While babysitting the children of a friend one night when I was 14-years-old I was faced
with a very tempting opportunity to take advantage of two really sweet little
girls, 7 and 8 years old. I remember being very tempted, and then passing on
the opportunity for several, at the time, very good reasons. Primarily, it felt
like the wrong thing to do and on several different levels. I was aware that
the world could come crashing down on me if I did not honor this basic
awareness, like it was destined to do for Amnon, as well as Josh Duggar. Josh
Duggar can be described as outside of the statistical norm. There are probably
a lot of opinions as to how far, and as to what or who put him there. It has been
found that the vast majority of 14-year-olds choose not to violate siblings or
others, and half of those who do will not stop. This minority is unique. Many
of us did something one time when we were kids that may have gotten us in deep trouble. We were thankful that we were
not caught, and promised ourselves never to do it again. It remained a secret. Other individuals are not so mindful and they chose not to not stop. Perhaps it's a compulsion
similar to what the average addict describes. Call it what you want, I call it
a disorder. Others need protection from these sorts of individuals. In some
instances these offenders need protection from themselves. It can be argued
that not being more cautious of Amnon, as well as not being more protective of Tamar, is the
primary mover of the ugly collapse of David's family at the end of 2 Samuel and is more than just a little responsible for two of
his boys eventually attempting a coup against him (of sorts). The Lord showed
us how disrespecting our daughters will cause repercussions. IMO, the Duggar
tragedy could have been affected before it occurred simply by supervision and
affirmation that the Duggar's training was actually being learned and
practiced. I''m not going to stir the pot on Mr. Gothard's personal
philosophies, which they used in their homeschooling cirriculum. As the life long single parent of my 16-year-old daughter I have
learned that, done rightly, young girls can benefit by the protection of being
fully informed about the nature of men and boys (women and girls) in all
respects (before they learn it too late the hard way, or from someone else),
and cautioned about it explicitly. The alternative to this is constant
supervision of the boys around young girls. To me, it's basic parenting. To me, Josh was not
well-parented, and those four daughters needed respect and protection. I
believe the best thing that could have happened is for Josh and all involved was to obey the law and
leave Josh be accountable to the respective human institution (social
services), God's ministers for justice, and Josh's actions could have been put
into perspective for everyone involved, particularly his sisters. That was the
Lord's path. If you want his presence and his blessing, then that's where you
go. That is where the whole situation could have been set right again. They decided for themselves when and if they were going to obey every human institution, and Christ was not there. As it
turns out, Christ will help them pick up the pieces now anyway and go on, but the consequences are different now. My heart
breaks for the females in this case who were (are) neither respected nor
protected.
_________________________________________________________________________
The reason I am going to be a little hard on Josh Duggar and his parents here is not to extract revenge on them, but to consider what might be justice and perspective for their victims. I'm a little disheartened by the apology-counseling-and-done philosophy of dealing with molesting minor girls (and boys for that matter). There are very few deterrents anymore, or reasons for a minor not to molest other family members if he or she is so inclined. But family molestation often have life-long emotional and psychological repercussions for the victims.
Maybe, what helped set off my, admittedly, conniptic reaction here upon seeing the news of the Duggar family is a recent 40 day jail sentence handed down to a local pastor, just north of here in Rhinelander, for molesting his 16-year-old adopted daughter. When you read, "Rhinelander Man Gets Jail Time for Molesting Daughter", you might expect to hear of more than a 40 day sentence. Forty days? That doesn't strike me as a punishment, or a deterrent, or much of anything but a hasty formality. Granted, I suppose that depends who you ask. The man was the pastor of a church. His adopted daughter, I am told, had come from other past sexually abusive settings. He adopted her, knowing her already delicate condition, and wound up praying on her himself. This likely he used up her last chance at experiencing a caring, respecting, nurturing father figure. My personal hope now is that some lawyer will step in and help her reverse or nullify the adoption, free her from this creep, and perhaps revive at least one last chance for her to find a supportive family unit to finish out her formative years to adulthood. Incidentally, it was reported that when asked, she reported she would be in favor of a more substantial punishment. Of course, he says he would like to reunite and try again some day, imagine it all just going away, but by then she will be an adult, and unlikely to want to reunite. After all, he had his chance to raise her and he chose instead to use her as a sex object, and unfortunately, while she can forgive him - maybe already has - she has her life to get on with. She will soon be an adult.
