Posted by Jules on March 16, 2004 at 05:47:58
In Reply to: False Memories, Naming & Shaming, and the Reconciliation Option posted by Anovagrrl on March 15, 2004 at 11:30:54:
There are a few issues here I wanted to comment on.
The first is that I don’t know that the debate regarding repressed memories has any relevance to any of us. I do not personally know of any person raised in the Family who recovered their memories of abuse. We always knew exactly what had happened to us, it was just that we were told it was love, or at the very worst, a mistake, but nothing that was really harmful, so there was no reason for us to be angry or upset about it, and if we were, the fault lay with us. The reason people usually begin to talk about it when they leave is because for the first time they are allowed to actually feel their emotional responses to what happened to them, and are not constantly being told to “forget the past” and “defend the Family”.
The second issue is that yes, there is the possibility that someone would be falsely accused of abuse. To publish details and names of accused abusers without collaborating evidence could, in most circumstances, be considered questionable ethically. However, given the unique circumstances of the Family I believe that we are completely morally justified in speaking out in this way. Child sexual abuse was an accepted practice in the Family. There was a deliberate and calculated mass cover-up. Victims who spoke out in the past and now are maligned, our deaths are prayed for and we are called blood-dripping demons. The Family has now successfully reinvented themselves as human rights advocates and children’s charities. The pendulum has swung so very far in the direction of injustice that naming and shaming is the very least we can do. With Family homes now being six adult members, there is a high probability that abusers will be in homes with children without the parents being aware of who these people really are. If you accuse someone of being a terrorist, it might just be slander. If you claim that you saw them commit the act or that you were the victim, it’s more likely that what you are saying is true. If you can collaborate the account, then your accusation has yet more substance. However if the person in question is (or was) a card-carrying member of Al Qaeda then it’s a whole different kettle of fish. I am not saying that accuracy is not important. It certainly is. But this was a pedophiliac sex cult for crying out loud. They gave us Heaven’s Girl as a children’s story.
The third thing is that I am personally very doubtful as to whether those aggressively campaigning for “reconciliation”, both in and out of the Family, between abusers and victims, actually have the victim’s best interests at heart. IMO, to confront your own abuser is one of the most difficult things to do, let alone to do it privately and alone. Someone was telling me about a CBS show that was on the other day about the film “Searching for Angela Shelton”. It’s about a young woman who travels around the US looking for women that share her name. 50% of her namesakes were abused as children and through her journey she comes to terms with her own abuse. She decides to confront her father and while she had planned to scream and yell and let him know how much he devastated her life, instead when she is there, faced with him, she reverts back to that ashamed and terrified little girl she was. I have experienced this myself, and it’s a horrible feeling. These people bullied and dominated us for years. They broke us down and systematically destroyed our self worth and self esteem. They are experts in manipulation and know exactly which buttons to push and how to push them. The recent writings from Karen Zerby echo exactly the same type of manipulative condescension we have heard most of our lives. Personally I have tried to confront many of my demons, but I still experience overwhelming panic when I am in a closed room with someone who has the language, mannerisms and vocabulary of a first generation Family member. If someone who had hurt me sought me out, I can’t think of how that could be a good experience for me at all. I don’t want them to feel better about what they did.
This is an honest question and I am curious to hear what people think, but why do we need to reconcile? I have no idea if reconciling with an abuser is an accepted (non-religious) therapeutic practice but it sounds very suspect to me. Sometimes I think that there is still a mentality of people who were in the Family being some sort of unit or friends with each other when that may not really be case. We have friends that we do make now and other friendships that have persisted through the years of being in and now out of the group, but I don’t personally think that it’s appropriate to give someone special consideration just because we were both once in the Family. I had some very unpleasant experiences after leaving the Family as well. If I were to ever write a tell-all book, it is likely that certain well known people (or their lawyers) would try to track me down and “reconcile”. I however never ever want to have to interact with these people ever again. I don’t see what the difference is. If the victims feel differently, then I respect their decisions, but I will not support any private interactions between abusers and victims unless specifically initiated by the victim, and with adequate support available for them.
I guess when you have spent your childhood being abused and then it is demanded that you keep silent and even lie to protect the people who had exploited you, you don’t really trust these people to have any of your best interests at heart. I wonder if anyone would be looking to reconcile if we had not named names and Daniel was not now collecting affidavits?