Jump to content
IGNORED

Doug Phillips is a Tool & Vision Forum is Dead - Part 7


happy atheist

Recommended Posts

One of your purposes in engaging in this conversation is to try to convince me of the rightness of your beliefs.

Do you know, that's something we generally don't do on here? Everyone is entitled to believe what they believe. What they're not entitled to do is set it as a universal law that everyone has to believe.

I have no problem with you believing in the Bible: you can even believe that it's the inerrant word of God (as transmitted by the committee of elderly gentlemen who re-wrote it for James I in 1611 English) if you like. What you can't do is say that your belief trumps mine, or attempt to force me to act according to your belief.

Which patriarchy and domininionism does try to do, of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

It really isn't hard to believe at all that parents would turn a blind eye to abuse. I've seen it happen and all you have to do is read stories of how parents reacted to abuse by Gothard to see that that happened. My parents are friends with people who were close with Gothard during one of the numerous periods that he has been accused of molesting and sexually harassing young women and teens. They have a hard time believing it because the man they remember was this humble, kind man who would never do anything like that, yet apparently he did. So just because westchamps doesn't remember Doug as a man who would do something like this doesn't mean that he wasn't that man during the time westchamps knew him, it just means that he didn't see that side of Doug.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This blows my mind. What is wrong with people. The fact that they knew "years back" makes me question even more what was in her legal filing, though. Would parents be shamed into silence about a secret "affair" their adult daughter was having with a public figure? Yes, maybe. Would they be shamed into silence about habitual and continuing outright sexual abuse that was being perpetrated on their daughter? Hard to believe anyone could be so scared and/or callous as to let something like that continue to happen, REGARDLESS OF THE CONSEQUENCES.

westchamps, it seems you are struggling to understand the mindset of abuse victims. I highly recommend that you watch the movie "Doubt" and pay particular attention to what Viola Davis says to Meryl Streep. It is a powerful movie and well worth watching the whole thing but that scene may help to answer your last question above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please excuse me from the argument for an hour or so. The sun has suddenly started shining in my bit of England, and since this may not happen again for some time, I'm going out to do some gardening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've not piped in here but it is not "obvious" because there are quite a few people who suggest that stoning a recalcitrant child is something that should not just be allowed, but mandated. We have no way of knowing where on the spectrum you fall, thus it is a legitimate question.

http://rethinkingvisionforum.org/2011/0 ... sm-stonin/

So, one guy equals "quite a few people"?

What was I just saying about a broad brush.....

And you're crazy if you think that Christian Reconstructionism is a widely held belief among Fundamentalist Christians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think you understand just what it is like to be a woman in such a patriarchal culture, let alone be a woman who is being sexually abused by someone who has such a position of power over her. Or even someone who is being abused in any other culture-there are millions of people who are being abused right now, and have been for years, but they haven't told anyone.

Doug Phillips is a tool. He is also a very powerful tool, who has a lot of influence over the members of his cult. Everyone looks up to him and worships him, pretty much everyone who Lourdes knew. It takes courage to tell people, knowing that most people would not believe her and blame her for it. This kind of courage takes time, especially when you are beaten down from being regularly abused.

The purity culture doesn't help. It says that all men like women who are completely pure and have never had any form of sexual contact. If you aren't pure, no man will want you, you are filthy, used and will never marry (and in fundie culture, that is a very big thing, the thing that every woman is trained for from birth). Also, there is so much responsibility placed on women for men's lust. Whenever a woman gets sexually assaulted, it is always "She shouldn't have been wearing that skirt", "She should never have gone out alone", "She was drinking too much". What Doug did was degrading and probably made Lourdes feel dirty and used. She might even have been blaming herself for some of it, Doug did tell her that if it was wrong, it was all her fault. She might worry that if she told anyone, they would see her as dirty and impure, and then everyone will know and no man would ever want to go near her. They might also blame her for moving out from under her father's umbrella of authority, that if she hadn't moved out of her parents home and lived with Doug to work as their nanny, he wouldn't have had the chance to get her alone and rape her. Did she even understand what was happening to her, with the way that her culture doesn't seem to teach sex ed? I imagine that she didn't really have words to describe what was going on, or understand what it was, other than that it was something dirty.

She was also groomed to be his victim for years before he started molesting her. Doug is a narcissist, he is charming and manipulative, and knows just how to keep his victims around. As well as raping her, he was nice to her, and told her that he loved her and wanted to marry her when his wife died. She trusted him, and had known him for years as a father figure. Its confusing, to have someone say he loves you, and then come into your bedroom and molest you. Abusers are good at that, the perfect mixture of love and fear. He could ruin her life, and she knew that. Its also scary standing up to someone who is abusive, he is bigger and stronger than she is, and he has done plenty of horrific stuff to her already. There are many victims of abuse who are afraid to leave or to tell anyone because they are afraid of what their abuser would do to them if they did.

It takes a lot of courage to come forward with all of that. Especially when it is going on and on. By the time the first incident of abuse happens, the abuser usually has his victim sucked in enough that they wont have the courage to tell anyone. It takes years to gain the strength necessary to overcome all of this fear and finally do something to get yourself out of an abusive situation.

