Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
…and you liken that to gihenom?
🙂
“Again, if it is done out of pure love, let Ha’SHem do it painlessly— nobody is stopping Him.”
what are you trying to say here? Are you arguing that it is for a purpose, or are you arguing that it is out of love?
I don’t know what the gemara says about gihenom so I won’t start voicing opinions, but in regard to something being both out of love and horribly painful, that is not a stira. You say nobody is stopping Him. Exactly. Since this is the way Hashem chose to make the process, this is what is in our best interest.
Please explain what you are saying, I would like to understand your point.
phil – not sure what you were trying to say there, a few too many run on sentences trying to tell me off for things I said that you couldn’t follow. No, I don’t think it’s black and white (and I actually know what that phrase means).
” Victims should only be able to sue if the abuser admitted to his crime and if there has come to light sufficient proof of abuse”
Oh, that sounds like a great idea! We should do that with murder and embezzlement too! victims should only be able to sue if the murderer or embezzler admits to his crime.
“why did the Brooklyn institution and the summer camp protect that molester for 25 years?
Maybe they believed him innocent. And maybe he was.”
and maybe he wasn’t but they did the popular thing at the time and ignored it, hoping it would go away.
AJ – thank you for that research. I read that as well but it wasn’t clear if the institutions who enabled includes our middos under totally new leadership. For instance, if a school district or an organization hides a molester, the district or organization remains responsible. But if its a lone institution and NONE of the players remain, i was told it might not be the same responsibility. And yes, even if the menuval died, the enablers are still responsible.
Thanks for the footwork
Ubiq – I hear what you are saying, and i would agree if he said that. I just (personally) don’t think he did. And seperately
The non controversial psa was great, i agree with that too. It was what *I* read as “we all know what they did wrong to get themselves there” opinion he tacked on that I found bothersome.
Guess it just proves there are deficits inherent in the effectiveness of written communication.
Ubiq- i really don’t think he said that at all (and I’m surprised to see you putting words in someone’s mouth). We’ve discussed this before somewhere, so pardon the repetitioncz, now IS the time to talk about being careful, more than just careful, but it is not our place to surmise or judge what those victims did or didn’t do. It’s a chutzpah to surmise, without having been there yourselves, and point fingers.
The second point of forgetting who really calls the shots, well that’s just our wishful thinking. Hishtadlus should not be confused with control.
Grey- Yes! You said it better than I ever could, thank you.
AJ – agreed, and I tried that as well but they don’t seem able to hear it. I think it works better (passion and blindspot and all) to pretend that it will just work that way.
The big fat joke of it is that I haven’t even decided my opinion of the law because I haven’t read into it yet. I’m only pushing back on the ignorant comments. Anyone else out there willing to admit they don’t *really* know enough to form an opinion but just can’t bear to support outing molesters? Anyone willing to wait till they’re well versed in the details of something before speaking out for or against it?
TLIK –
” But this passion exacts a huge cost. It blinds to fact and truth, and it “justifies” any collateral damage that results from the process.”What I find interesting about this line of yours is that it is *exactly* how I have for years described the attitude/expression of those who deny the existence of molestation among us. I hope that gives you some insight into the clear fact that both sides have their passion and their blind spots. But the biggest pela is that there should be any ‘sides’ at all.
the only reason you think people are in denial of things is because you ignore them when they speak, pull out what works for you, or just manipulate the comments to be similar enough to what they said to fool people (as with the above case). Iv’e pointed it out on many of those occassions with you feigning deafness to the written word in front of you. (Or with you thinking my critique of you and your skewed view is somehow a critique on yiddishkeit – when in fact there is very little overlap between the two).
“But what is black and white that it’s evil is this new law ”
are you aware of what the phrase ‘black and white’ means?
I am pretty sure you are incorrect based on what i read and heard but will ask someone who knows the law.
Also, if an institution is built on money the donors earned in a non kosher way, the building will not endure. I even heard someone say that that also explains why our school systems are in such dissarray. Hashem asks us to build our homes and businesses with honesty and yashrus . If we don’t, we pay the price eventually, and i don’t see Him holding of any statute of limitations. Build on quicksand – sink.Joe- as i said,i have not read the text but it was explained to me differently.
I am not certain but am pretty sure the suit is not against institutions that have all new administrations. I am fairly certain it is make believe information joseph and some others are using to sway people wrongly. Suing in court without a psak is assur. So is lying.
