowledgement of both sexual and physical abuse among partnered adults and there has even been a campaign run here to raise awareness of this aspect of abuse perpetrated by women in marriage. The cultural reasons for not reporting such crimes here would be very powerful.
quote:
c. Increasingly, those being sentenced report that they themselves were abused themselves, regardless of the sex of their victim.
This one always presents a particular problem, despite its apparent truthfulness. For those who are survivors of abuse, the stigma of the abused turning into abusers due to their experiences is horrifically crippling; especially in terms of reporting such crime. It's one of those important and possibly crucial bits of information that, while we cannot ignore it, must be dealt with and examined with extreme care.
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
Being an abuse survivor is connected to being an abuser how? It certainly doesn't make someone an abuser. Perhaps it is this: abuse is common, when caught abusers tell of their abuse history to soften the consequences and response, and this is only about the very common experience of being abused. So maybe you can tell me the theory of how being abused causes someone to become an abuser - I think it's BS. because most victims don't sexually abuse others. I think something rather special is going on inside the minds, feelings and spirits of the small group of abuse victims who go forth and abuse others, absolutely not connected with being a victim earlier in life.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
Posted by No Prophets Flag:
quote:
So maybe you can tell me the theory of how being abused causes someone to become an abuser.....
I can't do that, nor would I want to as like you, I think it is also BS. However, it is often stated as a fact by many and the incorrect inference is often taken from it. The idea of the abused becoming abuser due to the experience of abuse is quite an assumption to draw in my mind. Some abusers having been abused in their own past may merely be coincidence or it may point to something more significant. Abusers having been abused in their past is a very, very different statement from 'the abused go on to abuse'. Hence why I feel making these statements very often needs to be much more clear and done with extreme care and clarity.
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Robert Armin
All licens'd fool
# 182
|
Posted
goperryrevs: quote:
Was Ball just a contradiction (as we all are) of the light and the dark? Was Ball just a plain evil manipulator?
This, it seems to me, is the heart of the problem. In the 80s Ball ran a programme for young men, where they lived with him in a semi-monastic lifestyle, as part of exploring what God was calling them to. A friend of mine spent some time on it, benefitted enormously, and went on to be a priest. When Ball was convicted this same friend was heartbroken - Ball had helped him enormously, had never behaved inappropriately towards him, and my friend wasn't aware of anything wrong going on while he was there. So was Ball both saintly AND an evil manipulator? Is it possible to be both?
--------------------
Keeping fit was an obsession with Fr Moity .... He did chin ups in the vestry, calisthenics in the pulpit, and had developed a series of Tai-Chi exercises to correspond with ritual movements of the Mass. The Antipope Robert Rankin
Posts: 8927 | From: In the pack | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Robert Armin
All licens'd fool
# 182
|
Posted
goperryrevs: quote:
Was Ball just a contradiction (as we all are) of the light and the dark? Was Ball just a plain evil manipulator?
This, it seems to me, is the heart of the problem. In the 80s Ball ran a programme for young men, where they lived with him in a semi-monastic lifestyle, as part of exploring what God was calling them to. A friend of mine spent some time on it, benefitted enormously, and went on to be a priest. When Ball was convicted this same friend was heartbroken - Ball had helped him enormously, had never behaved inappropriately towards him, and my friend wasn't aware of anything wrong going on while he was there. So was Ball both saintly AND an evil manipulator? Is it possible to be both?
PS In NO WAY am I condoning what Ball has done.
--------------------
Keeping fit was an obsession with Fr Moity .... He did chin ups in the vestry, calisthenics in the pulpit, and had developed a series of Tai-Chi exercises to correspond with ritual movements of the Mass. The Antipope Robert Rankin
Posts: 8927 | From: In the pack | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adarynefoedd
Apprentice
# 18759
|
Posted
Power over others is a really important factor in this case and others. There are many examples in the report where power was restored by manipulation and pretending to be a victim. The onlookers trying to deal with the situation become thoroughly confused. Letters fly around. The particularly strange aspect of this case - the involvement of a twin and examples of substitution. Plus the class aspects as others have noted. Plus all the issues of authority and clericalism (is that the right word?). I do wonder if changed gender balance will make a difference?
