1. Ask questions--using what you've learned here about answers, including reliable denials.
2. Presume that minimization will take place in the language.
Recently, one wrote about an "affair" between her 8 year old child and her husband.
It caused one to have an angry comment because others did not respond with the same level of shock.
First, here is the post about the affair, and then the angry comment left.
This elicited an angry response:
"With all due respect, how can you call your husband molesting your 8 yr old daughter "an affair"? You speak as if you are the victim. If the molesting went on for years and it started when your daughter was 8 how could you possibly have had NO IDEA . It is just strange in my opinion how you call this "an affair". Also, an 8 yr old is not a "young lady". An 8 yr old is practically is just a little kid. You need to become clear in your head it was not "an affair", it was moleststion. Am I seriously the only person disturbed by this post?"
The post begins with a question:
"With all due respect" warns you of what follows won't be respectful.
Then asks, "how can you call...an affair?" This is actually a relevant question (which begins the post) and deserves an answer because the answer, itself, is not only useful for learning, but for assisting victims.
In child molestation, the damage to the child remains immeasurable in its fullest understanding. Statistics are useful, though each time I feel I have a grasp of the impact, something new arises. It is universally heartbreaking.
The answer remains within the attempt to protect oneself from the guilt of Neglect.
It varies greatly, so allow me to be general.
The mother has suspicions but fears taking action.
The mother knows, but is paralyzed by fear.
The mother does not know, because she does not want to know.
The mother does not know.
The mother cannot bear the guilt of knowing it happened on her watch.
on and on it goes.
It is awful. But is that the case here? We continue:
The change of language to "affair" is not only minimization, but it puts:
a. blame upon the child
b. both the adult and the child on equal status
c. protects the mother from the guilt of abdicating her role as protector.
As to anonymous' closing question:
I think some simply did not comment on it due to shock or disgust.
Others may not have responded for a very different reason:
The original post is not true.
Here is why some may have decided to not bother to respond...
My husband was having an affair... at least that is what he and the young lady considered it.
First, she uses the language "an affair" as standard language, not using the quotation marks used later.
Next, she refers to the partner in the affair: "the young lady." Let's see how she references her daughter throughout.
1. She is "the young lady."
He had her convinced that he would divorce me and marry her "as soon as she turned 18".
2. Here, she is referenced by the pronoun "she" and we learn now that the "young lady" was under the age of 18.
I wasn't aware ANYTHING out of the ordinary was going on. I knew he drank too much, and worked too little,
Here we have "anything" in all caps, with two qualifications: drinking too much, and working too little which will then be met by the word "but" which is given in comparison to what she has just stated:
but had NO IDEA that an underage girl was completely in love with him,
The subject now wasn't "aware of ANYTHING" but chooses to compare this to: "but" (her own rebuttal to her own assertion) that "an underage girl"
3. "an underaged girl"
and they'd begun a physical relationship behind my back.
note the issue with the "physical relationship" is that it was behind her back. None of this was the complete "mind blower" until:
The complete mind-blower was that the girl was my daughter, who was 8 years old when the "affair" began. It lasted 2 years. I certainly do not blame her for it, and realize she was the primary victim, but it still kills me that I was so CLUELESS.
4. "The girl"
First, she was:
"the" young lady, and next she was "she" being under 18. Then, she was "an" and not "the" (already identified) "girl" and finally "the girl" became "my daughter."
Noting the context of the language, there is no justification for the change. There are more indications that this did not proceed from experiential memory should one decide to give it more attention.
It is not a truthful account. This is why it was likely ignored by long term readers.
There has always been deceptive comments here just as there are on all forums and blogs where commenting is popular.
I think readers recognized this as a false posting.
There were also recent pedantic comments that seemed to catch some reader's attention, that is until they saw that the poster had an agenda, instead of seeking to engage in conversation about the blog. These comments were written by the same person, seeking empathy and attention, yet had an agenda seeking to disprove analysis over a specific case.
It did leave us happily....
with samples for analysis!