Fun Stuff > CHATTER
Child Pornography or Art? Is there a line, if so where?
StMonkey:
In some support of how reactions to a problem can effect a child more than the problem can, I've seen this happen multiple times in front of my very own eyes. I was a student trainer in high school, which is basically a student that helps with some of the minor medical issues given to the Athletic trainer by, well, atheletes. Anyway, one of the days I was there it was a couple of rather weak-stomached girls and I, and it was a kids day, meaning children from roughly 8 or 9 on up were there. Well as it turns out, one of the eights year olds somehow managed to impale himself upon one of the machines with his leg. There was a maybe 3 inch wide, very clean cut(as opposed to jagged, like when you fall off your bike) on his leg. It hit a spot on his leg where there is a lot of fatty tissue, and as such, some was, well, poking out. When the kid got there, he was brought in by one of the high school coaches, who had kept calm and collected, and so the kid, taking his cue, entered the room with nary a whimper. As soon as the squemish student trainers saw the cut, they, to put it bluntly, freaked. I'm pretty sure one of them actually screeched. Anyway, immediately, once the little kid saw the girls making a big hullabaloo over his cut, he began to cry. Not just singe tear, I'm talking bawling. I had to round up the rest of the trainers and explain what they just did while the Athletic trainer and coach tried to calm the kid back down. Now this was a dramatic change in the child, a complete 180.
Yeah, the kid was hurt, but because of how the coach dealt with it, he kept it under control and remained calm. But once someone else went OMG THATS THE MOST HORRIBLEST EVARRR!! He went nuts. So I'd say yeah, reaction to a situation can drastically change the way a child views it
Sox:
Being sexually abused is not comparable to cutting your leg open. One is an accidental injury, one is a prolonged, violent, humiliating attack. Due to how different the two situations are, I don't think it's a valid argument to compare the impact of people's reactions after the event. People are going to react differently to a bit of gore to how they'd react to the knowledge of somebody being sexually abused.
The more I think about, the more that's pretty ridiculous. There aren't many things that draw a fair comparison to being sexually abused. I just think it's fair to say that sex with children is morally abhorrent under the vast majority of circumstances, much like torture, the act of wearing green on red, and 80s music production.
schimmy:
Moreover, it occurs to me that the two situations aren't directly comparable for another reason. Or, it's not so much that they're not comparable, but the conclusion that negative reactions to a situation can make it work is somewhat innacurate.
Since the claim appears to be that therapy and the like are what sometimes cause the damage to children, and not the actual act of sexual abuse, then a more direct comparison would be, to take a lead from StMonkey's example, the injured child's wound being totally ignored for fear of him crying. Now, sure, this might have the benefit of in the short term apparently helping because the child isn't crying, it ignores the main problem of the wound that being bleeding, and infection and the like.
So, looking at it this way, it seems that if you were to compare the two, the conclusion I would draw is that while perhaps giving a child therapy and forcing them to talk about sexual abuse they have suffered might in the short term appear to be a bad thing, in the long run it might very well be the best thing that can be done.
Speaking from my own experience, (and I should stress that I have absolutely no experience of sexual abuse, so I don't know if the two situations are emotionally close enough to be compared) every time I get upset about something, I don't want to talk about it, because that means dealing with it, and that means I will inevitably be upset by it. But, you know what? That happens regardless of whether you actively deal with it or not, I get upset by something more, and for longer periods of time, if I don't talk about it to someone than if I do, and I'm willing to bet that's the same for most, if not all people.
Obviously the way someone else reacts to something that has happened to you will affect what you think about it, but a reaction is still necessary, I think. If a child is sexually abused, then for obvious reasons you shouldn't immediately scream in their face "OH MY GOD, THAT'S AWFUL YOU MUST BE SO UPSET, YOUR LIFE IS OVER!" but you should also not ignore it entirely. Therapy, as I understand it, is about the patient talking about what bothers them, not the therapist telling them what should be bothering them.
bob, just bob:
I agree whole heartedly I'd never argue that it's best to say nothing to them about it, just that many times the (mostly justified) horrified reactions of the parents and loved ones around the abused person probably really don't help, they don't need to be told about how horrible it was and how their life is over, they are already thinking that enough on their own.
but so often is that the reaction the person gets, when really they need support and comments like " it's ok you'll get through this" and " we're here for you" and sure the person gets those of course, but only after a few minutes of "OH JESUS" comments, and this is a generalization. there are exceptions of course. I juts thought I'd bring up the fact that a lot of damage can be caused by the reactions and comments of those around the person, especially in a young child who doesn't really know what's going on, and when it finally comes out they just see everyone freak out, having everyone raise such a huge fuss about it could cause an extreme amount of pain to say a 6 year old? maybe not as much as the abuse but a decent amount to be sure.
how old exactly were the kids? 12-13? I think that's the age were these kids really start to become aware of what's going on, and while posing for nude photos is kind of a large step to take to explore this newfound world, I don't think it's totally wrong especially since these kids had their parents consent. think about it if these kids parents were aware of what was going on and were behind the project. the kids have probably been raised in an environment that would allow them to better understand that what they were doing is art. again a generalization but one with at least a little merit I think.
pi:
--- Quote from: schimmy on 29 May 2008, 11:02 ---Since the claim appears to be that therapy and the like are what sometimes cause the damage to children, and not the actual act of sexual abuse, then a more direct comparison would be, to take a lead from StMonkey's example, the injured child's wound being totally ignored for fear of him crying.
--- End quote ---
If we're to ignore Sox's stance that this is an invalid analogy, from StMonkey's example, I would conclude that the medical professional's actions were fine. It is the uninformed public acting on impulse/emotion, treating the target as if they're damaged more than they really are, that causes the [other] damage.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version