Thought also this article at the bottom of the page, a whitewash in the Daily Telegraph 14.3.93 shows a lot of manipulation and re-editing. https://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2015/10/07/peter-ball-how-the-british-establishment-protects-its-own/
Posts: 3 | From: UK | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
Robert Armin: quote:
So was Ball both saintly AND an evil manipulator? Is it possible to be both?
It certainly is in the case of workplace bullies - the people who aren't being victimised by them often find it very difficult to believe that there is a problem.
Cognitive dissonance may be in play too - people don't like to admit they've been taken in.
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
. So was Ball both saintly AND an evil manipulator? Is it possible to be both?
Obviously not making any direct comparison here but on the matter of evil and goodness working in tandem in one person there is no doubt they can.
At the height of his reign of terror Yorkshire ripper Sutcliffe escorted a young female to her home by car, for a friend at night. She later recalled in an interview how he was the perfect gent, and said he even quipped about protecting her from the Ripper.
He was of course clever enough to know that the random attack was the best way of maintaining his cover.
Evil, if we want to use such terminology, does appear to produce a sharpened skill in avoiding detection. As it was with savile we see that serial perpetrators can use a whole host of mechanisms, including using other people as a demonstration of how good they are, in order to shield themselves.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
So was Ball both saintly AND an evil manipulator? Is it possible to be both?
I think its perfectly possible for people to be both evil, and do good. OTOH I would hesitate to call such behavior 'saintly' which to me signifies something about very deep motivation.
As the example rolyn shows, sometimes even the good can be contingent. As the example from the Catholic shows, there were a number of people who's strategy precisely hinged on service as a means to build a constituency.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
Being an abuse survivor is connected to being an abuser how? It certainly doesn't make someone an abuser. Perhaps it is this: abuse is common, when caught abusers tell of their abuse history to soften the consequences and response, and this is only about the very common experience of being abused. So maybe you can tell me the theory of how being abused causes someone to become an abuser - I think it's BS. because most victims don't sexually abuse others. I think something rather special is going on inside the minds, feelings and spirits of the small group of abuse victims who go forth and abuse others, absolutely not connected with being a victim earlier in life.
The argument is that if a person grows up as a victim of abuse, they find it difficult in adult life to accept that abuse is not normal. Much the same as a child growing up in a house where there's a lot of domestic violence, or other criminal activity. If you want a detailed examination of the theory, read
Bugmy's case and the cases cited there on deprivation.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
Such theories are unworthy. Heard such ideas first in the early 1980s. The epidemiology from the Badgely Royal Commission showed 1 in 4 girls and 1 in 7 boys had sexual behaviour toward them (1984, Canada).. Which means an awful lot of perpertrators have either had it done to them or saw it. No causation.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
The argument in Bugmy is of matters to be taken into account in determining the appropriate sentence; social deprivation in childhood and youth is one such matter. It does not purport to excuse criminal behaviour, still less to argue that such behaviour is a necessary consequence of prior experience.
Similar principles have been applied following the decision in Fernando cited in Bugmy but for which I can't find a web reference. There are plenty of cases especially in the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal and the Victorian Court of Appeal applying them. I'd suggest that they are indeed correct.
Perhaps you don't understand the daily application of them. In criminal cases here, there is very commonly a pre-sentence report prepared by the Probation and Parole Service to assist the court, setting out relevant background material. That may contain an assertion by the prisoner of abuse as a child. It is a matter for the sentencing judge to decide whether to accept that assertion or not, acceptance not being by any means automatic. Acceptance is far more likely if the prisoner gives direct evidence of it to the court where his account can be tested by cross-examination.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
quote:
Originally posted by Adarynefoedd:
Thought also this article at the bottom of the page, a whitewash in the Daily Telegraph 14.3.93 shows a lot of manipulation and re-editing. https://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2015/10/07/peter-ball-how-the-british-establishment-protects-its-own/
Good find.
