Relevation & Inspiration...MTC abuse

[Just_A_Guy]

@Crash, I agree with you insofar as we are talking about rape or “abuse” in the legal sense of the word.  But in the more generic sense, the guy has admitted to BYUPD that he asked this woman to expose herself to him.  I’m not ready to call him a rapist; but I’m quite prepared to label him as a hypocrite, a rounder and a cad.

A couple of other random points that seem potentially germane:

1)  I don’t know how it is for rapists of adult women; but when we look at child molesters, it’s not at all uncommon for a perpetrator to violate ten, twenty, even as many as ninety victims; before he is caught and dealt with through legal proceedings.  I know that in my state, as part of their treatment juvenile sex offenders are often hooked up to a polygraph and interrogated about possible additional incidents and victims.  Leaving aside the constitutional issues involved (which drive me absolutely batty), every time I’ve seen this done we found at least three or four more victims.

I still think that the commonly cited “one-in-four” statistic is deeply overblown (unless we are including catcalls and swats on the rump as “sexual assault”—which may be broadly right, but is still light years away from rape).  But even assuming the figure is  correct—that “one in four” women seems likely to have been victimized by a very, very small proportion of men.  

2) One of the challenging things about a lot of these devastating attitudes that keep victims silent, is that they are perverted versions of some kernels of truth.  There are things a woman can do—places she can avoid, tools she can carry, and yes, ways to dress—to reduce the possibility of her being raped by a stranger; but this fact leaves a victim vulnerable to the abominable suggestion that she somehow “asked for it”.  Sexual penetration does trigger, among other things, a physical sensation that our brains are hard-wired to label as “pleasurable”, which can lead a child to feelings of guilt over the fact that she “enjoyed it”.  The simple fact is—and I don’t mean this pejoratively at all—but mentally, emotionally, and cognitively:  sexual assault leaves its victim as a hot mess.

Edited March 27, 2018 by Just_A_Guy

[The Folk Prophet]

4 hours ago, Crash said:

See, and I don't believe that most men are scum - vile servants of Satan.

That's because your you're a man! (Edited for shame's sake.)

Hey, this progressive sort of liberal type logic is fun!

 

Dance banana, DANCE!

 

2 hours ago, LiterateParakeet said:

@The Folk Prophet.  I disagree. I don't think men are scum, most men I know are good both in and out of the church.  

Really, it depends on what one means by "most" and by "scum", "vile", and "servants of Satan".

Edited March 27, 2018 by The Folk Prophet

[NightSG]

16 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

That's because your a man!

Ah, I missed one on the sealed book thread:

• If thou rememberest not proper usage of "your" and "you're," complain not if the Lord remembereth not your name, for He hath a lot more than two simple words to keep up with

Edited March 27, 2018 by NightSG

[Just_A_Guy]

10 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

The first BP has been interviewed and said didn’t believe her, but coverage had been really irritating.  The first coverage I saw had the BP saying that her story was internally inconsistent; but later variants of the story have the money quote as being that the BP just couldn’t believe an MTC president would do something like that—which of course, feeds into the narrative much more handily.

As for telling later leaders—again, this comes back to what it means for a victim to be “believed”.  The woman here seems not to have expressed any complaints about the way she, personally, was treated or counseled; her anger comes from the fact that the Church would not explain to her the nature of any discipline that may or may not have been imposed upon Mr. Bishop.  

Just found a story that partially overlaps with what I was looking for. Note that he says the accuser had a history of “embellishment”.

http://kutv.com/news/local/woman-who-accused-mtc-president-of-sexual-assault-has-been-telling-her-story-for-3-decades

[The Folk Prophet]

9 minutes ago, NightSG said:

Ah, I missed one on the sealed book thread:

• If thou rememberest not proper usage of "your" and "you're," complain not if the Lord remembereth not your name, for He hath a lot more than two simple words to keep up with

It was my auto-correct. I swear! I typed you're and it changed it. 

