Their story of Rape and Reconiliation. *trigger Warning*

Persephone kindness

In 1996, Thordis Elva shared a teenage romance with Tom Stranger, an exchange student from Australia. After a school dance, Tom raped Thordis, after which they parted ways for many years. In this extraordinary talk, Elva and Stranger move through a years-long chronology of shame and silence, and invite us to discuss the omnipresent global issue of sexual violence in a new, honest way.

It's very rare for an abuser to allow this reconciliation for healing to happen. I wish i could happen more often.

Persephone kindness

sugarman wrote: »

That's fairly old and was discussed at length before

The video is three months old only

And it's such an important topic. So it deserves the thread i think.

Don't be so dismissive. I think it's very valuable.

Here is a more recent one.

Persephone kindness

I know it's an uncomfortable topic Sugarman. I just thought it was a very hopeful healing story though.

Persephone kindness

Persephone kindness

She is amazingly strong to forgive him. And he is strong to ask forgiveness.

893bet

Didn't have time to watch the video so skipped through.

Did the chap get convicted?

Cynic in me sees a money making opportunity.

And ****ing lol at the poster so says "he is brave to ask for forgiveness". Yeah what a hero...

Persephone kindness

893bet wrote: »

Didn't have time to watch the video so skipped through.

Did the chap get convicted?

Cynic in me sees a money making opportunity.

And ****ing lol at the poster so says "he is brave to ask for forgiveness". Yeah what a hero...

In answer to your first question no.

But how much money would it take for you to say you raped someone his face and name are known. And she could charge him tomorrow.

Maybe if the word rapist was a different consequence more rapists would do this. It's obv been healing for her.

The monster myth society has provided around rapists convicted or other wise hasn't really helped victims. In fact it's often re-traumatizing.
Yes there may be some rapists who are not emotionally intelligent enough to do this. Or are just bad.

But some are I guess more than that.

And yes I do think he is REALLY brave to ask for forgiveness. And she is strong to forgive.

silverharp

TED hmmm , they turned the likes and comments off in that video also they attempted to DMCA a response video. the response video below comes to the conclusion that it was awkward drunken teenager sex not rape.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylvVMJsGKxc&t=4s

Persephone kindness

silverharp wrote: »

TED hmmm , they turned the likes and comments off in that video also they attempted to DMCA a response video. the response video below comes to the conclusion that it was awkward drunken teenager sex not rape.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylvVMJsGKxc&t=4s

The man himself might might know ..he was there.

jamesthepeach

I feel a bit sick.

We are getting to a stage it seems today where it's becoming cool for some women to have been raped and cool for some men to have been rapists.

Why is a guy who confessed to rape not in jail, even if the victim forgives him? It's an open and shut case.

It's not the victims choice on whether he should be in jail or not. It's the law.

D0NNELLY

jamesthepeach wrote: »

I feel a bit sick.

We are getting to a stage it seems today where it's becoming cool for some women to have been raped and cool for some men to have been rapists.

Only online thank feck

Persephone kindness

jamesthepeach wrote: »

I feel a bit sick.

We are getting to a stage it seems today where it's becoming cool for some women to have been raped and cool for some men to have been rapists.

I am sorry it upset you. I can understand that.

It upset me ...but over all it made me hopeful. Not that it is cool. But that healing can come from reconciliation. I think a lot of victims lose hope though out the traditional process because it doesn't seem to ease their pain. If this can change things and also help men who have raped not see themselves as monsters and feel their own humanity and self compassion ..i think that is a good thing. I think it actually frees them to be very calm and compassionate to the women they hurt..if they have received forgiveness.

But obv everyone is going to have diff reactions and opinions on it. Possible strong ones.

Outlaw Pete

These two claim that they are doing this to send the message that society needs to stop blaming rape victims when they are raped in similar circumstances, who (according to them) usually focus on what the victim was were wearing or how they were behaving.... but society doesn't blame rape victims who were so drunk they couldn't even undress themselves.

