|
Petronius -> RE: Maybe leaving CM.. A warning (7/14/2007 3:24:49 PM)
|
sappatoti made a few points that had more than a germ of truth to them, yet which I believe he took to invalid conclusions.
quote:
A) As Lockit has mentioned that she had gone to her local law enforcement for assistance, and that they may be in the middle of some form of investigation, whether known to Lockit or not, I believe it is not prudent for Lockit to disclose the specific details of her case on a public forum.
I think that's a good point.
But Lockit started the post as a warning, so to speak. One doesn't have to present an incredible number of details like personal email addresses, dates of specific attacks, etc. to demonstrate some validity to one's claims.
One also cannot justify a failure to present damn near anything on the same lines.
He also wrote
quote:
... each and every stalker goes about his/her sick craft in their own unique way. There is no universal stalker handbook with step-by-step instructions on carrying out a successful stalking. To say that Lockit's case is not realistic is unfair to those who've been victimized by stalkers.
Right, every stalker is unique and every form of stalking is, when examined in enough detail, similarly unique. But all correspond to certain fundamental realities. To use another illustration (even though sappatoti tends not to understand them): Every rape victim had a unique experience and we would be ill-advised to dismiss a claim simply because it was so unique. But it's otherwise when some ostensible victim claims "And then he put his second penis in me." In other words, however unique a claim may be it has to accord with reality based on some evidence. We can't justify, as I believe sappatoti approaches, any story however wild and unsubstantiated simply because every story is unique.
sappatoti and I also have a very different view on what helps and hurts real victims. He maintains that disbelieving Lockit hurts them; I maintain that a disregard for evidence hurts them.
Belief and victimization has a particular history in a related area, at least if the feminists I spoke to were correct and I believe they were.
They had organized a series of campus "speakouts on rape" where women volunteered to share their experiences and to educate people about the reality of rape against all the fantasies of whatever character.
Alas, the movement was destroyed by narcissists who couldn't stand the attention real victims were getting. The narcissists discovered that they could easily invent a more heart-rending tale, a more horrid rape, more horrific consequences, or greater numbers in the gang than any real victim. Thus the narcissist with the lies got the attention as the real victims with the truth got lost. The upshot was that the speakouts collapsed as more and more people, discovering the narcissists' wild lies, disbelieved everybody.
That's sad, but I think it illustrates my point that evidence, not wishful thinking, is what helps real victims and that belief absent evidence hurts them.
Real victims have enough problems being believed; they don't need to face the negative consequences of tall tales from others.
|
|
|
|
