Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 8 days ago)
35,634 posts, read 17,975,706 times
Reputation: 50663
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by lizjo
Trying to normalize a person that has lost his humanity is a futile exercise. Finding interesting things about him and assigning positive attributes is just ridiculous.
No one is normalizing sexual abuse, or thinking that's a positive thing.
But looking at a story in a nuanced way, is a way to teach critical, expanded thinking.
"What else could be true?" is an excellent exercise. "Is there anything positive here"?
BUT, for people who speak in syntax that involves the "good guys" and the "bad guys", it's an impossible exercise - an undeveloped skill.
The ability to see a good characteristic in an otherwise extremely dangerous and flawed person is just intellectual honesty.
But yeah. For people who really need to see things in black and white, because that's more comfortable, it's off-putting that others have this ability. To see nuances. To accept contradictions.
No one is normalizing sexual abuse, or thinking that's a positive thing.
But looking at a story in a nuanced way, is a way to teach critical, expanded thinking.
"What else could be true?" is an excellent exercise. "Is there anything positive here"?
BUT, for people who speak in syntax that involves the "good guys" and the "bad guys", it's an impossible exercise - an undeveloped skill.
The ability to see a good characteristic in an otherwise extremely dangerous and flawed person is just intellectual honesty.
But yeah. For people who really need to see things in black and white, because that's more comfortable, it's off-putting that others have this ability. To see nuances. To accept contradictions.
Why would you want to find positive attributes in a person like this? You say nuanced thinking. Maybe this would be a good topic for a debate team to tackle.
The victim was described as more than just disagreeable. Read it again.
That's life for you. A lot of childhood sexual abuse victims are more than just disagreeable. Haven't seen it of course, the review makes it sound as if his disagreeableness does seem to center around the sexual abuse he endured as a child. Maybe we can permit his character that and not demand a perfect Leave it to Beaver wholesomeness of him?
That's life for you. A lot of childhood sexual abuse victims are more than just disagreeable. Haven't seen it of course, the review makes it sound as if his disagreeableness does seem to center around the sexual abuse he endured as a child. Maybe we can permit his character that and not demand a perfect Leave it to Beaver wholesomeness of him?
I’m wondering if we are even discussing the same review.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 8 days ago)
35,634 posts, read 17,975,706 times
Reputation: 50663
Quote:
Originally Posted by lizjo
Why would you want to find positive attributes in a person like this? You say nuanced thinking. Maybe this would be a good topic for a debate team to tackle.
Well, because it's just basically being honest. Why would you NOT want to be boldly intellectually honest?
That's why when someone is tried for a horrible crime, there are people who are witnesses who will get up on the stand and say something positive about them that's true. Before the jury deliberates. Because it's honest, and it's a factor.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 8 days ago)
35,634 posts, read 17,975,706 times
Reputation: 50663
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malloric
That's life for you. A lot of childhood sexual abuse victims are more than just disagreeable. Haven't seen it of course, the review makes it sound as if his disagreeableness does seem to center around the sexual abuse he endured as a child. Maybe we can permit his character that and not demand a perfect Leave it to Beaver wholesomeness of him?
Yes, EXACTLY. A lot of people who had terrible things perpetrated on them as children are extremely difficult people. And so, instead of asking "what's wrong with you?" we can ask "What happened to you"? because that's fairer.
(Which is actually the name of a currently very popular book on that subject of difficult adults who have been victims of abuse).
Well, because it's just basically being honest. Why would you NOT want to be boldly intellectually honest?
That's why when someone is tried for a horrible crime, there are people who are witnesses who will get up on the stand and say something positive about them that's true. Before the jury deliberates. Because it's honest, and it's a factor.
The play isn’t portraying anything honestly by acting like pedophiles suffer a lifetime of punishment.
Yes, EXACTLY. A lot of people who had terrible things perpetrated on them as children are extremely difficult people. And so, instead of asking "what's wrong with you?" we can ask "What happened to you"? because that's fairer.
(Which is actually the name of a currently very popular book on that subject of difficult adults who have been victims of abuse).
That’s not what the play is about.
My goodness, those defending it are really making up an alternate reality of what the review claims it was about.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