I mean, if what they were saying was true and that there is a need for this story..... then wouldn't there be many people blaming her for being raped, asking her what she wore that night, how she behaved etc.. and are they? When that rickshaw driver raped that drunk Dublin girl last year I don't recall anyone commenting on her attire or saying that her behaviour was the reason for the attack.

There seems to be a deliberate lack of specificity about the rape also, other than the fact that she counted to 7200 seconds that is, but then the cynic in me sees that really as just spoiler avoidance given that all those details are no doubt a plenty in the book they have for sale.

Persephone kindness

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

These two claim that they are doing this to send the message that society needs to stop blaming rape victims when they are raped in similar circumstances, who (according to them) focus on what the victim was were wearing or how they behaved.... but society doesn't blame rape victims who were so drunk they couldn't even undress themselves.

I mean, if what they were saying was true and that there is a need for this story..... then wouldn't there be many people blaming her for being raped, asking her what she wore that night.. and are they? When that rickshaw driver raped that drunk Dublin girl last year I don't recall anyone commenting on her attire or saying that her behaviour was the reason for the attack.

There seems to be a deliberate lack of specificity about the rape also, other than the fact that she counted to 7200 seconds that is, but then the cynic in me sees that really just as a bit of a spoiler avoidance giving that all those detail are no doubt in the book they have for sale.

I believe it. I don't have any intent in posting it other than I think it was inspiring. I will take it as you don't have any other intent in stating your suspicions other than it made you suspicious.

But if it was true. Or there was a conviction. What would you think of such a thing being done? And bringing rape and convicted rapists out of the dark and allowing them to be publicly forgiven and open? What do you think of this type of healing reconciliation? Let's say exactly the same thing ..only he had been convicted and served a sentence? That way it removes the monster myth.

jeanjolie

jamesthepeach wrote: »

It's not the victims choice on whether he should be in jail or not. It's the law.

I think you're getting to emotional my friend....Victims of any crime whether it be rape, theft, assault etc... should be allowed not to prosecute provided they are of sound mind.

Might I ask, why does this bother you so much? It's her decision...

Samaris

jeanjolie wrote: »

I think you're getting to emotional my friend....Victims of any crime whether it be rape, theft, assault etc... should be allowed not to prosecute provided they are of sound mind.

Might I ask, why does this bother you so much? It's her decision...

Well, there's a worrying aspect in that, while achieving her/their healing, if yer man raped her, he committed a criminal act and it is wholly her judgement that he'll never do it again - a judgement more appropriate to a courtroom than one individual. Yes, she has the right not to press charges, I'm just dubious.

Maybe she's justified in her belief, it's just rather dangerous. I hope she is never proven wrong to have trusted him.

What's the trigger warning for? I assume it's not to do with rape since rape is in the title so only an idiot wouldn't realise that rape was spoken about within the thread. So I just can't quite figure out what else it's there for.

sbsquarepants

I watched that ted talk about 6 months ago and it really unsettled me. After letting it ferment in my brain since then, I'm no closer to knowing what I think about it.
I'm not sure what exactly it is, but the whole thing just doesn't sit right with me at all. I don't know whether to be impressed by her courage and openness, or alarmed by it, or what to think at all really. He can just go fúck himself either way, he gets nothing but contempt regardless. Rapist as victim - no, i'm sorry, you won't be selling that shít on my doorstep!
Maybe I'm just too cynical for my own good, I don't know. I'm not rushing to applaud or embrace this anyway.

jeanjolie

jeanjolie wrote: »

I think you're getting to emotional my friend....Victims of any crime whether it be rape, theft, assault etc... should be allowed not to prosecute provided they are of sound mind.

Might I ask, why does this bother you so much? It's her decision...

It's not "her decision" at all. It is a decision for the prosecution service in any country.

jamesthepeach

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It's not "her decision" at all. It is a decision for the prosecution service in any country.

