Wrong Word : "Oi Paedo!"

Paedophile : is a technical term, and piece of misleading use of language.

More correct would be 'manipulative or violent (child/minor) focused sex attacker': irrespective of who is being attacked, the choice to attack, to manipulate, to predate upon the other, is always, always equally evil.

This choice is made  possible only when the other, the person is transformed into an object, is de-humanised.

‘OI!  PEADO!” - the unsubstantiated internet.gossip allegations being promoted with some vigour ....

This is human evil….. and the beginnings of yet more human evil, ‘oi peado!’, followed by an assault, based on what evidence?

"..... don't like the look of that individual!"? "I heard that...."? "It's on the internet!"

(as opposed to "I found direct links to proven evidence that stands up on the internet, and then I checked them....")

One might comment that those people that enjoy or seek pleasure in violence, manipulation or predation are more evil than those who perhaps behaving thus because they ‘are doing a job’.  Soldiers?  Vigilantes? Prison Officers? Police?

The Stanford Prison Experiment - The Power of the Situation to de-humanise ...

Is the line between either of these definitions really real? Does the person on the receiving end care more which side of the line their attacker is on?

Dehumanisation can also find expression in the way an agenda driven analysis might attribute negative qualities to chosen opponents, perceived ‘enemies’, as a way of undermining how others perceive them..

I don't think this is something we can leave to just one sector of Society.

This 'issue' affects us ALL! In real terms, in the lived experience.

The issue, as I see it, is not just one set of actions, by one particular group of people, but an entire spectrum of behaviours that are almost Institutionalised in full, in the social structures that have emerged from the current Dominant Statist Culture.

They might appear to be many individual states, yet there are only states, no 'nations' in the distinct sense of an aboriginal 'nation'. There is a trans national myth of social organisation that seeks infinite expansion in a finite world.

All of these sets of relationships, personal and Institutional, have been adversely  influenced by the Power, (which David Smail calls 'distal power' - power beyond the average person’s ability to affect) so that a majority of living relationships end up becoming Power Relationships.

Assault and sexual exploitation of children, or the murder of civilians, including children, by military, the willingness to really heavily harm another, or to kill to get one's perceived needs met,  as acted out by individuals or groups or Institutions.... these are extremes of that spectrum .....  of power relationships – as opposed to empathic relationships, a spectrum that ranges from close intimacy to the collective interactions that are expressed in healthy psychologically social, cultural, and organisational behaviours.

The other end of the spectrum of Power Relationships is, for me at this time, describable in a speculative manner, as a kind of starting point description:

So here goes: behaviour that may be the expression of social and experiential distress, and that has an adverse affect on others only because it appears or presents as petty bickering, jealousy, sullen-ness, sulk, mind-games, sexism, thoughtlessness and whole host of other variations on psychological distress languaging.  The person is unhappy. And needs support and help, appropriate attention.

In between we have a range of permitted behaviour that is expressed all too clearly in our history texts, our newspapers, our entertainments, notably, war, invasion, infinite growth empire/economies, militarised police FORCE, and 'non-permitted' yet fairly widespread organised violent crime (which in some cases is linked to wars pursued by Institutions of State), gang wars, organised group violence of any kind, domestic abuse, bullying.... it's all linked. Some is ‘good’ Some is ‘bad’.

IT’S ALL HARMFUL. EXTREMELY HARMFUL!

I think that to address one serious area of this harming dynamic one has to commit to  addressing the holistic image, the whole picture of a Dominant Culture in psychological distress  - to also see how this 'fits in' in a cultural sense.

This means to me that when I can fully humanise the victimiser, to fully humanise the survivor, not to excuse anything, certainly not to mitigate the trauma and what followed, and humanise what that MEANT to the survivor, the person who was victimised,  and to fully understand these events and what may have lead to them, in order to securely find a societal pathway to prevent further victimisation. This is not a single issue.

 Wherever it occurs. Starting with myself.

Let me address the behaviour, and see the human being as human, through broken, damaged and dangerous; part of my family.

One I must stop from any further damaging behaviour.

Can I see the 'enemy' as a human being, and not a monster. It makes it easier, I think, to look at the behaviour, to look at the experiences of people and assess what one finds, honestly.

It doesn't diminish the horror, the revulsion, the sheer visceral anger and shock we all naturally feel, up close to such behaviour - until we are de-humanised : that is what military training tries to do, certainly in terms of the 'enemy'. Veterans appear to 'get over it', mostly.

