Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



vassilissa ([info]vassilissa) wrote in [info]otf_wank,
@ 2009-12-15 18:54:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Satanic ritual abuse wank
I dithered about whether to put this in unfunnybusiness or here, but in the end Satanic Ritual Abuse is not real, and what the person who said it was said was so funny it belonged here.

People who blatantly deny the existence of ritual abuse after being offered solid resources to the contrary demonstrate that they don’t need evidence about its existence. Instead, when they continue to deny its existence in a seemingly obsessive manner, they are more likely trolling for new victims in hopes that responding survivors will – while more emotional – slip-up and provide vulnerable, personal information.

There you go. If you deny the existance of ritual abuse, it's because you're looking for new victims to ritually abuse.


(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]sneer
2009-12-15 06:37 pm UTC (link)
And your proof that nothing like it has ever happened anywhere ever to anyone is... what, exactly?

Yes, we should absolutely believe kids when they say they've been abused. So why do you insist on dismissing out of hand the claims of any child who claims to have been ritually abused? Insisting that ritual abuse has never happened to anyone ever and assuming any child who claims to have been abused in such a way is making it up or has had false memories planted is worse than unhelpful.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]melannen
2009-12-15 06:57 pm UTC (link)
The reason it's important to debunk claims of SRA is that it is, essentially, a blood libel - or at least very close kin to one.

The narratives created in SRA cases always have much more in common with narratives created (worldwide, and throughout history) to justify persecution of an outgroup than they do with any actual child abuse/murder cases - the very rare cases of *factual* ceremonial murder/abuse happen in very different ways, and are if anything hampered in their prosecution by SRA hysteria.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]sandglass
2009-12-15 11:11 pm UTC (link)
You can't prove a negative. No one has ever proven that RSA has happened, and have in fact proven that the "evidence" was manufactured with great bias, therefore it's reasonable to believe it hasn't happened.

Do crazy people sometimes abuse children? Yes. But that's not RSA.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]eilan
2009-12-16 12:40 pm UTC (link)
You can't prove a negative.

So I can't prove that there's no elephant in bed with me now?

Damn.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]inalasahl
2009-12-17 12:13 am UTC (link)
So why do you insist on dismissing out of hand the claims of any child who claims to have been ritually abused?
She isn't doing that, and it's really ridiculuous to claim she is.

One of the reasons that people don't believe in SRA anymore, is that it's never children claiming to have been abused this way. It's either adults who've had RMT, or children who've been interrogated at length until they stop denying it.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


(Read comments) -

 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map