TLIK – Your confusion leaves me baffled. Steak and ice cream? I would expect a lot more respect for them from you. And with all you do know about people and the system, I can’t really fathom why you aren’t understanding this. I know I have said several times already that this has little to do with money. I would go so far as to say that this has *nothing* to do with money. It is about validation and confrontation. And they don’t just ‘have benefits’, they are the impetus for healing. ESPECIALLY since so much of the damage came from being lied to, denied, ignored, left unprotected and INvalidated. They were told by people close to them that letting adults close to them destroy them repeatedly was either a myth, or their own problem. Do you really not get what the point of this is?
Perhaps this will help give clarity – My friend became really sick and while unconscious suffered the amputation of both legs. There were many emergency decisions made and he just wanted to know what happened while he was unable to advocate for himself. Because nobody wanted to “throw anyone under the bus” the health care team was not always forthcoming. Even tho there was NO suspicion of negligence, he sued the hospital (or doctors perhaps) just so he could get the whole story, the truth, the facts. Period. He had to sue them for damages, knowing he might not get any because there was no negligence, because that became the ONLY means to get the facts, the truth, the players and the backstory. Does that help?
Clearly.
I believe he did.
Phil – stop. That isn’t why abuse victims go to court and justifying it IF that was the reason would be stupid.
DY – that’s not what hes doing. He’s asking Joseph why HE speaks out to the abuse victim but not to people he considers holy. He is questioning what seems to be a double standard.
I dont think I said anything about money. And i dont believe you are up to date with the research if you believe validation and confrontation have no clinical benefits.
Did you ever hear of aliza flatow? Do you think her parents were in it for the money as well?
You can put your fishing pole away, im not biting.
Joseph – dont be naive (or crass). Their filing has <em>little or nothing</em> to do with money.
(Advance notice to Neville and kluger- interjection said the victims aren’t in it for the money. Joseph rebuttal to that comment is that the law is only about money. Can’t you see how he manipulates the question to give an answer to stir controversy? Sorry, You cannot honestly read this and miss it )
“We” know Joseph. You’ve said it over and over. But I don’t know who you’re talking to or how it relates to anything I said. (And I am not asking for clarification from you either, I was addressing someone else entirely)
“I am directly challenging the notion that revenge has any clinical benefit to the victim”
I wish you would look into it because the data does not agree with you. But your mistake is calling it revenge (and attributing a desire for the money is just ludicrous). The therapeutic value is in confrontation and validation. So much so that therapy pushes for this to happen SO THAT healing can happen. According to many people who work with those who were molested, the molestation was only half the damage. The betrayal of the adults who didn’t protect them or protected the abuser was the nail in the coffin. To the extent, according to some of these therapists/counselor, that it can determine if the person can heal at all. This damage of being nullified and made into a virtual nothing, can sometimes only be healed by being acknowledged and supported. In real life. By the very people who killed them.
Which may help you understand why We are so protective of them when opportunity strikes.joseph’s first paragraph is false, speculative and unsupported. Even on the chance he really believes it, he still picked his information randomly from his impressions.
At least let this machaa be in print as well.” I have no idea about the background of the Williamsburg lawsuit you and Syag refer to ”
😂😂😂
AJ – oh I realize that, I was responding to Joseph
“I have a friend whom when she told her parents, they responded, “okay, let’s just check with him and see if your story adds up.”
I feel like crying- I hope they came around eventually, although I am not holding my breathThose are harsh words for the satmar rovs
People don’t *suddenly* remember at 55. That’s just how long it takes for some people to scrape themselves out of the sewer their lives have turned into by getting molested by the people closest to them, and then being spit in the faces and left to rot by the people who didn’t believe them when it happened. Then it can take them 20 years to stop blaming themselves and spend a decade convincing themselves that unlike 35 years earlier, this time someone might believe them and support them. But maybe not, and risk dying another death. Yes, sometimes it takes people that long.
I dont approve of his approach but nothing he has said supports or warrants your accusation. Defending long gowns cannot be compared to condoning miniskirts in halacha.
Sorry smerel, it wasn’t a raw nerve, it was my jew bashing detector alarm going off. Raw nerve would be if i bothered discussing the topic at hand, which would not be worthwhile. I’m just commenting on your ability to speak motzei she ra on a huge group of yidden based on your views.
Regarding social media – outside of the CR and personal whatsapps I dont have social media, dont visit social media and don’t (on principle) even read comments section of ywn and matzav articles (the only pages I will visit). So i dont know what you’re talking about. But you seem well versed so care to fill me in?
Or better yet, please don’tPhil- i don’t care about your projections, i care that you made them up. Why is it a problem to ask people to use integrity and emes when they speak? Amazing.
but I guess I should be thrilled that you didn’t have pretend statistics to “back it up”
“Those who hate the frum world and are the type to automatically take the anti frum side see it as a wonderful development.”
that comment is stupider than saying all trump supporters are white supremicists, including the Jews.
