Todd himself confronted me, or rather more vice versa, in an airborne conversation with me, in a car ride going across a local bridge. I heard out your case, stated in airborne form. I don't judge on behalf of children like some hero, but simply judge aside of them, meaning their visceral reaction to an adult is what is important. In the case of sexual abuse, sexual titillation by either or both parties can be considered child sexual abuse, or else feelings of creepiness or discomfort. This is something known to PeeJ, and involves a 10-year-old girl, adding four more years, over the Internet. He seemed to be alone, and wanted some company, and the girl was willing, evidence of abuse in and of itself.
He gets very defensive over this, but I try to presume innocence, with him presuming I must mean the opposite. Nope, I am honest in my judgments, perhaps brutally and perhaps with confrontation, judging above the line like the Early Christians did, usually by way of pro-social question. I find you guilty, yet not guilty. Guilty means there were damages. That's all the term "abuse" means - damages imposed, even in the moment, by way of inappropriate adult-child contact. However, I deem you a struggling and incidental abuser, meaning not an abuser in present tense, meaning you are a regret adult and I'd use that term to describe you. "Regret adult", in case you were told otherwise, is the children's rights equivalent for "former abuser", but can include lawful options...I do not like, at all, what you did, and I was shocked to disbelief to believe you did it...With a child of that age, I do not believe in pressing charges unless she wants to, and she declined to, is that correct? "Yes" That's my answer then, but I might have a word about how her parents handled it from there "Yes, they believed in that" No wonder she was on the Internet, looking up older men. Blame always falls with parents. Every time. So parents must take responsibility in this country, and stop blaming pedophiles for literally everything. You parents have a share in the sacrificial pot as well...I am not one to speculate about the harm of abuse, but I think she got more harm from her parents, and perhaps some of that was illegal as well.
I am one to actually am less attracted to girls on the Internet than in real life, meaning an online conversation is simply an online conversation. In person, winning over parents, then befriending the child, is my modus operandi, but the gaslighting is all set up so that the child herself can stop anything she wants, and be the boss of her own body and personal space...I could have rabid feminist beliefs about these issues then, but dissociate myself from the equation. It was a specific form of pride, where nothing I do is bad, because my own personal feelings constitute objective moral reality. I've reformed myself since then, and abuse has an objective standard. Anything the child perceives viscerally. I picture a lighting rod, with the rod symbolizing a child grasping the harm of their abuser, and documenting it for further knowledge. If she's afraid of me, I'm obligated to leave her presence, and leave for good, meaning for as long as she demands, with her word being law...No, that doesn't make me feel insecure in the slightest. The opposite, in fact - put in my place, in an accountable fashion. Pro-social menace, leading to pro-social submission. Submission is active in the case of being a caregiver, providing even attachment needs, and silent and submissive when not caring for children, holding your head low, knowing how worthless you are to them. All adults should take this attitude.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Any comment that
1. Endorses child abuse (including pornography of such)
2. Imposes want to the point of imposition, meaning entitlement.
3. Contains self-entitled parent rhetoric, to the point of self-victimization
will not be published. Flexible application. Debate is allowed, but only civil arguments that presume the best of intentions in their opponent, on both sides.