Agreed.
I say put him on the stand. He can tell his story there. And then it's the jury who find him guilty or not. The way it is now he gets away with it.

Should he be on the sex offenders list? Or do you get off that list because you somehow got your victim to forgive you.

Outlaw Pete

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

. but society doesn't blame rape victims who were so drunk they couldn't even undress themselves.

Unfortunately, I see this happening all the time if a victim is drunk. Of course, they say they are not blaming the victim, with the same breath then say she shouldn't have got so drunk that let someone rape her!
Sounds like blaming victims to me...

Outlaw Pete

Persephone kindness wrote: »

But if it was true. Or there was a conviction. What would you think of such a thing being done? And bringing rape and convicted rapists out of the dark and allowing them to be publicly forgiven and open? What do you think of this type of healing reconciliation? Let's say exactly the same thing ..only he had been convicted and served a sentence? That way it removes the monster myth.

Well, had that guy been convicted and jailed then I wouldn't give the situation much thought tbh as he accepts that he raped her and so that aspect of it all is not up for debate. There are men getting locked up for groping girls over 40 years ago and so for someone to be jailed when they admit raping one 20 or years ago... just wouldn't really be all that odd in this day and age and so had I just seen an article on that aspect of it all (and they had no book to promote) I guess I'd just think 'That's mad, Ted' and move on.

As for the forgiveness side of it..... if that's what they want to do... so be it. I've seen parents of murdered children forgive terrorists that were responsible for their children's deaths and so it's not all that unique a concept to forgive someone for a wrong doing.

I just come back to why it is that they say they are doing all this (which is the only problem I have with it all) and I don't buy it for a second. It rings quite hollow and they are in effect creating a strawman issue as they are not addressing something which needs to be addressed, like for example The Accused did in the late 80's (given that it tackled the notion that a somewhat inebriated women who was being amorous with men on a night out was in some way to blame for their rape) but this anecdote does not given that nobody believes (much less a large chunk of society) that a woman who is so drunk that she can not even undress herself is culpable should she get raped in that state.

Had this guy genuinely believed she was sober enough to have sex and that she had in fact conveyed consent to him...... then it would have been a Ted talk worth watching.... as it would create a debate worth having....but otherwise I just don't get what it is that can be garnered from their story which is all that important given that nobody would really (in western society at least) feel it okay to have sex with someone who was that drunk

arrianalexander

jamesthepeach wrote: »

Agreed.
I say put him on the stand. He can tell his story there. And then it's the jury who find him guilty or not. The way it is now he gets away with it.

Should he be on the sex offenders list? Or do you get off that list because you somehow got your victim to forgive you.

He wasn't prosecuted so he wouldn't be on the sex offenders list . She didn't report it at time and by time she was open about it the statute of limitations had run out or expired (whichever the right phrase is) they were both on pat Kenny one morning and both admitted they couldn't get it to court . Yes ridiculous since there is no denial but unfortunately that's how this case is. As far as I can remember she said the laws have changed since.
Not pretending to be an expert but that's what I recall from interview, I'm sure it's on a pat Kenny newstalk podcast

Outlaw Pete

bubblypop wrote: »

Unfortunately, I see this happening all the time if a victim is drunk. Of course, they say they are not blaming the victim, with the same breath then say she shouldn't have got so drunk that let someone rape her!
Sounds like blaming victims to me...

Nobody says this.................. (but sure feel free to link to any occasions where someone has - be interested to see them).

I would suspect what you are in fact referencing (and then spinning) is the many debates that have been had about risk reduction and yes, getting drunk undoubtedly raises one's risk of being attacked, not just sexually, but physically also. While a woman getting drunk and walking alone in strange areas undoubtedly increases her chances of being attacked, so too does men getting bloto and staggering down alley ways late at night. Warnings to avoid behaving in a manner which increases the odds of getting attacked / robbed is not victim blaming nor anything close to it.

Persephone kindness

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Nobody says this.................. (but sure feel free to link to any occasions where someone has - be interested to see them).