[NightSG]

2 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

It was my auto-correct. I swear! I typed you're and it changed it. 

"We apologize for any inconvenience caused by auto-sort relegating you to outer darkness.  Please be assured the paperwork for the correction will be processed within the next 3-5 millenia.  If you haven't been contacted by the end of the next geological age, you should use our web form to register a complaint."

[Midwest LDS]

Fyi the church just made some changes in policy in response to these allegations.

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900013999/lds-first-presidency-letter-directs-leaders-to-review-teach-policies-on-preventing-responding-to-sex-abuse.html

Edited March 27, 2018 by Midwest LDS

[The Folk Prophet]

Just now, Midwest LDS said:

big

I'm not sure this word is being used correctly.

Of all the "holy cow" changes the church has made or might make in the future, this one is pretty minor.

[NightSG]

14 minutes ago, Midwest LDS said:

Fyi the church just made some big changes in policy in response to these allegations.

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900013999/lds-first-presidency-letter-directs-leaders-to-review-teach-policies-on-preventing-responding-to-sex-abuse.html

So just because adult men are statistically[1] somewhat less likely to be victims of sexual assault by other adult men, we're denied the benefit of these new protections.[2]

 

[1]  Statistics that depend on reporting, which men are far less likely than women to do.

[2] No, I'm not particularly worried for myself, as I've yet to meet a bishop I'm not fairly certain I could mop the floor with if he tried that, but you have to admit the Church has plenty of guys who aren't exactly shining examples of masculine strength and combat prowess.  And for that matter, I've proven that at least one LDS woman can dislocate my jaw with a right hook, in spite of big fluffy gloves and protective headgear, so they ain't all such delicate flowers.

Edited March 27, 2018 by NightSG

[Midwest LDS]

8 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

I'm not sure this word is being used correctly.

Of all the "holy cow" changes the church has made or might make in the future, this one is pretty minor.

Agreed fixed it☺

[Petty3]

9 minutes ago, Midwest LDS said:

Fyi the church just made some big changes in policy in response to these allegations.

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900013999/lds-first-presidency-letter-directs-leaders-to-review-teach-policies-on-preventing-responding-to-sex-abuse.html

Good.  I'm glad for these changes.    As long as there is agency people will continue to make choices that can hurt others.  Protections need to be in place.

[Midwest LDS]

4 minutes ago, Petty3 said:

Good.  I'm glad for these changes.    As long as there is agency people will continue to make choices that can hurt others.  Protections need to be in place.

Agreed. I really like the fact that it spells out that abuse victims should be advised to get out of a bad situation instead of staying. In addition, I feel like this is also a protection against false allegations for the bishops as well. 

Edited March 27, 2018 by Midwest LDS

[Midwest LDS]

7 minutes ago, NightSG said:

So just because adult men are statistically[1] somewhat less likely to be victims of sexual assault by other adult men, we're denied the benefit of these new protections.[2]

 

[1]  Statistics that depend on reporting, which men are far less likely than women to do.

[2] No, I'm not particularly worried for myself, as I've yet to meet a bishop I'm not fairly certain I could mop the floor with if he tried that, but you have to admit the Church has plenty of guys who aren't exactly shining examples of masculine strength and combat prowess.  And for that matter, I've proven that at least one LDS woman can dislocate my jaw with a right hook, in spite of big fluffy gloves and protective headgear, so they ain't all such delicate flowers.

Eh it comes from the First Presidency so I'm sure it's the right direction. I do agree with you though, that there should be discussion of how to help male abuse victims as I know they are far less likely to report anything 

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

22 minutes ago, Midwest LDS said:

Fyi the church just made some changes in policy in response to these allegations.

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900013999/lds-first-presidency-letter-directs-leaders-to-review-teach-policies-on-preventing-responding-to-sex-abuse.html

This is awesome! 

"Never disregard a report of abuse . . ." Applies to all victims:  child, woman or man.   

