|
In Reply to: 2nd part of psychologist's email as posted by Goth posted by repost by request on November 22, 2002 at 22:04:57:
"... Part of the problem in the SGA's focusing on blaming the FGA's for thier molestation is that they are only identifying one type of abuse, sexual, instead of recognizing that COG's sexualization was simply used as one more control/manipulation tactic....one out of dozens if not hundreds. It was simply an easily accessible toehold that, more than likely, appealed to the *ick* personality of the leader..."
I have never had the impression that this psychologist gets - that SGAs identify only one type of abuse, sexual. Where did she get this information? Who gave it to ger? She definitely has a warped idea of SGAs. Her generalization discount her as a good phychologist.
On top of that, her answer is clearly framed by the question asked: >>>Do you think this (the practice of glorifying the 'new' and 'young') is a factor in the generalized anger towards all first generation adults?<<<<
Am I the only one who sees this as a leading question, of the type a lawyer would ask in a trial?
What respectable professional would answer a specific question in such a generalized answer? What respectable person would she generalize with only partial information?
I'm sorry but I don't buy any of this stuff and I'm just scratching the surface. In my opinion none of it is worth reposting but I respect the position of others who may need it and enjoy it. I also enjoy taking a shot at it and, as far as I am concerned, it is now down in the water full of holes.
