|
In Reply to: trafficking posted by Jules on December 20, 2002 at 20:41:27:
Right, Jules. Our parents did not get a check when they sent us in but I personally see it as an economic transaction, and not really outside of the UNICEF definition. Here's why.
Karen posted earlier: "According to the UNICEF definition of child trafficking, it is "..the illegal transport of children in order to sell them for exploitive purposes...Children are sold and bought for such things as labour, sex, organs, and marriage.""
When I was sent 500 miles away from my mother at age 12, a woman was given a POA who was GAF shepherd. Pretty soon she "asked" me to share with her husband, the second-oldest person in the COG in Argentina (the oldest was like the oldest guy at all in the Family, so GAS man was not young, maybe 45 in '85). The ultimate betrayal from somebody who has assumed a motherly position. I was not safe morning, noon or night from being asked while I was doing JJT to take him an herb tea and being used for a "quick stop service."
At least when I was sent witnessing I knew that would not happen (though because of one's vulnerable, resourceless situation, I was molested while hitchhiiking to tapenessing spots -- no, we were not given bus fare). Small wonder I became a very good tapenesser even though I was a painfully awkward little girl dressed in grown-up forsake-all rags; to this day I hate standing near a stopped bus because I still feel it is a big group of people just staring at me.
OK. I didn' get to see my brother until after the TTC, when he was old enough to be sent for "teen training." His voice had changed and he was taller; he had to call out to me because I did not recognize him.
I might have gotten a letter or two from my mom during this time. Not one phone call, of course.
Back to the UNICEF definition. I was not sold for organs, and also, I personally was not sold for marriage (though their push to marry the young'uns off and get them pregnant...I'll not get started there).
But labour and sex? Yes. My parents simply were so loyal they did not require cash payment. they got paid by remaining in good standing in
the group that they lived for. When I became rebellious around this time, they were ashamed and rejecting.
There may not have been money passed in any other direction than staright up in the Family. However, we mislead ourselves to ignore the economics of the Family. I regard what happened to me at the hands of that leader as a perk of his job, part of his compensation. The group received economic benefit from my suffering in the form of his high-level service to them (he preyed on other girls my age too). Of course they derived economic benefit from my regular labor; each of our slaving kept the homes running and tithing.
OK, now I am feeling to sad. I have to go.