[Midwest LDS]

2 minutes ago, LiterateParakeet said:

This is awesome! 

"Never disregard a report of abuse . . ." Applies to all victims:  child, woman or man.   

Agreed I appreciated that phrasing as well.

[Crash]

2 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

@Crash, I agree with you insofar as we are talking about rape or “abuse” in the legal sense of the word.  But in the more generic sense, the guy has admitted to BYUPD that he asked this woman to expose herself to him.  I’m not ready to call him a rapist; but I’m quite prepared to label him as a hypocrite, a rounder and a cad.

Well, abuse and assault are two different things. Abuse obiously turns to assault when it becomes a physical violation. To the second part of your comment, if he admitted that he asked her, or any other woman, to expose themselves to him, against their will, then it would not be assault but would be abuse. Or just a creepy dude. Asking and forcing are two differently things. One is abuse, if she really didn't want to but didn't know how to say no, and the other is assault. This, perhaps, was not as clear to her and she could have naively went along with it because of his authority and to that I am sympethetic (I'm speaking in hypotheticals because we do not know if any of this played out as she is claiming). 

If the abuse continues without confrontation, including manipulation and coercion, the abuser is emboldened, which leads to the assault. In these types of cases, the assault is consentual because the abuse has gone on long enough for the abused to have been trained by the abuser to not put up much of a fight, if any at all, when the assault occurs. 

In any of the cases where abuse and/or assault occurs, the abuser is pretty much a low life. Again, I don't know enough about this case as I don't think there is enough solid evidence to lean one way or another (not for me, anyway). So, I'll watch this one unfold all the way through. I firmly believe that alleged victims should be taken very seriously but I also firmly believe that alleged abusers or assaulters should be allowed the benefit of the doubt until proven guilty. We may be given a Bill Clinton moment of admission. Maybe that's a bad example. 

Edited March 27, 2018 by Crash
Apparently, I can't spell correctly

[NightSG]

Also thinking some lawyer insisted on poorly overdoing it; "the two adults should be two men, two women or a married couple" without reasonable consideration for any other factors; so my mother and I wouldn't count as two adults.

2 hours ago, Crash said:

Well, abuse and assault are two differently things. Abuse obiously turns to assault when it becomes a physical violation. To the second part of your comment, if he admitted that he asked her, or any other woman, to expose themselves to him, against their will, then it would not be assault but would be abuse. Asking and forcing are two differently things. One is abuse, if she really didn't want to, and the other is assault. This, perhaps, was not as clear to her and she could have naively went along with it because of his authority and to that I am sympethetic (I'm speaking in hypotheticals because we do not know if any of this played out as she is claiming). 

That depends largely on where it happens; some states would consider such an unreasonable "request" from someone in significant authority to at least be coercion, if not imply a threat (especially in the context of having taken her into a private place well away from others) and therefore equivalent to actual physical coercion.  Similar to some 6'8" dude asking politely for your wallet in a dark alley; a reasonable person would infer that there will be consequences for refusing.

Edited March 27, 2018 by NightSG

[Just_A_Guy]

32 minutes ago, Crash said:

Well, abuse and assault are two differently things. Abuse obiously turns to assault when it becomes a physical violation. To the second part of your comment, if he admitted that he asked her, or any other woman, to expose themselves to him, against their will, then it would not be assault but would be abuse. Or just a creepy dude. Asking and forcing are two differently things. One is abuse, if she really didn't want to but didn't know how to say no, and the other is assault. This, perhaps, was not as clear to her and she could have naively went along with it because of his authority and to that I am sympethetic (I'm speaking in hypotheticals because we do not know if any of this played out as she is claiming). 

If the abuse continues without confrontation, including manipulation and coercion, the abuser is emboldened, which leads to the assault. In these types of cases, the assault is consentual because the abuse has gone on long enough for the abused to have been trained by the abuser to not put up much of a fight, if any at all, when the assault occurs. 

