Quote:
|
There are not "some", there are "many" negligent parents, and there are more than enough children being molested, for it to be anything but a hypothetical to worry about them being molested. Negligent parent = easy target of a child = greater molestation possibility. It's not a difficult concept.
|
It is a hypothetical. Just as the fact that someone who has molested once may molest again is a hypothetical. One is not a more likely hypothetical than the other. You can split hairs on this all day if you want to. I don't understand why you're doing it, but eh...
Quote:
|
You use the word "might", and still think that's a good point? Or a point at all?
|
So your hypothetical is that:
negligent parent = molested child
or
negligent parent
might = molested child.
Choose wisely.
Quote:
|
I didn't speculate that molestations happen, I didn't guess or theorize that neglected children are at a higher risk- those are known issues that are already happening, have always happened, and unfortunately will continue to happen despite our best efforts to the contrary. What you did was to create a fantasy world in which this one man is all manner of different threats you've invented for him that you have yet to verify on any level whatsoever are even plausible- not even including what he HAS done, let alone what he "might" do.
|
I created a fantasy world? Please, show me where I created a fantasy world making this guy out to be a threat.
Quote:
First of all, I have no idea what you're talking about when you say I'm doing the same thing to NG as she's doing to the guy. In what way could I possibly be infringing on NG's rights, judging her before knowing the facts, or anything else? This is probably the most made-up and baseless part of this thread so far.
Second, no one else who has said what I said (many of them saying so before me), have written that she's already trampling his rights. What was said is that by engaging in what became called a "witch hunt", she will be- mostly because there's nothing to tell us exactly what he did. I'm not sure how you misread every one of us who said the same thing: "by doing x, you're trampling on his rights without even knowing what he did". No one, especially me, has insisted she's already infringing on his rights- we've all said her future plans smelled of "witch hunt", which would be.
|
Well, I've gone back and taken a cursory look, but I don't see anything resembling a witchhunt. City officials have been contacted, a bus stop moved, a pre-school notified. Sorry but I haven't noticed anyone else on this thread take their concerns quite so far as you and as far as I'm concerned your level of feverish outrage directed towards NG over this is as alarmist and reactionary as anything else on this thread.
Quote:
I see only one or two people who "misunderstand" my "pronouns", both of whom have every bias in the world to be misreading what I write (with or without intent to do so). I have a hard time believing that I've suddenly forgotten how to form a cogent sentence using the correct articulations. I said many times that only those guilty of that which I lament should feel that I am directing those comments to them, and my wording has been faithful in that purpose. I can't help it that you manage to be a good parent and still feel like I'm pointing the finger at you anyway... maybe you feel the guilt anyway because somewhere deep, deep, deep down inside you feel that there's something you could have done to prevent what happened, and some teeny tiny part of you vainly clings to the thought that you could have done something, but didn't... or could have seen it coming, and didn't. I don't believe for a second that you're anything but a great mother, and I don't believe that any other person here does either. This is not an attack on you- please stop seeing it that way. Seriously.
And 'not for nothing', but you're totally ignoring the fact that you're intimately connected to this topic on a very personal level- with all due respect, I have to point out that you may have lost a little perspective on the issue because you're too close, and you're reading into my words whatever you like (subconsciously) because you (subconsciously) "want" to feel victimized. I hate to break out the psychology of it, but there it is. People who are victimized look to be victims again- the worse the victimization, the worse the effect afterwards. It's the same reason that people who are raised in an abusive home grow up to pair with abusive partners. It's a cycle of victimization, and you're at least partly stuck in one, yourself.
I am not making a victim of you- please do not be a victim to me. This was not meant to insult, only to help. PM me if you like.
- analog.
|
The bolded part of this pre-school analytical hogwash is the only shred with any basis in reality. Only they are not deep at all, and they are one thing that all parents of molested children have in common.
Vive la analog. C'est brilliance!
You understand very little.
*edit* And I'd just like to add that not only am I not a victim, but more importantly neither are my children. Thanks, but no thanks. Perhaps you understimate my kids and I, because of course, you don't know us. But just for future reference, minimizing people's real experiences down to superficial psychoanalytical precepts on a message board is pretty obnoxious. And to be completely honest with you, I think my efforts to become well-informed on this issue because of my personal involvement with it makes me more than qualified to have opinions on it.
To be sure, I am not the one making hysterical statements and drawing far-flung conclusions here. If someone else thinks so, I'd like them to chime in and point them out to me. I have discussed this issue and related issues on this thread in a very calm and unhysterical manner. Don't believe me? Go back and look. My problem has been your tone, and, apparently, my interpretation of your use of the pronoun "you." If I were calling for NG to go further and attempt to have him removed from the neighborhood or otherwise disrupt this guy's life you might have a point. But I'm not. I haven't. I won't. You see, because I know enough about it to see this from BOTH sides of the issue. How about you? I think it's obvious you don't.