.

Defense lawyers do it in court all time ...and way way worse. Even after conviction in sentencing they will use to sway the judge to be lenient.

Persephone kindness

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Nobody says this.................. (but sure feel free to link to any occasions where someone has - be interested to see them).

I would suspect what you are in fact referencing (and then spinning) is the many debates that have been had about risk reduction and yes, getting drunk undoubtedly raises one's risk of being attacked, not just sexually, but physically also. While a woman getting drunk and walking alone in strange areas undoubtedly increases her chances of being attacked, so too does men getting bloto and staggering down alley ways late at night. Warnings to avoid behaving in a manner which increases the odds of getting attacked / robbed is not victim blaming nor anything close to it.

What other people feel is victim blaming is what other people feel..you can't please anyone ..but just cuz it doesn't make sense to you doesn't mean they don't feel it ..

Winterlong

28 posts in this thread , 11 of which are from the OP.
What's going on OP?!

Persephone kindness

Persephone kindness wrote: »

Defense lawyers do it in court all time ...and way way worse. Even after conviction in sentencing they will use to sway the judge to be lenient.

Allocating blame to the victim of any crime is very high risk stuff, and will often result in the Judge very bluntly reminding a lawyer that it is their client who is being prosecuted, not the victim of the crime. To persist with it in looking for mitigation after conviction would be very rare, and only in the clearest of cases, as usually it would produce the opposite result and antagonise the Judge.

Persephone kindness

Deleted User wrote: »

Allocating blame to the victim of any crime is very high risk stuff, and will often result in the Judge very bluntly reminding a lawyer that it is their client who is being prosecuted, not the victim of the crime. To persist with it in looking for mitigation after conviction would be very rare, and only in the clearest of cases, as usually it would produce the opposite result and antagonise the Judge.

Even female judges do it

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/mar/10/judge-accused-of-victim-blaming-during-sentencing-comments-in-case

It seems logical ....to suggest ..but rape counselors and professional therapists have said it's damaging ..

This was said after conviction that link at sentencing by the judge.

Widdershins

I'm not clear on the purpose and benefit of forgiving the rapist and removing the monster ''myth''. It sounds like saying to remove the stigma of being a rapist.
Imo they don't want forgiveness, and it's wishful to think they care about it.
I know you've mentioned the healing process and maybe it's just that I don't recover from things through the same processes.

Outlaw Pete

Persephone kindness wrote: »

Even female judges do it

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/mar/10/judge-accused-of-victim-blaming-during-sentencing-comments-in-case

It seems logical ....to suggest ..but rape counselors and professional therapists have said it's damaging ..

This was said after conviction that link at sentencing by the judge.

I knew that is what you were going to cite and that judge said nothing like the comments you have attributed to her..... here is what she said in full:

"We judges who see one sexual offence trial after another, have often been criticised for suggesting and putting more emphasis on what girls should and shouldn't do than on the act and the blame to be apportioned to rapists," she said.

"There is absolutely no excuse and a woman can do with her body what she wants and a man will have to adjust his behaviour accordingly. But as a woman judge I think it would be remiss of me if I didn't mention one or two things.

"I don't think it's wrong for a judge to beg woman to take actions to protect themselves. That must not put responsibility on them rather than the perpetrator.

"How I see it is burglars are out there and nobody says burglars are OK but we do say 'please don't leave your back door open at night, take steps to protect yourselves'," she said.

"Girls are perfectly entitled to drink themselves into the ground but should be aware people who are potential defendants to rape, gravitate towards girls who have been drinking. It should not be like that but it does happen and we see it time and time again."

She said men do it because "a girl who is drunk is more likely to agree as they are more disinhibited" and are "less likely to fight a man with evil intentions off". She also said women were less likely to report it if they were drunk because they sometimes cannot remember exactly what happens.

She added: "They are entitled to do what they like but please be aware there are men out there who gravitate towards a woman who might be more vulnerable than others. That's my final line, in my final criminal trial, and my final sentence."