In any of the cases where abuse and/or assault occurs, the abuser is pretty much a low life. Again, I don't know enough about this case as I don't think there is enough solid evidence to lean one way or another (not for me, anyway). So, I'll watch this one unfold all the way through. I firmly believe that alleged victims should be taken very seriously but I also firmly believe that alleged abusers or assaulters should be allowed the benefit of the doubt until proven guilty. We may be given a Bill Clinton moment of admission. Maybe that's a bad example. 

I agree with this.  Leaving aside the allegation of physical rape—based on the stipulated facts from both parties, we have an apparently- consensual sexual encounter between two adults with the power dynamic being roughly analogous to that between a college student and her professor.  As Mormons, we think it’s wrong because of our heavy emphasis on the Law of Chastity; and Mr. Bishop’s reputation suffers accordingly.  But in most other contexts the law wouldn’t bat an eye and society would do little more than snicker.

Edited March 27, 2018 by Just_A_Guy

[clwnuke]

Both Sister H****s and Mr. Bishop were adults at the time. I think it's a horrible moral tragedy but I also agree that it's probably not a crime unless assault/rape and coercion was actually involved. If that's the case then it all comes down to character. I sure wouldn't want to be in the courtroom when the dirt starts flying.

[Mod edit:  Let’s avoid putting specific names to the accuser until we have solid confirmation.  Thanks—JAG]

Edited March 27, 2018 by Just_A_Guy

[Petty3]

11 hours ago, clwnuke said:

Both Sister H****s and Mr. Bishop were adults at the time. I think it's a horrible moral tragedy but I also agree that it's probably not a crime unless assault/rape and coercion was actually involved. If that's the case then it all comes down to character. I sure wouldn't want to be in the courtroom when the dirt starts flying.

Even though they were both adults, if it did happen he was someone in authority.  He had power over her and was much older than her.

[Mod edit:  Let’s avoid putting specific names to the accuser until we have solid confirmation.  Thanks—JAG]

Edited March 27, 2018 by Just_A_Guy

[Guest]

2 hours ago, NightSG said:

"We apologize for any inconvenience caused by auto-sort relegating you to outer darkness.  Please be assured the paperwork for the correction will be processed within the next 3-5 millenia.  If you haven't been contacted by the end of the next geological age, you should use our web form to register a complaint."

Your on fire! ?

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Just found a story that partially overlaps with what I was looking for. Note that he says the accuser had a history of “embellishment”.

http://kutv.com/news/local/woman-who-accused-mtc-president-of-sexual-assault-has-been-telling-her-story-for-3-decades

So which one was supposed to be when he was still recovering from surgery?

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

2 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Just found a story that partially overlaps with what I was looking for. Note that he says the accuser had a history of “embellishment”.

http://kutv.com/news/local/woman-who-accused-mtc-president-of-sexual-assault-has-been-telling-her-story-for-3-decades

"history of embellishment"  Yeah....see zil's post.  All us women knew something like that was coming.  

[Just_A_Guy]

4 minutes ago, LiterateParakeet said:

"history of embellishment"  Yeah....see zil's post.  All us women knew something like that was coming.  

Perhaps so; but I think that regardless of gender—if you’re going to make an accusation of severe wrongdoing against a highly-placed individual, you need to not have a history of making stuff up.  

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I agree with this.  Leaving aside the allegation of physical rape—based on the stipulated facts from both parties, we have an apparently- consensual sexual encounter between two adults with the power dynamic being roughly analogous to that between a college student and her professor.  As Mormons, we think it’s wrong because of our heavy emphasis on the Law of Chastity; and Mr. Bishop’s reputation suffers accordingly.  But in most other contexts the law wouldn’t bat an eye and society would do little more than snicker.

 

Well, I thought from the start that both sides sounded off.  I figured he had done something.  But without further info, we didn't know exactly what.

While this confirms that hypothesis, it's still not firm just how far it went.  Still inconsistent statements.