Context is difficult with you Gabby, partly on enigmatic grounds (I mean the term nicely) on your expression. I'm broadly probing the legitimation crisis. We have reached a point when politicians promising change need to be greeted with shouts of 'apple juice'. We lack public context on economic matters even though technology could give us an economics we could use as we use washing machines or drive cars. Instead of this we have perverse resource allocation and devolved budgets to ration services that revictimise victims through the false promise of help, which is really going to be the denial of the complaint and exposure of complainants to more harm. Meanwhile the problems grow under the pretence we are dealing with them. We might learn about data and evidence in an examination of this. We don't seem prepared to do so.
On Tuesday, 4 November 2014 06:07:33 UTC, Gabby wrote: > > Ah ja? I'm not so sure. > Am 04.11.2014 01:49 schrieb "archytas" <[email protected]>: > >> Needless to say. >> >> On Monday, November 3, 2014 9:18:32 PM UTC, Gabby wrote: >>> >>> Again your interpretation. I meant to have politely replied: What is >>> your context? >>> >>> 2014-11-03 20:41 GMT+01:00 archytas <[email protected]>: >>> >>>> Gabby makes some important points - seem to remember the 81 paper but >>>> there were many, Dictionaries don't really help here - nor the >>>> hermeneutics of 'finding the original copy' - German sin is exemplified in >>>> the Jewish Numbers 31 and so on across genocides and the concentration >>>> camp >>>> as a business tactic in such as 'red rubber'. Primitive societies tell us >>>> their wars are based on revenge - though they always involve resource >>>> grabs >>>> (land, hunting, women, children). We seem to have merely managerialised >>>> this. >>>> >>>> The demand for social services and welfare is much greater than we >>>> admit, extending into such issues as why we have been so stupid to expand >>>> the human population in tripling it in my lifetime, global warming, >>>> pollution and the crass failures of "education". One might think one >>>> could >>>> at least focus on 'the abuse next door' - but I have to say when this came >>>> along in my life Sue and I failed and found the agencies and politicians >>>> much worse than useless. The ultimate standard of morality would have >>>> been >>>> to shoot the parents and do the time - had one been able to rely on the >>>> agencies looking after the kids rather than doing a worse job. >>>> >>>> The resource issues are not insurmountable though they are within our >>>> stupid economic system. Even to talk of this is more or less heresy - and >>>> look what we prefer to do - speak of young kids preferring a 'prostitute >>>> lifestyle' and hear politicians talking about the few cases in which >>>> abused >>>> children hit the care jackpot. The ages of consent across the West were >>>> often created in response to child prostitution. The first law of >>>> innocents I know of comes from Dark Age Scotland and I am by no means sure >>>> what the improvements since have been. >>>> >>>> The specific social services resource issue was discussed in the 1950's >>>> in terms of concentric circles - one could only focus on a small number of >>>> the worst cases in a much wider circle of need. Only 10% of kids killed >>>> by >>>> parents in the UK are actually known to social services in the sense of >>>> being subject to a care order. The costs of admitting a problem soon >>>> spiral and following the money one soon realises little actually gets >>>> spent >>>> on the kids. Gabby raises the issue that it is cruel to promise solution >>>> when we have no intent of funding what's needed. In terms of sufficient >>>> numbers of people to do most of what is needed there is no problem - we >>>> just create a system which prevents money-resourcing. >>>> >>>> We have, of course, pumped trillions into subsidy of manufacturing and >>>> banks over the years - these areas supposedly thrusting self-reliant >>>> genius >>>> competitors - and very little into what we call welfare - we 'police' >>>> Afghanistan and Iraq making things much worse but do almost nothing for >>>> our >>>> own victims. There are answers. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sunday, November 2, 2014 8:46:36 PM UTC, Molly wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I befriended one of the LaCasa employees that worked with children in >>>>> groups and took disclosures. She eventually became a police officer, >>>>> hoping it would be less stressful. I think it probably was.If the network >>>>> is large enough, no one burns out. Trouble is, it is rarely large >>>>> enough. >>>>> I think people have the need to look away from this problem more than any >>>>> other. >>>>> >>>>> On Sunday, November 2, 2014 2:59:57 PM UTC-5, Allan Heretic wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Ah, pedophiles they have been in the news including one for >>>>>> soliciting an underage computer image. Personally I am glad to see the >>>>>> aggressive prosecution, I am very proud of the enforcement effort. >>>>>> I wish I could say it would an honor to be part of the team thing on >>>>>> pedophile but truth is I think it would destroy me. I do give them my >>>>>> full >>>>>> support, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: Molly <[email protected]> >>>>>> To: [email protected] >>>>>> Sent: Sun, 02 Nov 2014 8:26 PM >>>>>> Subject: Re: Mind's Eye Re: Who can we tell? >>>>>> >>>>>> *It is important to agree on terms when conversing. This from the >>>>>> Free Dictionary:* >>>>>> *em·power·ment** n.