It doesn't mean not being angry, not feeling the rage, suppression. for me, it means choosing not to cause harm whilst feeling the anger, the rage, the frustration.

Fully conscious. Fully aware, Alive.

For me, this is all about the David Icke, Rense, Jones stable of publishing that hypes the horror, insinuates and alleges, and present no credible attributable sourced EVIDENCE for their claims,and worse, they rarely speak of the world of child development, trauma studies, intergenerational behaviour patterning, the study of the development of empathy and it's biological functioning, which it appears is our natural optimal.

Why?

Surely if there's proven evidence, then the two go together: if one is committed to resolving the issue.

The Institutionalisation of Power Relationships across Society, from violent abusers in 'care homes', 'prisons', 'schools', the office  bully, to warring states, the disruption of the child mother bonding essential to the development of empathy, as a socio-cultural structures is a crucial matter.

Address that and the rest will flow from there.

This is not to be taken to mean mitigating the needs of those being victimised or of Survivors. The two go hand in hand.

The latter being the more immediate need.

There is time then to deal with the former matter in depth, over time.

Kindest regards

Corneilius

Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe

Power or the children's best interests?

If mothering was truly respected in our Society or Culture, and recognised as the central crucible of the psychology of the adult world, which it is, then the concept of a 'working mother' would not exist : mothering (and all parenting) would be seen and valued and understood as a primary, not a secondary activity, at the very centre of our Society..... or in other words, the children's welfare would be our primary Scoietal concern, in both the short term and long term.

The phrase 'the working mother' would be seen and be understood as an oxymoron.

The various Government initiatives to 'get mothers back to work' are not designed for the best interests of the children, the parents or our society : they are designed for the best intersts of 'the economy'. This always means the best interests of profit, power and great wealth.

Irrespective of peoples lack of knowledge, the degrees of social conditioning we all endure and the all too common reflexive, reactive objections to the central point I am raising, which others such as Sue Gerhardt and Oliver James and James Prescott have examined in great detail in their work, the fact remains that the psychology of the adult world is both revealed and perpetuated in how the adults relate to and treat children.

Adults whose natural needs as children have not been fully met will express that loss in many ways, not least in repeating aspects of the behaviour that lead to their own loss when they too become responsible for children, either as parents, or teachers or celebrities... and punishing them or 'correcting' them or nudging them is not the way forward.

Recent events demonstrate quite clearly that The BBC and The Vatican quite obviously do not hold the welfare of children at the centre of their deliberations, as is the case for many of the 'great institutions' of our Society...

It is the way Institutional Power is mediated to protect it's power and self image that most needs to change. David Smail pointed this out in a cogent essay, "there's no such thing as Society". Well worth reading.

I say this because the messages Institutional Power(s) transmit to parents are a huge determining factor in how parents organise their lives, and to date no Institutional Power has supported Natural Parenting to the degree our innate biological psychology demands, as to do so would lead to the demise of the POWER of the Institution. This is clear to any who examine their own lives, let alone the lives of the Powerful, with any degree of honesty and empathy.

It is the Power that is protected, time and time again. And that is a psychological immaturity. To see Power as more important than function is deeply dysfunctional.

Kindest regards

Corneilius

Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe

An open letter to the media, the BBC and all others concerned with the issue of child abuse, and in particular concerning the reportage of the Jimmy Saville case….

An open letter to the media, the BBC and all others concerned with the issue of child abuse, and in particular concerning the reportage of the Jimmy Saville case….

To whom it may concern,

The most frequent word being used to describe those who have been abused, harmed or assaulted by Jimmy Saville is ‘victims’, rather than the term ‘Survivors’ which we Survivors ourselves prefer to use.

There is a qualitative difference between the two words – one implies weakness, the other strength.

The etymology of the word ‘victim’ and its link to the word ‘victor’ is interesting, and worth reflecting upon. The victor tends to justify any abuses they perpetrate, or harm they cause, and thus they minimise the meaning of the lived experience of those amongst the ‘defeated’.

Yes, Saddam was a monster – yet did the Iraqi people deserve what was visited upon them by the International Community in the name of removing this monster?

Madelaine Albright’s infamous comment on the sanctions that preceded the removal of Saddam, was that “the price was worth paying – we think the price was worth paying.”  A price paid not by her, not by the US Government, or any other, not even by Saddam, but by the Iraqi people and their children.

There is also the use of the phrase “victim consciousness” which is often used to denigrate those communities and cultures who have been subject to massive and long term trauma and who come forward and seek acknowledgement of their stories as human beings, (rather than the simple and cold historical facts and statistics), from the inheritors of the Powers that traumatised them.