A 40 day jail sentence is about as short a sentence as you'll ever get for anything. The so-called pastor helped to cheat a young girl out of ever knowing what a nurturing, honorable father figure might be like, and now he will go basically unpunished. But the judge felt it would inconvenience him and the rest of his family if he had to bear some legal penalty for his crime and spend some time in jail.
His family is another of his numerous victims. They are not a victim in the usual sense. While possible, it seems unlikely that his family needs protection from him any longer, but they do have the huge tasks ahead of either engaging in mammoth denial and memory repression, or, coming to an understanding of both what their father did first, to the young lady, and second, to his congregation. As their father, he brought harm to one of his own. He had every opportunity to know the seriousness of the consequences of the 'harm' and avoid it or seek help if he could not find it in himself or his faith to stop, but he didn't. To complicate things further, he eliminated himself from the prospects of being able to continue raising his daughter, which is made worse by the fact that it leaves her with virtually no opportunity for having a father figure for the rest of her youth, or at least, as I said, until she can become legally unadopted. On the bright side, it is conceivable a foster parent will fill that need, but an adopted family would have provided a support system for her into young adulthood and even far into the future. Let's also leave room for some from her recent church congregation or another church to provide a family for her. We would hope. After being abused by a preacher, a Christian or a church may be the last place she will go to find comfort. But back to the first challenge for the family. Their dad is suffering almost no consequences (other than having to temporarily go job hunting, and maybe relocate). Is what he did really that bad? Unless they understand the gravity of what their father did to that girl, then, sure, they have their dad back, but they have been deprived of a valuable understanding that would make they and their families to come stronger for generations. The second, his family is going to have to recognize his teachings for what they were and where they were coming from. Was he a false teacher? A wolf in sheep's clothing? A deceiver? A hypocrite? Yes and no. It doesn't matter, he taught by example that God's word is of no effect. His teaching did not come from the mind of Christ. It would stand to reason to me that his family is going to have to come to terms with the possibility he did not know of what he was preaching about. They may need to simply let the Spirit of Christ cleanse and reestablish their understanding of Him. As a Pastor, we might imagine him teaching his congregation of Christ's power in us toward self-control, and yet, in private he is capable of demonstrating a total disregard for Christ's presence. Gloriously, in the kingdom of Christ, actions speak louder than words. But the family, after the Pastor's actions in the sight of God, is going to have to reassess their understanding of Christ.
In the larger picture, in light of the damage this man has done to himself, his family, church, and friends, the sentence lends itself to minimize the collective fall-out on potentially everyone affected allowing life to return to normal for everyone, except, the legally defined victim herself. The sentence, after all, was all about him and helping him put his life back together as quickly as possible. To minimize the otherwise disastrous effects of such an assault on a girl's life. It has turned into being more about him, his victimhood, and his victimization of his family and his church instead of the court making a statement on behalf of society about the consequences of his actions on the girl. And realistically, he is smart, clever, able to find work, no doubt able to deceive others into believing that he has changed now, even if not soon enough. He is far from helpless in his own rehabilitation. She, arguably is left with nothing. Even after a well-deserved two or three year sentence such as the kind of response that would send a fitting message for impersonating a father and then leaving a child betrayed and alone in this world, he could walk back into a normal life - normal, except that his predatory days would be more well supervised for a while. But instead, conveniently, his own victim-hood is already easing his way back into a comfortable life with his family, I'm sure the 40 days is just about over, and the whole thing has already begun fading into the repressed compartments of the brains of most of the people involved.. He will soon be able to visit his family, minus his one-time adopted daughter, immerse himself in his work, and thank God that the girl, really, was the only casualty in all of this. Many of us will find that a little hard to get comfortable with, but we are warmed up now for a discussion on what to think about the Duggars.
So what about Josh Duggar, and where should come down ethically on the actions of him and his parents, the police officer, and the church elders, all who disobeyed the law?
Conspiracy of silence due to the inability to talk about it, and dismissiveness to the consequences on the girls.
In England, until 1908, there was no public law against incest. It was not discussed. There were too many questions such as whether it was a private matter that the community should not try and control, and were there natural instincts against incest or was the cultural taboo just a man-made thing not needing to be legislated against. Since there was no public discussion on these issues, there was no resolution. There was, in light of the difficulty of talking about such a delicate issue, what was referred to as the "conspiracy of silence". In other words, it was not talked about. They did not know how to talk about it. Members of parliament spoke of the "delicacy and difficulty of the subject" and called the debate "painful" and "strange," "a subject of very peculiar character". And after all, what was so bad about incest for the average male; that is, until there was a baby that needed raising. There are many rich stories of adult brother and sister relationships, emotionally intimate, sometimes even suggestive and involving fantasy, but all stopped there, short of romance or incest. I guess anything further than that was denied by a conspiracy of silence. It was not until 1907, when the British Parliament had to debate the law prohibiting a man from marrying his deceased wife's sister, that events first demanded that they quickly cover the issue of incest, and this first uncomfortable debate on incest opened the door the following year to debate as to what degree the relationship of incest should be banned. It is said that when incest was spoken of in public it was discussed euphemistically - beating around the bush, and often with intense anxiety. It was also known as a hotly emotional topic. And so goes the rise of public discussion of incest from the depths of non-discussion to nervous public debate, but into the public light no less. The topic was no longer surrounded by a wall of silence. But what about sibling sexual abuse?
It is hard for many Christians to talk about sibling sexual abuse. Maybe just in the church. Clergy pedophilia has been particularly difficult to bring out into the light of day. But not in the secular world. In the secular world, most, if not eventually all of the advertisers for the Duggar's TV show seemed to almost immediately have had an opinion and pulled their ads.
Sibling sexual abuse is a stronger sibling forcing his/her fleshly desire on the weaker. Nowhere in the literature does it ever turn out for the good. Nowhere are there anything but negative outcomes, just a matter of degree. And interestingly, nowhere do we find anything about perpetrator remorse. In fact, whenever free of personal consequences, half of all perpetrators keep doing it. The only thing that can stop them is the victim's parent. If the parent has the sense to be concerned. In the case of the Duggars, the victims complained in 2002. A year later in 2003 they had been violated still more and were back again asking their parents for protection. This is an example of a parent or parents who, even after it was too late, didn't have the sense to be concerned. This is to miss one of then basics of parenting. It is one thing to miss it the first time, but to have your girls have to ask you for a second time, with a total of five victims, that's not worthy parenting.
I am not without experience in potentially life-changing child molestation situations. When I was a 14-year-old I could have very easily gotten a cheap thrill from one or both young girls I was babysitting. The two were the extraordinarily sweet little girls of a friend of the family, probably seven and eight-years-old at the time. It was way before bed time and they wanted to get into their skimpy little abbreviated nightgowns and play house with the big, neat babysitter. We played. I did not ask them to get on more substantial pajamas. We played. I was the big, cool kid and I could easily tell they were enamored with me. The coolest thing they could do at the time, they thought, was to sit on my lap. They trusted me because they trusted their daddy. They had no idea what lusts and deception men are capable of. I did. The cutest one wanted me to climb into bed with her and play. She loved and trusted her daddy and apparently projected some of that affection and cuddliness onto me, who knows. I was a red-hot blooded young man full of fleshly desires and lusts. With or without climbing into bed with her, as she envisioned, I could have easily figured out an untraceable way of getting pleasure from her precocious little body. Instead, I told her "no". I even had her get off of my lap. I knew playing with her that way was out of order. I had been taught the rules, somewhere, that apply to these situations, I don't know where, but I assume it was indirectly by my mother. I knew, praise to God, that if I mistreated either one of those two young girls, there would be punishment in store for me, both from their father, my family, and from the law. I knew my mother would have quickly turned me over to the law. I would have expected it, and I dare say respected, honored it, and lived long enough to appreciate it. She loved me knew I needed to respect right from wrong. She knew right brought a blessing, and wrong brought a curse. She had already told me one time in a fit of exasperation about how she may have to send me to "boys school" if I continued to challenged her authority. Yet, I believe she would 'not' have turned me in simply because she was requiired by the law to do so (to report a crime perpetrated on a minor child), but in the spirit of the law, she would have done it to honor those little girls. They need protection, and if I would betray their trust, then they needed justice. She would have burned with anger for what I had done to those girls. That is what I was thinking. What was Josh Duggar thinking? I obviously was not in the minority percentile or one of those who are prone to offend and re-offend. Josh Duggar apparently was.
So where were Mr. and Mrs. Duggar when needed? They were neglecting Josh, and they were neglecting their daughters. Josh was reported to have "forcibly fondled" several of his sisters and a non-family member, numerous times. A year later, he was still doing it. Josh is a victim of his parents neglect. What makes him a victim? He has lost his public career - something he may never had lost had his parents stepped in and responded rightly to the reports the first time. He was legally under the age of accountability, so one would think that the parents in the house are largely responsible for his behavior and his victims. They had another chance when at age 18, a letter describing some of the accounts was discovered in a book the Duggars had lent to a family friend. Your sins will find you out. The friend called the Child Abuse Hotline, which led to the Crimes Against Children and the Springdale Police Department investigating the case in 2006. Josh was 18 by then, the three year statute of limitations had expired, and nothing happened. Well one thing happened, Josh missed a chance at taking responsibility and accepting the consequences of his actions. That likely would have been the end of it. The Lord could have made it the end. It was a decision that meant the difference between public acceptance, and public humiliation. They had broken the law earlier. A law which His ministers had put in place to help restore the perpetrator and restore the victim. But the church elders did not even counsel accountability to the law. They instead recommended patrol officer and friend (who they entrusted to break the law for them and not notify authorities of known crimes against children), and on top of that, that officer turned out to be a pedophile himself and is now serving a 53 year prison sentence. So the Duggar's church elders are implicated in a series of poor judgements as well. They decided to determine on their own which laws to respect and which not to. The Lord says to obey every human institution. The Lord only allows us to disobey the law of the land only in instances when we are forbidden to proclaim his name publicly. We all can think of laws we consider unjust, but we seldom think about the individuals on the other side of the law whose rights and well-beings it is there to protect. The elders could have placed themselves and Josh in the hands of the Lord. The Lord wants us to have faith in His word and that faith in His ways will always bring about the best possible outcome. To turn Josh into the social services was a challenging prospect indeed, but so is acting in real faith. I had been through the same thing with the elders at my church who wouldn't see fit to obey the law and report the boy-just-turned-man for fondling his six-year-younger sister for the previous six years, because they didn't want their privacy disturbed. Typically, it is important to women and girls that their violation be made known to authorities and the violator be held responsible. Contacting authorities does not mean your privacy will be shredded. Surely, church elders (who know already), if they feel the need, could ask the authorities to be sensitive about the girl victim's privacy (authorities already have very strict rules governing the preservation of minor victim's privacy). The fact is that many women don't report sexual abuse because they feel they will be blamed, or not believed, and many come out years later describing how difficult it has been not having reported an assault. It can be said not reporting the assault of a female of any age is doing her a diservice under the guise of protecting her privacy. It is the perpetrator that these people are trying to protect. it goes back to the 'conspiracy of silence'; they are protecting themselves from a revelation that they don't know what to do, or why.
So instead, the men in these instances want the authority (the elders) because under their care, in the darkness, they feel the matter is safe. They are afraid of what might happen if they bring the problem out into the light; they don't know what to do, while they fail to remember that the Lord is out in the light, and also that he will caste out their fear.
Instead, the family reported a pretense of counseling which later turned up to be no counseling at all but time spent with a family friend learning the building trades. The girls had to come forward again a year later and inform the parents it was happening again. And presumably, finally the parents locked the girls door at night (probably finally put locking doors on the girls room). But their brother was still out there. Did this make them feel safe, living with their betrayer? I'm sure it did, after repeatedly getting up after going to bed to check that the doors were locked. But what about by day?
I see that in the In Touch the news article one of the alleged victims in the official police report in 2006 said that Josh “sought after God and had turned back to God". But the same victim says that Josh, "had told “mother and dad what had happened… (and) asked for forgiveness." That's a line of baloney one of the Duggars put in her mouth. Because, the alleged victim herself had to tell "mother and dad what was happening", and that, more than once. And secondly, "The Duggars told police that Josh “apologized” to the female minors and that they had “forgiven” him". Well fine, and I trust that by now, if this twisted matter has not driven them away from any real faith in the Lord, or any Christian, that they have indeed forgiven both Josh and their parents in a real way. But, I'm going to read between the lines here and interpret this statement within the context of a larger cover-up mentality exhibited in the report by Mr. and Mrs. Duggar as meaning that the Duggars told police that Josh had apologized to the female minors and that they had been told that they 'must' forgive him. And I'm not sorry, that is likely how that forgiveness came about, because I believe those little girls were thinking that, yes, forgiveness is what we do here when we have been wronged, but I think that foremost in their minds was, "o.k. forgiveness is fine here, but, what exactly is this awful thing that has happened to us"?
It had to have dramatically twisted the family dynamic. If the home-schooling material by Mr. Gothard is any suggestion of how this whole matter was approached by the Duggars from the start, then it was handled by spreading the blame around to everyone (including the girls), except Mr. and Mrs. Duggar. And there was likely no mention to the girls of any failure except that which is imputed to the children.
The victims were not offered separation from their assailant, as the Lord gave to Tamar. Any victim of family sexual abuse needs a way to deal with her disgrace free from her assailant. Separation from one's betrayer is required for the trauma to begin to stop. If that does not occur then repression and denial have to quickly become the friend of the victim. Even repression and denial don't always bring. The real salve is justice. Recognition that a wrong has occurred is a good beginning. The abuser is made to take accountability. Consequences happen. The offender thus makes things right. The end. Without justice showing up in some real way for the victims, the repercussions hang in the lurch indefinitely.
In matters of this sort, the Lord has made us accountable to secular authorities. He tells us that they are both established by Him, and that they are for our good. Without them, like the Duggars, each man would follow after his own ways. In the backs of our minds, like the Israelites, we would say, "Where is the God of justice"? When really, He is here. He was, and is, and will always be - in the flesh or not in the flesh, here. Just in case our hope in His return is not enough to sustain us, God has put the Spirit of His Son into our inner beings, our minds, and wants us to go there, find Him and let Him teach us justice, right here, right now.
But before that, He gave us the story of Tamar. By the time we get to the end of 2 Kings, it is possible to trace all of David's troubles back to his silence on the matter of the rape of his daughter Tamar by his oldest son Amnon. Or, maybe I'm biased. But that event coincides with the beginning of the downward spiraling of David's larger family and his legacy.
Amnon's ploy was to get his sister alone, flatter her, and then prey on her body. When commanded to lie with him, she responded with a very godly and wise line of reasoning. She replied that not only was he about to violate the law, but violate and disgrace her personally as well. She suggested not only was he about to make a fool of himself to the whole nation of Israel, but, will tear the family apart and leave her bereft with nowhere to go for relief from her reproach (disgrace). Amnon then overpowered her and forcibly raped her. He hated that she did not just go along with it, and when he was finished told her to get out. He had done his dirty deed and knew that he would go unpunished. I imagine he knew he could lie his way out of it. She would not leave, because in her eyes she was ruined with no where else to go. He had broken it, and she needed him to fix it now. In those days, when two people had sex they were generally required to get married. Tamar and Amnon could not marry, so she felt this act had ruined her. She did not know how to leave after this. Amnon summoned his attendants to drag her away. Absolam, their brother, then found her crying and had her come to his house to live. The King was very angry when he found out about Amnon, and did nothing. Absolam, however, was bitter and hated Amnon for violating their sister and when two years later, King David had still done nothing, Absolam had Amnon killed, and took full responsibility for it. King David, now having a murder to prosecute, a daughter to render justice for, and a son to show his love to, again, did nothing. He did not pursue his murderous son neither pursuant to the law, nor as a loving father, but only made it clear how much he misses him. He was glad for what Absolam had done to Amnon, yet he pursued justice or acquital for no one, Tamar, Amnon, or Absolam as neither a father, prosecutor, or man of God. So Absalom, in his grief and bitterness, did something.
What Absolam had done, and what he was about to do, suggests that he had a heart that longed after justice, if not also a father, and a father whom would at least respect and seek after justice for his daughter, and now a two sons. He challenged his father to either meet with him or to kill him. Absolam implies that his father's inaction hurts him more than being hunted down and hanged. Not able to get his father's attention, Absolam, by contrasting himself to the King, decided to put himself forth as a better King. One who would listen to his subjects and deliver them justice. And for awhile he won Jerusalem's heart. He even offered his services directly to the Lord. But the Lord had already ordained Absalom to be a player in as the tragic player in what would be a story of the consequences one can expect if he does not protect and honor his daughter(s). The Lord will not have us shifting the blame to them. And perhaps, the Lord will not let the offense go unpunished.
Among other things, Amnon had made a mess of that thing in Tamar that God puts in all young women that they know will be special and unique about them to a man whom they chose one day. Josh Duggar took that away from his sisters. Given the chance. The Lord could have made it right again. It is how Josh could have gotten back into good graces with his sisters, and how the Duggars could have eased the way for Josh into the future. How? By going to social services? Granted, it takes faith, but yes, that is what Christ tells us to do in Romans 13. "But", some say, first of all, they are a secular institution; and second, haven't you heard all the horror stories about social services? The short answer is that Christ has said that they are his ministers of justice, obey them. He goes there with us, we are not alone. What more could we wish for. He is there. That is (was) Josh Duggar's pathway back to his sisters, back to making things right with his world. Things would be right today, at least in that respect, if Duggars had been counseled to do it the Lord's way. Christ would have loved to have been a much more active participant in things, I have to believe. It could have been a beautiful testimony. They could have walked with the Lord into the halls of his ministers of justice and been guaranteed a good outcome. Graciously, now He will help them anyway, but instead of the blessing they might have received, he will help them endure what happens apart from Him. Some will question if they really understand Christ and the bible at all.
The story of Tamar sheds light on an array of consequences. When a boy in a big family sexually abuses some of his sisters, it affects the brothers. Some of them, as we saw with Absalom, are likely to be bitter, grievous, or even jealous after learning about what Josh had done. The lack of justice for their sisters, and brother, leave open wounds. The girls are relieved of their shame and feelings of injustice by the message sent of from society at large, but it is a two edged sword because the younger brothers and sisters can no longer hope to have a prospect of the charmed life in the limelight they once had. Without advertisers their show will be a hard sell. When they step out in public they will be under greater public scrutiny than before.
. but never made it right. could discount their attitude to the other children for only so long.an rationalize away their apathetic lack of protection for the girls, in which they could get rid of the disgrace of the abomination of what he had done. There was a betrayal of their other brothers who may now harbor feelings about an unresolved crime against their brother much like Absalom and others did for Amnon's unresolved rape of his sister. What is the difference to a little girl who has been penetrated by a wanton finger? ad made up for their own hidingBoth his career and his family life have been severely disrupted by crimes committed before the age of complete accountability. How accountable was he? He did these things under his parents roof when he was just a kid? Isn't taking accountability for your kid when he is 14-years-old and living under your roof a large part of parenting? It's a most basic part of parenting.
In a very troubling way to me, it can be said here that Josh Duggar is wholly accountable, but partly victim. If nothing else, he is a victim of his parents not turning him over to the Lord. This is where I went when with the elders of a former church of mine just after the coming-out of a young man, just before his eighteenth birthday, admitting he had been molesting his six-year-younger sister for six years. Where do we go when considering how to handle such a situation? I went to "what does the law say here", and they went the other way. We start out seeking the Lord's direction from His existing word. The Lord says we need to honor every human institution. They are God's ministers for justice. That is the beginning of his roadmap to making things right. That is where the Lord is -- not in the institutions, but rather in the instruction. He is there with us when we subject ourselves to them.
Do you know what is involved in "fondling a young girl while she is sleeping" - that is, fondling her "breasts and genital areas", as Mr. Duggar (Jim Bob) puts it? I think I know. Just before his eighteenth birthday, a young man near to our church had come forward in a church he and his family had recently moved from and confessed to fondling his little sister, six years younger than he, for the past six years. That means he was 12-years-old when and she was six when he started. He knew it was wrong too, and he knew his parents had left his little sister unprotected, uninformed. His little sister knew at the least that it was something strange which her brother informed her she could not tell her parents or anyone else about. She never did. She claimed later that she did not enjoy it. She felt guilt, responsibility, and complicity. So, how did that go? What was that like for the two of them for six years? Was it a young man who just occassionally came to his little sister when he was feeling rebellious, or maybe "lustful", and just fondled her in the barn (where she was not likely to have been as a six-year-old girl), or a room when mom and dad were out (this was a family of about 8 kids at the time)? Did he come to her at night, secretly, while everyone slept? He came to her dozens, maybe hundreds of times, somewhere, over a six year period, not so much unlike Josh Duggar is likely to have tried to do, and even managed to begin to do. Now first, there is something wrong with the way Mr. Duggar describes what happened. In real fact, no little girl sleeps while a boy is fondling her breasts and genitals. Mr. Daggar frames it in a way that implies the girls generally slept through it - Josh fondling them while they were sleeping.What happens is really very much more twisted; because, needless to say, the little girl wakes up as it begins.
It is likely that she immediately complains to her molester and asks him to stop, perhaps that she would like to sleep, and that he should go back to bed. It is not pleasant for the little girl, but the young man does not stop, because he is clever, and he does not have to. How does work? First, they know him as a very adoring and adorable older brother. He knows he can talk them into anything he wants to. Take your pick here: the young man tells the little girl that he actually loves her as a brother, this is him showing it, and, that she should actually enjoy it. Maybe he tells her that it should be fun. It is fun for him and it should be fun for her. At any rate, if he says it is fun, then to her it must be fun, and if he says it should be fun, now he can tell her that since i is fun, then she has had some fun doing something very naughty, and she is in a lot of trouble if anyone finds out. Maybe he tells her that he thought she wanted to do it, or that it is her fault for makinghim feel like doing it in the first place. There is no end to the twisted manipulation older children or adults can exact on children, and she make them feel responsible. She is now responsible for doing something that needs to be kept secret. she is a part of this evil scheme, she even helped to bring it on, it is her fault, her older brother cannot be wrong, he would never lie to her, and her parents will be ashamed of her now if she tells them about it. If that bit of manipulation doesn't work on his prey, then the offender can threaten retaliation or even harm, in a brotherly sort of way, if she tells anybody. A little girl is not fondled when she is sleeping; a little girl is fondled when she is in bed, awake, afraid, and confused - and her world is being torn apart.
Where are Mr. and Mrs. Duggar while this is happening? In Touch, through the Freedom of Information Act, has assembled paperwork from the Springdale Police Department showing a timeline documenting correspondence between law enforcement and the Duggars and their son, and others. It came to light finally in 2006 when Josh was eighteen. The way the whole thing played out is . . . disappointing.
I have only seen snippets of the Duggars show, but I believe each child has his or her own bedroom. In 2002 mom and dad Duggar were made aware by daughter or daughters that multiple night-time fondling incidents had been being perpetrated by their brother Josh. A year later they seem to not have been able to teach their son, nor protect their daughters, because they were told by, ultimately, four daughters that it was happening again. It eventually gets much more bizarre when they take Josh to a family friend who is a police officer. Two things went wrong: the police officer broke the law by not reporting Josh; and, the police officer was a pediphile himself who chose to try and frighten Josh into leaving little girls alone while victimizing them himself. At the time he was probably not all that persuasive. but, now that he was arrested for repeat offending and sentenced to 53 years in prison, I imagine he is a very effective role model for Josh to use to avoid future offending. The officer was not incarcerated for molesting children himself, but rather for paying others to take pictures of themselves raping and molesting children.
I wasn't before the Duggars had 15 children that they learned there are sexophiles in this world that can injure our sons and daughters both socially and emotionally, and our children need to be either protected or cautioned. These are not the homosexuals we like to condemn and blame, as many pro-family groups would warn, these are the heterosexuals of this world. These are our friends and family members. When it happens, the potential consequences are immense. Men's careers are interrupted (Josh), reality shows are cancelled, but these things are all a process of taking responsibility for neglect and criminal behavior. Little Girls lives are unexpectedly and perversely altered, hope and trust are taken away.