Pure motzei shem rah on any number of people and totally ignorant.I don’t think mass shootings (or any of the other violent crimes) will improve until humanity has improved their value of human life. You can outlaw anything and everything, make it harder to get guns or drugs etc but people who don’t value your life or even their own will find ways to be destructive.
It is true that there are less/no mass shootings in countries where there are strong gun laws, but I don’t know what other factors exist there. And I can only speak for here, where I am most familiar. I don’t think anything in the US as a whole will change until we figure out a way to change the way individuals live and view their lives and their worth. It has to change within the communities, the schools and move up from there.
you obviously have your own opinions on this subject, but then present them that way. To state facts and percentages out of a hat is sheker. You can’t build a case of facts based on your opinions. I promise you I also have very strong opinions about this subject but that is irrelevant here. I am telling you to present your information honestly and straight. Otherwise this just turns into another vax/anti vax yelling match with people spewing opinions as if they were published data.
Philosopher – I may be wrong but I would bet your statement is pure emotion and conjecture. You give a rant and include percentages and “facts” while my guess is that you are just making it up based on what you feel or heard someone else say, and that you may not even be well versed in either the law, the actual workings of the justice system, or the subject.
This is another example of what I mentioned above.
akuperma – I haven’t read the text of the laws but from what I *have* read the school won’t be held responsible unless they had some part in protecting someone. So that argument sounds more like a set up to make it sound like a random act of injustice when that isn’t the case.
When misinformation gets presented as a premise, it manipulates the uninformed to form opinions and give support in ways they might not have meant to do.without making this thread about ANY specifics, and just going generally with the scenario you presented, why would that be a bad thing?
“Bruriah “-
You may or may not be right about Joseph, but the way you can lie about knowing and having met “them” proves that emes not a trait you hold close to your heart. Which pretty much disqualifies you from teaching Torah.
And your rant, by the way, is frighteningly manic so you may not want to throw too many stones.Oh, sweetheart! Thank you for the permission.
And then you go on to rehash a closed point, put me down in not nice ways, insist you are right about points you cant support, and overall try to shut me up for having an opinion you don’t like on information you fail to absorb.But its okay cuz your kavanna is to tell me not to pick on people!
Lying to prove your point (I’ve told joseph straight out that i agree with him when it applies. Look it up) doesnt bother you, and neither does being insulting. You have more than “proven” your *real* intentions are far from what you have stated.I keep trying to sign off kindly but you keep trying to get in a last blow. Will you feel better when im just too insulted to respond. If thats what you are waiting for then you win.
kluger – how about this idea. 4-5 people have noted this behavior, and even tried explaining it to you but you don’t see it and continue to be all over me to explain it to you. Not explain the problem, but explain it to you in a way that makes *you* like it. So how about if you just accept that you just don’t see it. Even though many others do, you don’t.
So you don’t see it and yet you will dig deep inside yourself to allow others to have their view of something EVEN though you don’t see it. It’s a madraiga.Fair? Cuz I am kinda done spinning my wheels. And the singling me out for my view but telling me I can’t have it is making me feel kinda cruddy by now.
Oh, and here’s another thing you won’t see but I can bet others will. Joseph thinks this whole thing was awesome and is singing your praises as we speak!!
” besides for a 2-3 sentences that could’ve used more revered language towards our holy Sages”
besides for? why wouldn’t that be reason enough?
Number two –
“Why are some folks uncomfortable acknowledging this Chazal or its truthfulness?”If in your truest heart of hearts you believe this post is parve, then let’s just call it a day.
.
“So I ask you, what I’m his comment causes derision?
That’s what I started with, but you told me you never claimed that.”no, you actually asked me this:
“Please tell me exactly which comment of Joseph on this thread, denigrate woman?”
and I told you I didn’t claim that because I didn’t.
But it does seem that you use those two questions interchangeably, which I find very odd, and it makes it very hard to respond when you seem to be unclear on what we are actually addressing.No, Coffee. It wasnt to you. And yeshivaguy is bruriah and the posts are better left unread.
Im just baffled. You admit you cant follow the conversation nor make heads or tails of it, yet you prefer (insist?) to back “whatever it was joseph said” even though 5 or 6 people have now disagreed with you, because that somehow makes more sense than considering you might be mistaken (Gd forbid you should go so far as giving us credit for having a valid point. Sometimes people can be right even when you don’t see it. I’ve seen it happen)
If it wasnt you doing it, i don’t believe youd buy it.
Are you flipping serious?? Did you really let all that go over your head? PLEASE tell me you are joking!