The above is a far cry from saying a woman "shouldn't have got so drunk that let someone rape her!". A million miles from it in fact and as I said earlier... some people just can't seem to make the distinction between risk reduction measures and victim blaming... but a distinction there is and quite a large one but unfortunately it would seem some would rather not see it.

jamesthepeach

arrianalexander wrote: »

He wasn't prosecuted so he wouldn't be on the sex offenders list . She didn't report it at time and by time she was open about it the statute of limitations had run out or expired (whichever the right phrase is) they were both on pat Kenny one morning and both admitted they couldn't get it to court . Yes ridiculous since there is no denial but unfortunately that's how this case is. As far as I can remember she said the laws have changed since.
Not pretending to be an expert but that's what I recall from interview, I'm sure it's on a pat Kenny newstalk podcast

Point is that there was a crime committed. Two witnesses and an admission of guilt are available now to prosecute that crime and nobody is prosecuting it.

Pawwed Rig

jamesthepeach wrote: »

Point is that there was a crime committed. Two witnesses and an admission of guilt are available now to prosecute that crime and nobody is prosecuting it.

Read the post you quoted. It has already been said that the statute of limitations has expired so no prosecution is possible.

Persephone kindness

jamesthepeach wrote: »

Point is that there was a crime committed. Two witnesses and an admission of guilt are available now to prosecute that crime and nobody is prosecuting it.

I think the statute of limitations was up. I am uncertain of Icelandic law though.

Outlaw Pete

Persephone kindness wrote: »

What other people feel is victim blaming is what other people feel..you can't please anyone ..but just cuz it doesn't make sense to you doesn't mean they don't feel it ..

Just because people feel a specific intention was at the heart of something said or done does not mean that it was what was actually being implied let alone the actual motivation behind it. The recent Gardai prevention measures posters for example were said to be felt as they were victim blaming... but that doesn't make them so.

Guess what I'm saying is that while feelings are important and all, in and of themselves they don't prove very much and so you can't just cite someone feeling that something is victim blaming as evidence of it being so.

Persephone kindness

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Just because people feel a specific intention does not mean one was implied let alone the actual motivation. The recent Gardai prevention measures posters for example were said to be felt as they were victim blaming... but that doesn't make them so.

I understand that might not be the intent.

Guess what I'm saying is that while feelings are important and all, in and of themselves they don't prove very much and so you can't just cite someone feeling that something is victim blaming as evidence of it being so.

I don't think someone feeling it shows intent to make them feel that way at all ...in fact that is the issue. If people KNEW they made people feel this way ...they wouldn't. Obv we behave diff with our friends and when in front of people.

It is just a reminder to victims that no matter what is said don't let it make YOU feel bad ..even if that seems hard. You did nothing wrong.

Persephone kindness

I don't think people mean to make victims feel bad if they knew they wouldn't.

sbsquarepants

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

The above is a far cry from saying a woman "shouldn't have got so drunk that let someone rape her!". A million miles from it in fact and as I said earlier... some people just can't seem to make the distinction between risk reduction measures and victim blaming... but a distinction there is and quite a large one but unfortunately it would seem some would rather not see it.

I think there is almost a hysteria in some circles about what is undeniably sensible advice. You SHOULD be able to do whatever, wear whatever, go wherever and so on - you should be, but that doesn't mean you are.

Much better in my mind to avoid any trouble, than to encounter it but have the moral high ground. That applies to all manner of things, not just rape.

It's better to not walk down that dark alley and get mugged, than to walk down it and know it's not your fault you were mugged. Better to take the long way home and avoid the gang of youngfellas drinking in the park, than to be the innocent victim of a hiding.

There is such a thing as common sense and self preservation. It's still not your fault per se, but if you temp fate it has a nasty habit of biting you on the arse.