* >>>>>> *Usage Note: *Although it is a contemporary buzzword, the word >>>>>> *empower* is not new, having arisen in the mid-17th century with the >>>>>> legalistic meaning "to invest with authority, authorize." Shortly >>>>>> thereafter it began to be used with an infinitive in a more general >>>>>> waymeaning "to enable or permit." Both of these uses survive today bu >>>>>> t have been overpowered by the word's use in politics and pop >>>>>> psychology. Its modern use originated in the civil rights movement, >>>>>> which sought political *empowerment* for its followers. The wordwas >>>>>> then taken up by the women's movement, and its appeal has not >>>>>> flagged. Since people of all political persuasions have a need fora >>>>>> word that makes their constituents feel that they are or are about to >>>>>> become more in control of their destinies, *empower* has been >>>>>> adopted by conservatives as well as social reformers. It has even >>>>>> migrated out of the political arena into other fields. · The Usage >>>>>> Panel has some misgivings about this recent broadening of usage. For >>>>>> the Panelists, the acceptability of the verb *empower* depends on the >>>>>> context. Eighty percent approve of the example >>>>>> *We want to empower ordinary citizens.* But in contexts that are not >>>>>> political the Panel is markedly less enthusiastic. The sentence >>>>>> *Hunger and greed and then sexual zeal are felt by some to be stages of >>>>>> experiencethat empower the individual* >>>>>> garners approval from only 33 percent of the Panelists. The Panel >>>>>> may frown on this kind of psychological empowering because it r >>>>>> esonates of the self-help movement, which is notorious for trendy >>>>>> coinages. >>>>>> >>>>>> I've never been interested in talking politics, and although I've had >>>>>> occasion to work with some, never really affiliated with any party. I >>>>>> will >>>>>> leave any tendency to interpret what I say as an affiliation with a >>>>>> political party up to you. I really don't have one. I will be excited >>>>>> to >>>>>> see Dave Bing next week when he comes to my place of employment. for a >>>>>> photo shoot, the Democrat who restored integrity to the office of Mayor >>>>>> of >>>>>> Detroit. He took a lot of heat and it took guts to devout the years of >>>>>> his >>>>>> life that he did to turning the city around like a freighter on the >>>>>> river. >>>>>> Like skin color, religion or citizenship, I don't don't hold many >>>>>> preconceived notions to a persons political persuasion when relating to >>>>>> them, so really can't speak to your comment about republicans and >>>>>> democrats. >>>>>> >>>>>> Nice to know pedophiles are prosecuted somewhere. Congratulations! A >>>>>> system working! >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sunday, November 2, 2014 1:28:13 PM UTC-5, Gabby wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The big picture, that you draw, is very much a U.S. American >>>>>>> Republican's view. I know quite a number of people whose aggressivenes >>>>>>> gets >>>>>>> triggerd by this deliberate choice of imagery. (I'm sure the relief >>>>>>> barking >>>>>>> will set in later) >>>>>>> Let's see if we can find a common ground for the word "empowerment". >>>>>>> The root is English, that's correct, but the modern popularity and >>>>>>> usage >>>>>>> goes back to the American Julian Rappaport: In praise of paradox. A >>>>>>> social >>>>>>> policy of empowerment over prevention, in: American Journal of >>>>>>> Community >>>>>>> Psychology, 9/1981, 1-25 (13), saying: „Having rights but no resources >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> no services available is a cruel joke.“ I think we can all agree if we >>>>>>> don't take a closer look at our rights, but assume we have them. >>>>>>> As for moving, if you cannot protect innocent children - this would >>>>>>> still be a taboo in our German context, even if we wanted to do the >>>>>>> same. >>>>>>> We have left innocent Jews to the apparatus, we have no excuse left. It >>>>>>> is >>>>>>> the alledged pedophiles who have to be protected in our communities, or >>>>>>> they have to move elsewhere, no laws and law enforcement could do >>>>>>> something >>>>>>> about that. >>>>>>> But you know what, I believe your call for a kid's survival training >>>>>>> is more of an anti-Democrat, Republican demagogy than a real call! :) >>>>>>> Am I >>>>>>> right? >>>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>> Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>> send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>> >>>> --- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >>>> Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/ >>>> topic/minds-eye/QYatNwqDgp8/unsubscribe. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >>>> [email protected]. >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>> >>> >>> -- >> >> --- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >> Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. >> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/minds-eye/QYatNwqDgp8/unsubscribe. >> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >> [email protected]. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