There are many people who stay around in abusive situations longer than five years. I know someone who was in one for 20 years. People don't stick around and be abused because they want to be abused, but from the psychological factors from having been manipulated and beaten down for so long, and the fear of their abuser that keeps them in.

Im glad Lourdes got out of this. I don't know what finally made it possible for her to get the confidence to tell someone (I suspect it had something to do with Nolan, I have no idea how long they've been together, I only knew they were involved with eachother romantically when I heard they had gotten married, but he is a seriously awesome guy and has proved to her that just because she has been abused, doesn't mean she is never going to be loved, that she is more than just the sex acts that were performed on her).

I have no problem with her getting money from this. In fact, good for her. She deserves something good to happen to her. Also the therapy she will need to deal with the issues she has from Doug isn't cheap, and seeing as it is Doug's fault, he should be made to pay for this.

A very good friend of mine with similar upbringing and beliefs to mine married a young woman who had a child out of wedlock and then later became a Christian. I guess he never got the memo?

The problem with what so many of you think about Fundamentalist Christians and "patriarchy" is that you paint with such a ridiculously broad brush. You take the absolute worst, most extreme things you've ever heard (since so many of you don't even know any people like me personally) about "patriarchy" and just make an absolute blanket assumption that not only was what you heard true in that situation, but must in fact be true across the entire spectrum. Which is utter, complete balderdash.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

westchamps didn't say he would believe his daughter if she told him she was being abused/harassed by their trusted pastor/elder. He said he would investigate.

He'd be willing to investigate, y'all.

Oh thank you kind father for deigning to look into the matter. No, I don't need you to believe me and trust what I am telling you at all. Sure, do your investigating and then decide if I have told you the truth. It's totally okay that it makes me feel like an accused criminal and not your beloved daughter.

Gross.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently WestChamp and his ilk believe this whole thing is some romantic event --sort of every young girls dream. I mean what girl wouldn't want some guy old enough to be her dad jerking off on her on a semi regular basis, even if she asked him not to! Sweet sweet days of romance and joy. ... not.

I

Is Sexual Harassment about Sex or Power?

According to a 1992 study conducted by the International Labor Organization (ILO), â€Sexual harassment is inextricably linked with power and takes place in societies which often treat women as sex objects and second-class citizens.â€

Catharine MacKinnon, one of the foremost writers on the topic, describes sexual harassment as an “explosive combining of unacceptable sexual behavior and the abuse of power.†A particular incident of harassment may or may not include any explicitly sexual behavior, but it always involves some form of abuse of power.

For example, when a harasser sabotages a woman’s work, he is not engaging in any kind of romantic sexual action. He is engaging in aggression. This situation is no different from that of the street harasser who comments on a woman’s body as she walks by, the coworker who won’t stop touching her or the landlord who won’t repair the sink because she hasn’t been “nice enough†to him. While not one of these actions is “sexual†in an affectionate or friendly sense, all are forms of sexual harassment.

It is very important to closely examine the “sexual†aspect of sexual harassment, because sexuality is often used as a justification for this social practice. Confusion about the difference between sexual invitation and sexual harassment is common.

Many men and women around the world believe that sexual harassment is a practice based on simple sexual attraction. It is often seen as an expression of male interest and a form of flattering sexual attention for women – a sometimes vulgar but essentially harmless romantic game, well within the range of normal, acceptable behavior between men and women.

However, the difference between invitation and harassment is the use of power. Harassment is not a form of courtship and it is not meant to appeal to women. It is designed to coerce women, not to attract them. When the recipient of sexual harassment has no choice in the encounter, or has reason to fear the repercussions if she declines, the interaction has moved out of the realm of invitation and courtship into the arena of intimidation and aggression.

Confusion about the dynamics of sexuality and power in sexual harassment prevents women from reacting to harassers with strong, effective countermeasures.

http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/svaw/haras ... whatis.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am going off personal experience Westchamps. I would say most of the people I know fall into the fundamentalists Christian category.

I'm assuming Westchamps didn't actually read the link that Curious provided and that I quoted because if he had of he would have not asked that question because the answer is in the link.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I recall correctly, you attended BCA or were somehow or other connected to Doug and VF? Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought I remembered reading that way back in this thread somewhere. If that is true, can you tell me how many times you were taught, from the pulpit, by Doug or another church elder, that it is your duty as a Christian woman to submit to unwanted sexual advances/harassment from any man? How many times were you told that by other wives in the church? I'm guessing the answer is zero on both counts.

I did visit but never attended regularly; I went to quite a number of VF functions/events, and did spend some time attending another well-known church associated with that group. Of course nobody would say that :) but there are a lot of factors. Sex is rarely if ever addressed, and many people grow up not knowing about sexual function with the exception of what naturally becomes apparent. Submission in general is taught; it's very sad, many of the books on "Biblical womanhood" essentially teach that a woman only exists as an auxiliary to a man's conquests and needs, reducing them to an almost sub-human role. When harassed/assaulted the woman feels dirty, used, and ashamed, and often made to believe it was her fault. This is the combination of many, many factors which conspire to make it very difficult to go to anyone for help.