Ciderswigger

Persephone kindness wrote: »

If this can change things and also help men who have raped not see themselves as monsters and feel their own humanity and self compassion

I honestly cant get my head around this sentence.This isn't some love-in where by the end of it everyone should feel better about themselves. This is a major sexual assault that can have repercussions for the rest of the victims life. A rapist SHOULD live with the feeling and knowledge that they are a monster.

GritBiscuit

Persephone kindness wrote: »

It is just a reminder to victims that no matter what is said don't let it make YOU feel bad ..even if that seems hard. You did nothing wrong.

Rape is obviously a hugely emotive crime and so any kind of comment on or about it tends to elicits a response from someone. When a portion of those someone's are victims of rape or advocates for victims of rape then the whole discussion around the topic becomes a minefield - and I don't think that benefits anyone, victims included.

To use the judge in question's analogy; if someone has their car stolen after leaving it unlocked in a dodgy area nobody has an issue with anyone stressing the best way to deter would-be or opportunistic car thieves is to lock the car. Nobody gets upset thinking, wow, you think it's my fault my car was stolen...we should only be targeting car thieves and leaving victims of car thefts out of it. I don't think anyone views people as cars or that the horror of rape equates with car theft, but that the underlying principals of risk reduction apply to both...and for some reason while locking the car in a safe area is lauded as absolute common sense, suggesting women avoid making themselves even more vulnerable than they already are is chastised as victim blaming - when really, we should care a damn sight more about women than bloody cars!

In an ideal world nobody would ever need to take precautions about anything because crime would not exist. But we don't live in an ideal world. Rapists exist. Some are abusive partners. Some are sadistic predators. Some are opportunistic. I don't think there is any way to avoid the former two but there are some things you can do to lessen your chances of being targeted by the latter...and I read that judgement in the context of a woman using her voice having seen multiple sexual assault trials to underline that point....and if that caution means one less woman being raped then surely that's a good thing?!

Widdershins

Ciderswigger wrote: »

I honestly cant get my head around this sentence.This isn't some love-in where by the end of it everyone should feel better about themselves. This is a major sexual assault that can have repercussions for the rest of the victims life. A rapist SHOULD live with the feeling and knowledge that they are a monster.

It has a bit of an ''he just made a mistake'' aura to it.

sbsquarepants

Ciderswigger wrote: »

I honestly cant get my head around this sentence.This isn't some love-in where by the end of it everyone should feel better about themselves. This is a major sexual assault that can have repercussions for the rest of the victims life. A rapist SHOULD live with the feeling and knowledge that they are a monster.

I don't really get the concern for the rapists feeling either, I have to say. You feel bad that you raped someone? Well boo hoo, so you should.
You don't feel bad enough you fúcking scumbag!

eviltwin

I don't know what to make of it and I'm not going to watch it because its too close to the bone for me. If she feels better for it and its helped her move on then I think that's great. I have worked with rape victims before who have been attacked by a partner or former partner and who have had to stay in touch with them for the sake of kids etc and they have been able to compartmentalise it. I'd imagine if the victim was subjected to a prolonged attack, if she had been dragged off a street and assaulted physically as well as sexually it would be a lot harder for her to find forgiveness. I don't think forgiveness is all its cracked up to be to be honest. I haven't forgiven the person who abused me and never will. If this helps some people great, but I don't think we should start encouraging victims of any crime to reconcile with the person who wronged them.

One eyed Jack

Persephone kindness wrote: »

It's very rare for an abuser to allow this reconciliation for healing to happen. I wish i could happen more often.

I get where you're coming from, but with these two, I can't help but get the feeling that it's less about reconciliation, and more about self-promotion. To me it appears as though they're using their circumstances to promote a particular agenda - to frame rape in a political social context. Not once, in the videos in this thread, did the man acknowledge that he was a rapist, and even when asked the question directly by the interviewer - "Do you see yourself as a rapist?", he side-stepped the question and went on to talk about how he felt.

It just comes across as was suggested earlier - a sort of a love-in between the two of them, the woman was asked were they now friends, and she responded that it was a collaboration. Even the language they used and the way they try to frame the whole thing as this great journey of self-discovery with both of them travelling from opposite hemispheres to spend a week discussing it in South Africa? It just comes across to me at least as very "sanitised and romanticised".

If it helps her cope - fair play, grand, I don't see what harm she could possibly do to anyone but herself, and I completely get the idea of her need to forgive and understand her rapist as a human being. But when she says that she isn't suggesting that all people who have been raped should try and do what they've done, by the very fact that they are standing up on the stage and have written a book about it, and are giving talks and using their experiences to make a commentary about a wider social issue, they are trying to say that we should all try and show forgiveness and understanding to rapists, and the way they're going on, it appears that neither of them want to take responsibility for that fact.

They shouldn't just be able to say "Oh well we're not saying this or that", when that's exactly what they are saying by trying to map their own individual processing of their experience onto wider society as though society is at fault for demonising rapists, and suggesting that hurts people who have been raped too, as if to say "We shouldn't demonise rapists, we should show them forgiveness and understanding", which comes off exactly like someone suggested earlier as a bit of a love-in, a socially and politically motivated love-in which appears to be solely in both their interests.

Lady is a tramp

It's not uncommon for victims to have an obsessive relationship (one-sided or two-sided) with their rapist, whether in a positive or a negative way.

Some victims get wrapped up in their hatred for and fear of their rapist, others become wrapped up in the idea of needing some sort of a bond with them for their healing.

In my opinion neither is healing, in most circumstances. Your healing should not depend on giving the power back to the person who hurt you in the first place.

It's a controversial topic ... I know so many victims of rape and abuse (probably more than most), and I am a victim myself of very violent and sadistic sexual abuse, back when I was a child. For me there could be NO healing in establishing any sort of relationship with the abuser, and I'm certainly not going to forgive him, although I do accept that he didn't choose to be that way (nor did his female accomplice) and I accept that they both probably suffered themselves in the past ... it's not my pain, though, and I've no interest in taking it on board.

For me the healing comes in being able to detach myself from it, and from relieving myself of blame in the whole situation. I was three when it started, and you wouldn't believe the amount of blame and self-hatred I attached to myself in all of it! So untrue. For me, I needed to learn that I didn't need to either hate myself or to forgive myself - that I wasn't in the wrong. It all came from within, from learning self-compassion and self-respect.

I wouldn't be happy in my recovery if it was linked with my relationship with my abuser. (Which is non-existent, by the way, and always will be, despite the fact that he's a member of the extended family.) I don't think about him regularly any more, and I don't live in fear of him any more.

I could never tie my healing into a relationship with him, knowing what he has done to me in the past. If someone hurts you so deeply, if they've the capability of doing that, how could you ever be truly sure they wouldn't do it again?

I know for sure that circumstances don't allow him any contact with other children any more (I wasn't the only one he hurt) ... that's enough for me, knowing no one else is in danger from him. I couldn't ever possibly move on if he were a part of my life.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

What's the trigger warning for? I assume it's not to do with rape since rape is in the title so only an idiot wouldn't realise that rape was spoken about within the thread. So I just can't quite figure out what else it's there for.

I think it must be for traffic. Like a tabloid head line

Vic_08

Persephone kindness wrote: »

I wish i could happen more often.

I wish YOU would happen an awful lot less.

Widdershins

Vic_08 wrote: »

I wish YOU would happen an awful lot less.

A bit mean! The thread got people talking.

Pawwed Rig

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Read the post you quoted. It has already been said that the statute of limitations has expired so no prosecution is possible.

I find it bizarre that a country would have a Statute of Limitations for serious crime...

Persephone kindness

Persephone kindness wrote: »

The video is three months old only

And it's such an important topic. So it deserves the thread i think.

Don't be so dismissive. I think it's very valuable.

It was talked about in this thread 4 months ago.

http://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057710031/7

GerryDerpy

Trigger warning. Oh my good lord.