They are asked to ‘get over it’ – ‘ old history, not our ‘fault’, ‘things are different now’, ‘can we please move on’ etc etc….

These phrases are used to deflect honest reflection upon what has happened, and what the long term and present adverse affects are in meaning, and in the lived experience.

Vulnerability is not the same as weakness. One cannot describe the boys and girls assaulted by Jummy Saville as being weak, and ascribe that value of weakness to them as a quality they expressed that led to their abuse. One cannot in all fairness ascribe the value of weakness to those who suffer from the adverse affects of intergenerational trauma. Vulnerability is closer to the truth.

To Survive trauma and abuse most often means to live past the events themselves, scarred and wounded, and to slowly and painfully try to re-assemble oneself so as to continue to live as best one can.

Often this has to be done without adequate support or understanding from those closest to the Survivor, let alone the wider community and Society. This takes a formidable  unacknowledged strength.

Not all Survivors make it, and it’s not through weakness that this happens. It’s through vulnerability, and through that heart breaking sense of abandonment that comes with denial, that comes with the all too common reflexive unwillingness of Society to accept that a pillar of Society could behave in such manner, a refusal to believe the Survivor because it threatens the projected image and self image of what are held to be central tenets or solid Institutions of Society.

”How could someone who did SO MUCH GOOD do so much evil?”

A Survivor would never ask that question in the way the media has framed the reporting of that question. A Survivor would never ask it in that tone of bewilderment.
 The Survivors of Jimmy Saville's abuses are not concerned with the reputation of the BBC, as much as they are concerned with truth, recovery and restorative justice and the protection of present and future children.

So I am calling on all media, and anyone else concerned with these matters, to cease using the word ‘victim’ to describe those who were abused, and to use instead the word Survivor.To attribute strength to those who come forwards, and to those who are unable to come forwards, just for their willingness to continue living and coping with what they have been through.

I would also add that using the word ‘victimisation’ to describe the abusers actions towards the vulnerable is more reliable and accurate. The victimiser alters the reality of the abused. The victimisers is the culprit.

Finally, I note that in all of the reporting, the stories and histories of Survivors appears to be being screened out. This is a grave omission. It cannot, and must not stand if truth, justice and genuine resolution is the intent of those who are writing and acting on this matter. Kindest regards

Corneilius Crowley

Kindest regards

Corneilius

Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe

The BBC and an Empathic Civilisation, from the cradle...

The roots of a genuinely humane and empathic Society are to be found in how we parent, as individuals, families, communities and Societies. Likewise the roots of a violent society.

PROTECT THE CHILDREN, NOT THE BBC

The psychology of any given family, community or society is both revealed and perpetuated in how that family, community or Society relates to and treats the children. Change that and you can change everything.

There is a spectrum of Societies ranging from egalitarian empathic to totalitarian violent, ans the best predictors of the evolution of either end of the spectrum, and everything in between is in how the natural child-mother bonding process mandated by our biology is either supported or undermined.

The biology and neuroscience of the natural development and utility of empathy as part and parcel of the human species adaptation to and position within a nurturing biosphere, one which incrementally increases environmental fecundity through the behaviour and action of all it's constituents, is quite well understood, yet Governments, Religions and Ideologies and many 'great Institutions' are consistently ignoring this data, because it is now amongst the greatest threats extant to their Power, their status and their image.

If the majority of people we aware of this data, and could both comprehend it and recognise aspects of it within themselves, based on their own visceral lived experiences, a primary source of information about the world, then Hierarchical Power which abuses those within it's 'mandate'  as we know it would soon fail, because inert compliance would not be forthcoming from such people.

The BBC has a role to play in this. Only we, the people, can create the pressure necessary for that role to be fulfilled in such manner that all our children's futures may be prepared for in ways that will guarantee the best possible outcomes for their lives.



Kindest regards

Corneilius

Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe

Charity, Power, truth and Jimmy Saville

I appreciate the genuine desire of so many people to 'help others' through the agency of Charity.

And yet, to offer such temporary and often distal help rather than directly and with energy move to confront the actual causes of poverty, (and all the various other areas of need labelled as 'good causes' - note the use of the word cause in this which avoids the actual cause.... how ironic!), to chose  to avoid a head on collision with the truth, in order to look and feel good, rather than to resolve the issues to the greatest degree possible when we as a community and society are very much capable of doing this, (we can send a robot to Mars, design nano-computers that can be ingested, build massive international events such as The Olympics, etc), to avoid that defining human and essentially humane task, out of fear of changing the status quo, losing a job, or for any other 'reason', feels, in my heart of hearts, like a betrayal.

