A very kind offering also, Vam. I think that it is easy for us (anyone reading) to sit in our ivory towers and bemoan the evils of the world and wonder what went wrong. The subject of morality has me wondering about the idea of moral imperative. If we know (commonly) that the repeated trauma of child abuse can cause the arrested psychological development of important things like conscience, empathy, compassion, self concept, can we look the other way when we know it is happening? Are we participating in it when we do nothing to stop it, or even talk about it in ways that sugar coat it or condone it?
I do feel passionately about advocating for the sanctity of childhood and think that we all have responsibility for the children around us to provide homes and communities that allow them to grow and achieve their highest potential. I don't apologize for my passion, I recommend it. We have a moral imperative when we see a child being abused, to intervene. If we don't, we shouldn't be surprised to see these children become adults who populate our prisons or become our corrupt politicians (or corrupt any profession.) We ourselves, corrupt them by looking the other way. We empower ourselves when we step up and say "there is a more respectful way," and we empower the children that we carry in this act at the same time. On Apr 10, 12:35 am, Vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote: > " But I can conceive of a much healthier environment where it would > possibly be permissible to respond in kind." > > You mean : You need it. I too. Let's do it. > > Instead, I see in the child's need an opportunity to create a healthy > perspective of the matter in him, his thought - world, his life, > beyond his need of sex and definitely without the least need in me to > benefit / satisfy myself from his need of sex. > > Just an alternate view ! > > On Apr 9, 11:49 pm, gruff <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Perhaps it does matter. Boys and men tend to be more sexually > > aggressive than girls and women, though in the adult range of that > > aspect, more women are beginning to come out of the timidity closet, > > which pleases me to no end. Or it did back when I was still able. > > > Nor does a child acting out sexually necessarily indicate a sexual > > violation or abuse has taken place. It may simply be a lack of love > > in the home that causes that acting out -- though a lack of love can > > certainly be considered abuse. Or it could also be a vivid > > imagination. There are probably a host of reasons a child would act > > out sexually, just as there are a host of reasons children act out in > > many other ways. > > > As to whether that acting out would justify a response, well, in > > today's emotional and irrational mindset many have regarding the > > issue, I'd have to say there would be no justified response because it > > would do no more than to place the child in the emotional chains of > > shame, guilt and despair. But I can conceive of a much healthier > > environment where it would possibly be permissible to respond in > > kind. It just doesn't exist at this time. > > > On Apr 9, 11:03 am, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > boy or girl, does it matter? children who act out sexually do so > > > because they have been violated in this way. But as a question of > > > morality, would their approach justify any response to it?- Hide quoted > > > text - > > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