And 21 is not a kid.

Prov 22:6 "Train up a child in the way [you think they] should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it." If you are raised in a particular context, to submit, take direction and not to develop your own opinions or thoughts, it takes a lot of work in order to overcome that. You aren't magically imbued with confidence, volition, autonomy and emotional security when you turn 21, especially if you've endured your entire childhood having that sapped, guilted or beaten out of you.

Lastly, maybe you didn't see where I posted it before, but I am not a Calvinist. Never have been.

I did see that actually, and thus this was meant to be a light-hearted joke! I'm all too familiar with the arguments between the two camps. I've known plenty of people who say that you can't be a Christian, be honest with yourself/intelligent, and be Arminian; sort of a "you pick two" situation. I'm not that way, thankfully ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One cannot enlist in the military at age 15, which is when the abuse started. A person can sign his/her own enlistment papers at 18 or have parental signatures to enlist at 17. In many states, a young person cannot even drive alone at 15. You are expecting a lot out of a young girl who likely could not even drive herself to the grocery store.

We get it! You think she deserved it. You think she should have stopped it. You think she is as responsible as Doug. You, in no way, want Dough to have to take all the blame for raping this girl. There. Isn't that what you've been trying to say amongst all your bickering over Bible verses?!

Information says it started when she was 21.

I never said she deserved to be harassed, if that is what happened. I also said she is not as responsible as Doug, if it was consensual. If it was consensual, she certainly deserves some responsibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, one guy equals "quite a few people"?

What was I just saying about a broad brush.....

And you're crazy if you think that Christian Reconstructionism is a widely held belief among Fundamentalist Christians.

Actually, given that the article is referring to a Vision Forum Program promoting this, and you said you were involved with Vision Forum, at least at one time, it isn't that wide a brush. Thus the question was in fact valid.

Phillips and his dad are involved in Christian Reconstruction ism as are a lot of the Dominionists he runs with and we discuss on this board. There are theonomy / dominionists boards managed by some of Doug's Old Acolytes. If you are not one of them, then some of them would toss you on the apostate pile with the Methodists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Westchamp, I have a story for you from one of my favorite authors, who happened to pass away today - Gabriel Garcia Marquez.

http://www.utdallas.edu/~aargyros/hansomest.htm

I hope you read this story, and I hope you reflect on your lack of empathy for the young woman. It's easy to glance at the bare facts and make a judgement, but there are many, many shades of gray that even the survivor had to work through for years before she found the courage to stand up for herself.

You made it clear you wouldn't stand for your daughters to be put into such a bad position, and you would believe them if they accused someone of molesting them. What makes you disbelieve Lourdes Torres?

Just off the top of my head, the fact that her legal filing compared to some of the drips and drabs of information that have been posted in various places by "insiders"....do not exactly mesh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ahh, but she would have never done any of that because of her upbringing, would have she? When I was old enough to join the military and kill people I was so sheltered I did not even know what sex was. If my religious leader had done something like what Doug is accused of doing to her I would have been so ashamed, confused, and humiliated that I would have kept it to myself. And then when he did it again I would have just blamed myself for it all and kept quite more. Part of it is my personality, a lot of it is being raised in an environment that does not empower women.

I'm quoting myself. I would also like to add that I as a teen I didn't even know what rape was. I read a book where a woman was raped and was totally confused. I dug out the encyclopedia to try and understand because I was too ashamed to ask anyone to explain it to me and even then, since my understanding of sex was so limited I didn't understand how a woman could be raped for hours. I was 21 and I didn't know what masturbation was or that a guy could jerk off in a woman's face. If I had a trusted leader who I had been brought up to admire as a man of God do something like this to me, even at 21 I would have been confused and ashamed and kept quite. I think that if I had been in this situation and my parents found out they would have done something, but I know plenty of women whose parents would have done nothing, blamed the woman for the actions and told her to keep quite, or in general wanted to keep the whole thing hushed up to avoid the shame and drama that comes with accusing a highly held religious leader of doing something like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I know that you interpreted my saying fundamentalist Christianity was and is anti-intellectual as my saying Christian homeschoolers are anti-intellectual. I never said that. I think that many fundamentalist homeschoolers are woefully uneducated in science and certain aspects of critical thinking but I don't think they are, as you stated "bumpkins". (There are of course exceptions to every rule)

You might have saved us a lot of back and forth if you had said the above, about 20 pages ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please enlighten us on how the Scriptures about child discipline really are incredibly more complicated and nuanced than they seem to be.

She just did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She just did.

I know we are due for a new thread soon, so I was going to wait till the new one to really address this, but he really only has to read that link to find his answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just off the top of my head, the fact that her legal filing compared to some of the drips and drabs of information that have been posted in various places by "insiders"....do not exactly mesh.

So you're less inclined to believe Lourdes because the complaint that her attorney submitted on her behalf doesn't mesh with GOSSIP from alleged insider GOSSIP SITES. Is that right?

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but in this case, I put more value on the substance of legal documents, particularly the vicitim's account, as opposed to Julie Ann, Libby Ann, Jen, Ted and Betty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.