And, welcome!
Hardly, and hardly an objective source. It appears to be written by the head of the abuse team at a well known and large firm of solicitors who present themselves as practising in this field. They make a point in their publicity that they are 'no win, no fee', with a list of high profile cases on their web site as an encouragement. If one knows that, then whatever the language of manufactured outrage, it's difficult not to hear the message 'come to us and we'll get you lots of lovely compo'.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
Perhaps you don't understand the daily application of them. In criminal cases here, there is very commonly a pre-sentence report prepared by the Probation and Parole Service to assist the court, setting out relevant background material. That may contain an assertion by the prisoner of abuse as a child. It is a matter for the sentencing judge to decide whether to accept that assertion or not, acceptance not being by any means automatic. Acceptance is far more likely if the prisoner gives direct evidence of it to the court where his account can be tested by cross-examination.
Sure, we have this all here as well. Also "Gladue Reports" about aboriginal factors. I hold the view of the first principle is protection of the public. These deprivation factors may be used to sentence at lower ends of ranges.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adarynefoedd
Apprentice
# 18759
|
Posted
Enoch thanks agree with you about the main article it was only the old article from the Daily Telegraph I found interesting. Note the fiancee and marriage denied etc.
[ 25. June 2017, 01:03: Message edited by: Adarynefoedd ]
Posts: 3 | From: UK | Registered: Mar 2017
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
Sure, we have this all here as well. Also "Gladue Reports" about aboriginal factors. I hold the view of the first principle is protection of the public. These deprivation factors may be used to sentence at lower ends of ranges.
That's why I provided the link to the High Court decision - it was purely a decision about sentence, not about conviction. It's worth reading.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
I didn't think this thread was about the sentencing of Bishop Peter Ball, but more about the historical cover up, those involved in the cover up and the implications around safeguarding in the Church of England, now and for the other historical cases.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
quote:
Originally posted by Adarynefoedd:
Thought also this article at the bottom of the page, a whitewash in the Daily Telegraph 14.3.93 shows a lot of manipulation and re-editing. https://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2015/10/07/peter-ball-how-the-british-establishment-protects-its-own/
Good find.
And, welcome!
Hardly, and hardly an objective source. It appears to be written by the head of the abuse team at a well known and large firm of solicitors who present themselves as practising in this field. They make a point in their publicity that they are 'no win, no fee', with a list of high profile cases on their web site as an encouragement. If one knows that, then whatever the language of manufactured outrage, it's difficult not to hear the message 'come to us and we'll get you lots of lovely compo'.
Your sense of social justice is a good as Ball's and his class.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
With the 'L' word already having been used by a Host on this thread I doubt if many are in the mood for bandying around unsubstantiated accusations as to who was or wasn't involved in a cover up.
As with this matter and, as it now seems, with the flouting of fire regulation on building material the art of nodding, winking and keeping it hush-hush is as alive, and as well as ever it was.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
Such theories are unworthy. Heard such ideas first in the early 1980s. The epidemiology from the Badgely Royal Commission showed 1 in 4 girls and 1 in 7 boys had sexual behaviour toward them (1984, Canada).. Which means an awful lot of perpertrators have either had it done to them or saw it. No causation.
No one is saying all, or even most, abused will abuse others. What is being said is that abusers are likely to have been abused themselves. It makes sense that some people will abuse no matter their own experience and that experience will affect the behaviour of others.
The same is thought with sociopathic behaviour.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Adarynefoedd:
Enoch thanks agree with you about the main article it was only the old article from the Daily Telegraph I found interesting. Note the fiancee and marriage denied etc.
Cynically, it might be said to be a classic cover up. It can't - at this distance - be proven either way.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
