[Kobi]

Originally Posted by The_Lady_Snow

Thanks for your post, and no it doesn't help me understand but thanks for trying.

There's really nothing that can get me to understand after reading the grand jury report, this man was gross (Sandusky) from being caught the first time with a young boy on a wrestling mat to he himself admitting showering with a child.

Who showers with a child?

Who ignores that some dude, some old dude is showering with kids.

Let me tell ya Kobi, there is nothing *normal* or *right* about a grown ass man showering with a young child.

That's just not what we do as adults with other peoples kids it's not right, it's creepy and it should not be done.


Paterno was told, he should of kept *SCREAMING* at the top of his lungs that something was not right with his right hand man.

He could of been a big hero, and though we don't really know how that went down I do know one thing.

Men love to cover shit up, look at the Powell case..


Men love their money, their fame, their football, their reputations more than they value, or love women and children.

So it's not really hard to imagine that Paterno knew, talked to his buddy and told him to get his shit under control and then *hoped* it would go away.

10 alleged victims and you being in the field you were know that serial pedophiles aren't gonna just stop Sandusky had access to hundreds of children Lord knows how many young men he fucked up.


Wanna know why no one cares to much about those boys, they are boys who come from low economic backgrounds, single mom homes they were prime targets for someone as sick as him.

Anyways until *WE* that means all of us see our women and children with value, (cause cars, dogs, suits, Football, etc etc have more value than them) nothing will change and because of that WE should ALL be outraged, angry, upset, passionate and speak out against it and try to change it.


That's all I really have to say about this particular subject because now I feel I am going in circles trying to *give* the right answer to a very peculiar question.

Snow, we agree on more than you think.

We agree that Sandusky is a "piece of work". "Piece of work" is my way of saying he is probably a freakin slimeball who makes my stomach turn. I look forward to a trial where efforts will be made to prove the sick and despictable acts of which he is accused. And, I hope that trial will result in a punishment worthy of the crimes of which he is accused.

However, he is still allowed due process under the law. It doesnt matter, in the scheme of things, whether I like that part or not. It is how our legal system of accountability works.

I think we agree, grand jury testimony is very compelling. How can it not be? It is someone telling their side of the story without being challenged. It is an avenue to see if there is enough credible evidence from a credible witness to bring charges. It is not ultimate truth or a trial. It is an unchallenged account of one persons side of the story.

I dont know about you but if I was accused of some crime I would prefer to be innocent until proven guilty rather than being seen as guilty until I can prove I am not. It is a philosophical difference with far reaching implications.

We agree, pedophiles are a huge, untreatable problem for our society. They are perpetual offenders. They do prey on those they see as vulnerable.

We agree, we need to find a way to deal with them being in the midst of other people and children in particular. 15 years ago, in my mind, pedophiles were a good reason to rethink using the death penalty. Today not so much. Today, maybe, pedophiles make me think funding Gringrich's quest to colonize the moon is a good idea. We could export them

We agree, that a patriarchal society puts women and children in a not so nice place. But, I suspect, we agree, there are still some nice men in there.

I suspect we agree, both men and women like to cover shit up, each individual for their own reasons. But, usually to cover their own asses in some way.

We agree, people need to speak up and demand something be done. Where we disagree, I think, is how best to do this. What tactic makes people listen and think and act more so than another in every situation? I dont have an answer to that. Its just a question I ask myself a lot.

The Powell case is another example of something that infuriates me. But what infuriated me might not be what infuriated you. And how I express that infuriation might not be the same way as you do.

A lot of effort was put into protecting the Powell children by a lot of people. It didnt stop them from being killed.

I want to know who made the decision that a father, who has said "they are turning my children against me" was allowed a supervised visit in an environment where Josh Powell had the control to be able to harm those kids.

In the scheme of things and given the result, it was an incredibly stupid decision. I am willing to bet someone, at the time this decision was made, said hey thats a stupid decision. And they were told to shut the f*** up.

I asked the question I did for a reason. I didnt ask - do media stories of sexual abuse make you react or not. Some folks seemed to have thought that is what I asked. I didnt.

What I asked is, regardless of how you react to media stories i.e. they make you mad or sad or uncomfortable or whatever, what factors play into how you feel or why you might have a stronger reaction to one story over another.

This means, for example, does a story that is headline news for a month provoke a bigger or different reaction than one that plays for just a day? The crimes in each are the same and equally hideous but does longer exposure to the story affect your reaction? Do you (generic you) feel the same passion about those kids in California who were news for a day as you do for all the Sandusky stories? etc. Other examples are in the OP.

Thats what I was trying to get at.

This has been bugging me because of a story that ran in our local paper, a week ago Sunday, about a mother who had been fighting to protect her child for years from sexual abuse by his father. It was a very graphic story that traced the timeline and court/legal/social service process along the way. The link to the article is in the Violence Against Women thread if you are interested. But, be warned, the article is graphic and it is disturbing.

It bothered me A LOT. The "outrage" lasted for a few days here. Now we are back to dolphin strandings.

But, that kid and his mother have been with me ever since I read the article. And, it made me wonder why is this particular case bugging me so much. I am still not sure I know the answer but this thread is taking my mind in a lot of different directions while I search for an answer.

I asked the question I did because I wanted to know how this stuff affected others and why it affected them the way it did. And was this different from the way it seems to work in my head. In hindsight, I might have needed to word it differently.

It was supposed to be a way to learn from one another and to stimulate a dialogue on "thinking harder" about something. I'm not sure it was taken that way tho.

BTW, there is no right answer. But, every post did give me food for thought.