h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Sorry for using your personal instance - and as I say I don't think it would be good for you - I just said I wouldn't blame you.

Its a hard thing to research really - and I understand your thinking about barriers, but I can't really suggest an avenue for you.

I have just found something on the 'abuser/abused hypothesis' http://www.mhamic.org/sources/garland&dougher.htm

It includes this quote 'The authors write that given its popularity, it is surprising that there is so little evidence to support it.' I am quite surprised, all my life I felt there was this link, and perhaps I have been completely wrong. I have seen many programs on prisoners who jstify their abusive behaviour with the fact they were abused, are they just using that as an excuse?

I realise I have only found one link on this subject so far, but it is interesting to have a life-long belief possibly completely wrong. I always believed in therapy working on some abusers, because I believed they had been abused and needed this recognised and worked on to recover and become whole themselves.

I know that because of my experience I maybe biased, so I would love to know what others think of the possible abuser/abused hypothesis, does it seem likely, or was I just looking for an excuse for my abuser to make myself feel better?

Mckay, at the moment I am not that bothered about my personal experience apart from wondering whether it made me think about things differently, purely because I wanted to forgive my abuser.

If this is too personal I can do a journal on it instead, but either way I would love to hear some more feedback on the abuser/abused hypothesis.

I have very delicate days, I am not having one now, I really would be intersted in discussing this further, its an interesting subject regardless of whether you have 'personal experience' of it.

>>"I would say we owe those who have been abused prompt treatment, to help make sure that they do not go on and abuse others."

Absolutely.

>>"Do those who have been abused feel they are being insulted by this attitude though, I do not believe that all abused go on to be abusers, but if we recognise this as one cause, surely its something that should be taken very seriously?"

I don't think treatment need be framed in any way as "We want to stop you becoming an abuser", just "We want to help you get back to a normal healthy life.
Some people might react to being in a traumatic situation by turning to alcohol, but I don't think treatment designed to help them deal with things would be helped in any way by saying "We want to make sure you don't turn into a drunk".

"I'm afraid I don't accept the "abused become abusers" arguement, as I know people who were abused, yet haven't gone on to abuse."

I don't think anyone's saying "*All* abused people become abusers".

>>"I know that because of my experience I maybe biased, so I would love to know what others think of the possible abuser/abused hypothesis, does it seem likely, or was I just looking for an excuse for my abuser to make myself feel better?"

I dare say that some people will use a claim of abuse in an attempt for mitigation, especially since it may well be that they could claim an abuser who's no longer around to say otherwise, but it does at least seem plausible that *some* people who have been abused in one way or another might deal with it by considering it partly 'normal'.
I have thought that might be more common in cases of violence/power, than those of actual sexual attraction, but that would be a vague guess at best.
There is the problem that if claims of being abused can't be substantiated, people may well not be likely to trust someone they think might be making a false excuse to minimise punishment.

However horrific the thought may be, there may be some perfectly normal people around who, if they could be somehow pushed past their natural revulsion, might actually get some pleasure out of inflicting abuse, just as there may be otherwise normal people who if forced against their will to kill or torture in time of war actually start to enjoy it. If that is the case, some kind of exposure even as a victim might lower someone's barriers of revulsion, just as it might strengthen those barriers in most people.

Potholer, thanks for an interesting reply.

I have been dredging up more articles on the subject and some say that the hypothesis is more likely to happen in incest situations, rather than all paedophilic situations. I have read of situations where the father groomed sons to continue the abuse, but these are more anecdotal, like a recent film about the Friedmans (which btw I didn't watch).

I should be starting therapy soon, I shall ask for the latest thinking of it, probably get told I am avoiding my own healing by looking at it the wrong way or something!

The behaviour of abusers will be shaped to some extent by their experiences. This might not be actual abuse, but they could have been treated in some way that was psychologically damaging, particularly if they were susceptible. Obviously people react differently, as we know.

I'm sure I heard somewhere that we all have a facility to derive some staisfaction from violence - presumably a useful trait in ancient times when we were hunter-gatherers?

<>



You're effectively saying, as far as I can tell, that since not all people are X, no people at all are X. Which seems odd. I suppose it depends what you mean by the 'argument'. If you saying people are arguing that it should be a reason for lower sentences, then I'd say you're right in opposing them. But I haven't seen anyone saying that. The locking up to prevent danger to society argument that seems to be prevailing doesn't have provision (rightly IMO) for releaseing someone because you feel sorry for them.

Something can be both a reason and an excuse.

Mitigation of jail time in return for therapy in a secure location might be a useful alternative in some cases. Although, as I've said before and with reoffending rates what they are, in more extreme cases I don't think we should risk letting them back out into the world ever.

Oh, before I forget, I think the point that we need some evidence for this abused - abuser link. It makes sense as a hypothesis, but I admit I've never thought to question it myself, nor seen others back it up other than with anecdotes.

I found some stuff last night which talked about it, but again no figures. I'll see what else I can dig up.

It's surprising how little evidence there is to support widely-held points of view when you begin to look for it.

Hi John it certainly is.

<> (Bouncy)

Even anecdotal comments on this end up showing that out of X number of siblings only Y amount ended up becoming abusive, so clearly there is no real evidence for this being considered a 'true-ism'.

I'm even not sure if all people who sexually abuse children could truly be called paedophiles. As in those who constantly seek out children in this manner are possibly different from those who 'behave badly' given a certain time and place situation - it might not be something they look for particularly.

Not that I'm justifying this behaviour in any way - not at all - but just pointing out that it's a very complex problem.

Also, in the case of women sexually abusing children there is no 'quick-and-easy' solution as in *just cut off their goolies!!!*.


az

Yes give them the full chop that be better.

How come I never met any women child molesters when I was a teenager ?

Be careful what you make jokes about SWL - I've met one. She was my mother. Funny, eh?


az

Sorry, extremely bad taste. I've been spending too much time in Misc chat.

S'okay, Misc chat will do to a person . ..


az

Men & Women who abuse children should all, be hanged no questions asked, they are clearly evil minded, dirty, child molesters therefor should be executed as soon as they are brought to justice they should be made pay for those they have hurt, same gose for murderers
they should be executed straight away, half the population in this world are plain evil minded people and there's no exscueses to what they do at all to any child

Half the population are evil, indicating that half the population should be executed?

What the hell? That means there's a 50% chance I should shoot you. This is clearly not logic.

The, grandfather when world war 1 started had to shoot six child molesters as back in those day's they were order too.

They should bring that punishment back today half the population of evil, child molesters where gassed and shot back in those days then anyway.