Charity is, to a much larger degree than most will openly acknowledge,  the guilt sop of the middle classes, and the propaganda of the ruling classes. For the lower income classes, charity always begins at home.

The Jimmy Saville story illustrates this quite well, amongst other things.
 

He was famous, feted by Power and Royalty, a TV star to millions of middle class folk, and when allegations were made during his tenure in that elevated position, they were played down, ignored or rejected because of his fame, because of his utility as a charitable agent, and his public profile as a man of good works. His 'oddness' was always besides the point.

At present, the media discussion is about the perpetrator, his accomplices, 'others', the 'enablers', and the restoration of the reputation of the BBC rather than the stories of the Survivors, and how such trauma has affected their lived experience throughout their lives, including how it has affected their families and relationships, and how those adverse affects play out in our communities.

People appear bewildered that "someone who did so much good, could be so evil."

To tell the story of what it really means to be a Survivor in this Society would be to begin to explore from a much deeper base the development of a truly profound critical analysis of our Society.

There is an unwillingness to look honestly at the many ways by which natural human empathy (not sympathy, a totally different thing) has been sidelined and effectively repressed across all sectors of Governance, Commerce and Religion, locally, nationally and internationally, as evidenced by the consistent disbelief of Survivors stories.

What kind of Society would ignore a child's plea for help? What kind of Society would protect it's image of itself in ways that permit harm to children?

Can one really be alive and fully human in a Society such as ours, working on the basis of 'this is the best of a bad lot' whilst refusing to confront and change what is harmful within it, when we know this is possible?

What kind of family would behave thus?

The blood, sweat, guts and tears of those who are oppressed, harmed or abused are hurriedly airbrushed out of the Politicians (and others) calls for change. They will not spend time reflecting on these uncomfortable realities; to FEEL THE FULL IMPACT of which would undermine that image of the status quo. That is utterly selfish, mean and cruel - even if it is not always entirely intentional.

Someone posed this statement/question : "We will also not confront the difficulty of Saville as a victim.... and what caused him to perpetuate such harm....What has happened to people for them to be so? Where have we as a Society gone wrong?"

This is the central question in the Jimmy Saville case, and is mirrored in countless ways by the actions of State leaders who engage in war, and how their actions are 'justified' by media and Offices of State, is mirrored by The Vatican (Worldwide Clerical Abuse, The Inquisition, )and Anglican Churches (Indian Boarding Schools in Canada and USA) and beyond.
 
This is crucial: for unless we examine the genesis of abuse, we will not prevent it.....

Of course, we must hold the adult who harms others 100% accountable, and yet at the same time we need to look to see how the child became such an adult, and seek to ensure that we fully understand that and then alter all of that within our Society that breeds such psychopathy. Resolution is the only long term path worth taking.

The mistreated infant most often loses touch with his or her true self - suppressing the truth of his or her felt experience - in order to adapt to the mistreating situation, and this leads to a loss of empathy for others.

This then lends itself to the creation a sense of disconnection from others, from those who ought to be nurturing the child, and from all of that which nurtures us in life, and this sense of disconnection has a fear associated with it which compounds the fear and trauma of the original mistreatment and leads to a strengthening desire to control others (or oneself) to get perceived needs met. Perceived needs are often distorted, A natural organism will resist such control, and it is here that violence is 'utilised', to enforce the control. Abusers are violent because they feel the power of enforcement by violence is effective.

When a group of people with this psycho-dynamic operate, when they work together, they will inevitably insert their psychology and behaviour into that structure.

This explains the emergence of Institutions of Power that are cruel and violent, even if in name they are social institutions swith roles in Education, Religion, Governance or Commerce, whose stated intent is 'to improve life' for humanity.

This briefly explains how an entire society - or large swathes of a Society, enough to make a difference - can be rallied under the false flags of people like Hitler, Blair, The Pope, Abu Hamza and Bush.

We need, all of us to engage in this matter and to do so for a multitude of reasons - the many billions of Survivors of abuse - be it the Iraqi people, the Syrian people, the Palestinian people, the children in 'care home' and similar Institutions, the many aboriginal peoples whose lands are being invaded by commerce for profit, and not least for the benefit of all our own children and their children's futures.

Kindest regards

Corneilius

Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe