Would you pursue a romantic relationship with someone who has been sexually abused?

[Light]

Because you said:



Once you get serious, I'll talk to you.

Very well, I'm quite serious. NOW address these issues, please, since they are in response to what you charged me with! I'm VERY serious.

"Water, I cannot see why you persist in being adversarial. And I never even once said that "we need each others in order to be happy and safe." Horse-hockey, woman! I said that others CAN effect our happiness and safety, especially negatively."

And:

"And I'm in no way trying to make "her" (or him, or it) feel guilty for not being "dependent" on others. More pure horse-hockey straight from your twisted logic, not mine, I'm a firm believer in individual independency even to the point that I strongly advocate it many, many times. However, I also advocate having interpersonal relationships because that alone is one the more important and enjoyable aspects of life."

And finally:

"You may feel free to keep trying to slant everything I say in an attempt to make ME fit your own twisted version of how YOU think I should feel according to you, but be assured that many people here are smart enough to understand exactly what I'm saying - even if you don't want to - and they can also see how truly warped your attempts are."

 

[sleeper555]

If one were to play the odds, then I would recommend steering clear of the abused (learned through experience). However, true love is not a numbers game and can take many forms, in my opinion.

This being said, every relationship is, in a sense a transaction... It is worthwhile pondering why you fell in love with a damaged person (what did u get out of it?). I have been guilty of this myself and have no delusions as to the answer.

 

[c20H25N3o]

No, this is not what I am saying.

I'm saying that even though you have been abused, this does not mean that you must feel abused, you do not have to take on the identity of being an abused person. You do not have to think that the abuse defines who you are.

Again, try to first think in the terms of a less traumatic example: Someone calls you names, calls you an idiot. Does this make you an idiot?
Or, someone calls your thinking warped. Does this make your thinking warped, are you obligated to think that your thinking is warped just because someone said so?

Answer this then ... if someone has touched you up when you were not in a position to engage your will in the act does that make you the victim of abuse or not?

Are you saying that abuse doesnt exist or are you saying it does exist however it doesn't have to have any consequences?

We've moved from 'how do you deal with a person showing obvious signs of being affected by abuse' to 'why would you even think to take the abuse into account because what you call abuse is not necessarily abuse!'

I am far too confused now. What snippet of the human psyche are you trying to expose? I need a purpose here

peace

c20

 

[water]

c20H25N3o,

Answer this then ... if someone has touched you up when you were not in a position to engage your will in the act does that make you the victim of abuse or not?

It does. The perpetrator has violated my personal space and is persecutable by the law.

Are you saying that abuse doesnt exist or are you saying it does exist however it doesn't have to have any consequences?

The MENTAL consequences of abuse can be chosen, I believe.
If someone stabs you, you cannot choose but to have a fleshwound, but you have some choice over how bad you will feel about being stabbed.

It's interesting how being bitten by a dog seems to be less traumatic than being hit by a person -- even though the actual fleshwound from the dogbite may be worse than what the human has inflicted.

Or, another good example:
Someone calls you an idiot. You feel offended, the emotions seething in you. But as soon as you find out that the person who called you an idiot is an authist or drunk, the gravity of the offence is immediately lessened. If a sane person calls you an idiot, it is bad and you feel offended. If a mentally challenged person calls you an idiot, it is not bad and there is no offence.
How come?

We've moved from 'how do you deal with a person showing obvious signs of being affected by abuse' to 'why would you even think to take the abuse into account because what you call abuse is not necessarily abuse!'

I believe that even though the body has been harmed, the mind does not need to be harmed.

I understand that my view of the matter relativizes the many lawsuits of where people sue one another for causing "emotional pain".
Being a victim is becoming more and more popular. It affords for a convenient identification and assures at least some affection from others.
People can make a career out of being a victim. The battered wife remains in her situation of continual abuse because there is some payoff for her there.

I am far too confused now. What snippet of the human psyche are you trying to expose? I need a purpose here

Good question.
"The snippet of the human psyche" that I am trying to expose is the principle of identification with events -- "I am what has happened to me".
I don't think this is a proper way to seek one's identity.

 

[water]

Very well, I'm quite serious. NOW address these issues, please, since they are in response to what you charged me with! I'm VERY serious.

"Water, I cannot see why you persist in being adversarial. And I never even once said that "we need each others in order to be happy and safe." Horse-hockey, woman! I said that others CAN effect our happiness and safety, especially negatively."

And:

"And I'm in no way trying to make "her" (or him, or it) feel guilty for not being "dependent" on others. More pure horse-hockey straight from your twisted logic, not mine, I'm a firm believer in individual independency even to the point that I strongly advocate it many, many times. However, I also advocate having interpersonal relationships because that alone is one the more important and enjoyable aspects of life."

And finally:

"You may feel free to keep trying to slant everything I say in an attempt to make ME fit your own twisted version of how YOU think I should feel according to you, but be assured that many people here are smart enough to understand exactly what I'm saying - even if you don't want to - and they can also see how truly warped your attempts are."

Your attitude doesn't make your questions worthy of response.

 

[Light]

Your attitude doesn't make your questions worthy of response.

Wow! What a cheap cop-out! I asked you to face up to the unfounded charges you placed against me. Apparently you can't handle it.

 

[water]

Wow! What a cheap cop-out! I asked you to face up to the unfounded charges you placed against me. Apparently you can't handle it.

If you choose to interact with people by the principle "It's either my way or the highway", like you have, then at least have the guts to stand your ground and don't try to make others responsible for your sending them off to the highway.

 

[c20H25N3o]

The MENTAL consequences of abuse can be chosen, I believe.

So how do you tell that to someone suffering the consequences? Say a 5 yr old little girl who has long since withdrawn into herself for fear of 'telling someone' and is now 16 and having extremly confused sexual thoughts? She wants man but is afraid of man, the abuser having established himself as the overall 'authority' over her life all those years ago?

Do you tell her to just 'think differently?'

peace

c20

 

[water]

So how do you tell that to someone suffering the consequences? Say a 5 yr old little girl who has long since withdrawn into herself for fear of 'telling someone' and is now 16 and having extremly confused sexual thoughts? She wants man but is afraid of man, the abuser having established himself as the overall 'authority' over her life all those years ago?

Do you tell her to just 'think differently?'

Actually, yes. Not "just", of course, but recovery therapy is working by the principle: Even though your body has been hurt, your mind does not have to be hurt.
Recovery therapy can teach such a person to unlearn the thoughts they have learned in the past.

 

[Light]

If you choose to interact with people by the principle "It's either my way or the highway", like you have, then at least have the guts to stand your ground and don't try to make others responsible for your sending them off to the highway.

Eh, what? I am standing my ground - it's clearly you that's retreated by not dealing with the questions of your personal integrity.

You make completely false accusations and then try to avoid the consequences when asked to face up to them.

 

[water]

Eh, what? I am standing my ground - it's clearly you that's retreated by not dealing with the questions of your personal integrity.

You make completely false accusations and then try to avoid the consequences when asked to face up to them.

You have a bad attitude.
Can you understand that it is your bad attitude that makes people retreat from you?

 

[cosmictraveler]

You have a bad attitude.
Can you understand that it is your bad attitude that makes people retreat from you?

I just have gas!

 

[Light]

You have a bad attitude.
Can you understand that it is your bad attitude that makes people retreat from you?

Bad in what way? Explain, please.

And pardon, but your slip is showing - the only one who's retreated from me is you.

 

[water]

Bad in what way? Explain, please.

Horse-hockey, woman!

More pure horse-hockey straight from your twisted logic

As soon as you call someone's input "horse-hockey", you show that you're not interested in what they think, but in your disparaging them.

And this:

"You may feel free to keep trying to slant everything I say in an attempt to make ME fit your own twisted version of how YOU think I should feel according to you, but be assured that many people here are smart enough to understand exactly what I'm saying - even if you don't want to - and they can also see how truly warped your attempts are."

Can be said only by someone who assumes superiority.
I will not take such people seriously.

And pardon, but your slip is showing - the only one who's retreated from me is you.

You were the first one to retreat, but then kept coming back. You first told me I'm not someone you'd like to know. Okay. So why are you after me ...


Which part of bug off is it that you don't understand?

 

[Light]

As soon as you call someone's input "horse-hockey", you show that you're not interested in what they think, but in your disparaging them.

And this:



Can be said only by someone who assumes superiority.
I will not take such people seriously.




You were the first one to retreat, but then kept coming back. You first told me I'm not someone you'd like to know. Okay. So why are you after me ...


Which part of bug off is it that you don't understand?

I made those statements, and in that precise fashion because you tried to read things into statements I had made. Your presentation was patently false.

You've been caught with you hand in the cookie jar and are now attempting to redirect things so that you can squirm out of it. I've never retreated once (not even in my nature to do so) and in your previous post you just tried to claim that "people" retreated from me. Again, false. you've been the ONLY one.

If you cannot handle the heat of the TRUTH then simply don't reply to this post because you've already proven quite well how wishy-washy you are. You say things and then pretend you didn't by ignoring it when it's pointed out. Sheesh!

I'm "after you" only in the sense that I want you to acknowledge you misrepresented me on several occasions. Believe me, beyond that, I want absolutely nothing from you!

 

[c20H25N3o]

Recovery therapy can teach such a person to unlearn the thoughts they have learned in the past.

The following statement has nothing to do with recovery though ...

'Even though your body has been hurt, your mind does not have to be hurt.'

Do you not think a more exact statement would be...

'Even though your body and mind has been hurt, your body will heal naturally and your mind can be 'healed' by unlearning what it has learnt.'

... ?

I still do not see how this connects to pursuing a romantic relationship with someone? The Yes / No vote doesnt seem like it could ever produce data that would verify or nullify your perception i.e.

'Even though your body has been hurt, your mind does not have to be hurt.'

Could you explain how or why you feel the data could support or deny the ideas you personally hold? I assume the poll was an exercise for the benefit of objectivity?

thanks

c20

 

[devils_reject]

Maybe, but I will pursuit Scarlett Johansson anyday. Not that that matters.

 

[Hapsburg]

As long as there is mutual attraction, I'll help her to get help from a professional therapist.

 

[water]

c20H25N3o,

The following statement has nothing to do with recovery though ...

'Even though your body has been hurt, your mind does not have to be hurt.'

How not?

Do you not think a more exact statement would be...

'Even though your body and mind has been hurt, your body will heal naturally and your mind can be 'healed' by unlearning what it has learnt.'

... ?

I have my doubts about how much the mind can be hurt. What exactly is there to hurt?

The things that get "hurt" in an assault are our preconceptions about how things SHOULD be.

If people would not hold the belief "Other people should respect us", then there would be nothing there to be hurt when other people would not respect us.

One of the things recovery therapy can be about is to teach people set up healthy interpersonal boundaries and build a healthy self-esteem.
An issue to work with are irrational beliefs like "I must be with someone in order to be someone", "Life should at least be fair to me", "Everyone is out to get me".

People whose minds were hurt were holding a lot of irrational beliefs about how things should be; it is because of these irrational beliefs that their minds could be hurt in the first place.
However, these things can be fixed retroactively.

I still do not see how this connects to pursuing a romantic relationship with someone?

It connects with it in regards to the justifications people give for either pursuing or not pursuing a romantic relationship with an abused person.
I wasn't merely interested in the yes/no data; I was interested in the justifications people give for their answers, the WHY behind the yes/no.

The Yes / No vote doesnt seem like it could ever produce data that would verify or nullify your perception i.e.

'Even though your body has been hurt, your mind does not have to be hurt.'

Could you explain how or why you feel the data could support or deny the ideas you personally hold? I assume the poll was an exercise for the benefit of objectivity?

Polls at forums are only informational about this particular population that has voted; such polls don't aim towards objectivity, we can't assure a universally representative sample.
What we can do is collect opinions on a certain topic. The poll question was just a trigger to collect opinions, to se what justifications people offer for their arguments.
And I thnk this thread has served this purpose.

 

[water]

I made those statements, and in that precise fashion because you tried to read things into statements I had made. Your presentation was patently false.

You've been caught with you hand in the cookie jar and are now attempting to redirect things so that you can squirm out of it. I've never retreated once (not even in my nature to do so) and in your previous post you just tried to claim that "people" retreated from me. Again, false. you've been the ONLY one.

If you cannot handle the heat of the TRUTH then simply don't reply to this post because you've already proven quite well how wishy-washy you are. You say things and then pretend you didn't by ignoring it when it's pointed out. Sheesh!

I'm "after you" only in the sense that I want you to acknowledge you misrepresented me on several occasions. Believe me, beyond that, I want absolutely nothing from you!

You want the acknowledgment of someone whom you do not acknowledge?


My communicating with you at all only proves that my being trained to allow people fuck me in the head, has been very successful. And that I am not over it yet.

"Good girls don't fight. Good girls don't defend themselves. Good girls don't do ugly things like calling people names. Good girls are nice to everyone, no matter who they are or what they are doing to them." -- in short: Good girls let themselves be fucked over by anyone. And a girl must strive to be good!

And it is being trained thus that gets me into situations like the one with you. No matter what I do, it would be wrong, and no matter what, I lose.

I have been raised and trained by people like you, Light. "Good", "understanding", "rational" people.

Fuck you, Light. You are a controlling bourgeois cunt.