Our culture (most cultures) react with silence and denial to episodes to revelations of sibling, or paternal sexual abuse. Our cities are full of run-aways, prostitutes, and strip club dancers whose employees trace their choice of lifestyle back to family sexual abuse; yet, we don't know how to talk about it, and slow the cycle down. We tend to blame it on homosexuals, or simply the victims themselves. in the end, we are all individually responsible for our choice of lifestyle, and unfortunately many of these victims would chose anything over trusting a so-called father or brother or uncle, and again being bound with anyone of the sort. Those of us who are not directly affected count our blessings and go quiet. Silence is conflated with peace and harmony. A nice "I'm sorry", a little counseling, and the perpetrator won't dare do it again? It's too embarrassing, they won't dare get caught doing it again, do you think? No, unfortunately it's not too embarrassing anymore, nor is the threat of a multi-decade prison sentence enough of a deterrent. Similar to an addiction, it seems (family directed sexual aggression - in some cases pedophilia, incest) becomes a compulsion, an obsession, too strong of an urge to just give up or redirect. We need to talk about this, because the victims need to know they live in a society with others who are trustworthy, do respect others, and do care about such things. When many victims of family sexual abuse report to parents they are met with denial, ignorance, turned heads, deaf ears, and they want us to. They don't want to be invisible. They don't want us to spare them their privacy or their dignity -- it's gone, and to them it is something they can't get back. It's gone for good. Innocence and trust are now a thing of the past -- your brother is your betrayer, your father is the failed defender, if not an accomplice or the thief himself. The most intimate parts of your life -- family trust, family relationships, your private body parts, have been changed, forever. Life gets a complete reassessment and there is no longer anyone whom you can count on apart from yourself, or drugs, or suicide. Keeping it quiet publicly does not hurt in itself, but does nothing to help the victim's devastated concept of self, society, relationships, and future. The quieter it is kept, the more likely it will more adversely affect the victims, and the less likely the victim will perceive that justice has been delivered. The more aggressively this society can warn against, condemn, and punish inter-family sexual offenders, the more likely our vulnerable young females can protect themselves from those who would turn their lives upside down.
Someone needed to take what they knew about young Josh Duggar seriously, because a year later the girls returned to their parents and told them they were still being violated. The story was not nearly over, but the rest is better explained by the media reports. Here are two media reports from Fox News and In Touch.
It
While each victims responses will not be the same . . .
Childhood sexual abuse by an older child is either through seduction or coercion. The older child can see how vulnerable a young girl is to gentle persuasion.
feelings of anger, disgust, or guilt with touch
Intimate relationships for both girls will likely be difficult to establish and maintain. Avoidance and fear involved now.
When the sexual abuse is
done by an esteemed trusted adult it may be hard for the children to view the perpetrator
in a negative light, thus leaving them incapable of seeing what happened as not their
fault.
lt. Survivors often blame themselves and internalize negative messages about
themselves. Survivors tend to display more self-destructive behaviors and experience
more suicidal ideation than those who have not been abused (Browne & Finkelhor,
1986).
which breaks trust and may result in the child believing that people they love will
hurt them (Strean,
Our strip joints and whorehouses are comprised almost entirely of their victims. In other words, many times being sexually violated by a father or an older brother does severe, permanent emotional damage to their victims. These girls need to see justice served at the time of the offense, and they need the perpetrator removed from their home. They need someone (i.e., judge, court, media, society) to make a statement that they were preyed upon, they are o.k., and the perpetrator needs to be punished, because he is not o.k.
the first thing David might have done was put Amnon out of the house. I told the elders of my church that if they would not turn the newly turned 18-year-old boy in to authorities for molesting his sister for six years, as the law required them to, then they at least need to put him out of the house. Rent him a room somewhere. Let his sister be free from her disgrace, away from of his constant presence. Away from the continuous reminders of his treacherous, lecherous words, her lost youth, and the death of a brotherly relationship. I told them several of them are mandated reporters
The greater family awareness, caution, and knowledge
Without guys like Josh, and girls like his sisters, who have been betrayed and run away, strip clubs would n have a hard time filling positions.
Young men and boys who fail to learn to respect girls sexually, young and old, need to be labeled and separated out as
No comments:
Post a Comment