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.
I kinda see all sides to this. I understand people who don't want to get involved with "damaged goods" so to speak, and I respect their choices. At the same time, not good to judge someone on the basis of what happened to them in their past (i.e. rape victims).
I have a close friend who I care deeply for, and she has been through a lot of craziness and hell in her life. I tried to help her, but she has gotten worse. The only thing I can do is try to help her find someone that is more qualified to help her with her trauma while at the same time being with her and supporting her as she progresses. At the same time, I have to respect that she wants her space. One thing that is very important to the healing of trauma is a set of boundaries. They have to be set and respected in order for there to be recovery.
One thing I have found is that people who have gone through tons of trauma (rape, violence, etc.) don't always want people around. She sure doesn't want me around all the time. So I do make sure that the time she does have with me is positive, as well as honest. She has a long journey ahead, and it is hard for her.
People who don't want to be involved with trauma survivors are entitled to their choice, but the last thing that a survivor of trauma needs is condemnation. I also understand that everyone has to walk their own journey.
From experience, we have to be careful with certain people, not just for ourselves, but for the sake of that person. There are many cases where people try to help someone only for it to actually harm that person instead of helping that person.
Those who want to help a trauma survivor, don't, I repeat, don't try to be a rescuer.
Last sentence, very very sound statement. As is the one concerning boundaries. The situation my lady and I are in is atypical in a lot of ways. We were deeply involved and had been for some time before the attack and subsequent events. For someone to have tried to come in from outside and try and help her through would more than likely have ended in disaster for both her and the would be assistant. For one, as you pointed out, many peoples first thoughts are of "rescuing". Such situations are not rescue missions. They are closer to a search and destroy. Space and alone time are also very important. With my lady it was (still is) a roller coaster there. From needing to be left strictly be to needing to be held close and cry within only hours long spaces of time. You have to be available, but still be able to maintain distance. It's a tricky balancing act.
With my lady, and I'm sure this is common, do NOT startle her. Don't ever make unannounced physical contact if she's looking away. Not even a soft touch on the shoulder or some such. That could wind up being quite painful. I don't disrespect anyone who would not want to be deeply involved with a trauma survivor. Thing is, "shallow" involvement isn't a good idea either. Not if someone's mind is on using a trauma victim for sex. Same goes for someone with other mental and emotional issues. There are some less than savory types who see victims and mentally ill people as easy marks. That I find more than contemptible.
There is no such thing as "casual sex" with a rape/assault survivor, nor is there imo with someone who is BP or some such. Someone trying to recover from an abusive relationship doesn't need some creeping bipred looking for a seduction thrill either. These victims are not "damaged goods". They have suffered damage to be sure but they are not a broken and malfunctioning sex robot. Along these same lines those who favor the damaged goods take for people who have been through a nasty divorce or other sort of emotional issue yet will use such people for sex whilst disdaining anything "deeper" need to get a clue as well. Speaking of boundaries. It seems hypocritical to see "damaged goods" as OK for sex but nothing more yes? Again, it's true what you said that trauma victims surely do not need condemnation. They don't need condemnation masked as affirmation either. I give thanks every day that I was and am there for my lady. She has been there for me as well even carrying the burdens she does. Many couples who's relationship has been invaded by rape and /or sexual assault don't recover ,let alone recover as well as we are.
I agree, if we're talking about a marriage. Not sure how I'd see that.
But I will say I have referred to an ex-friend of mine as used-up nasty goods, because she has Herpes, and cheated on her boyfriend of 8 years on a regular basis. She slept with all of his friends and never told any of them. She is pretty much a pariah now.
There ya go. A well deserved title. There really are pieces of crap like that out there that don't deserve to be respected.
A lot of the more socially awkward men don't want to have to go and raise the kids of a woman who spent her 20's partying and going after all the bad boys while ghosting the men who were like them during that time.. it's a bit of resentment for the women not picking them in the first place and a subtle form of "punishment" to them by rejecting the baggage.
Besides once kids get to be a certain age the man isn't going to be able to step in and be a "father" to them.. once the kids hit much past about the age of 5-6 seems like it would be more work than it's worth to want a long term relationship with a woman with these kids... and dating one where the previous fathers are in the picture and around... no thanks.
If I date a single mother, the kids must be under age 5, and there must be 2 or less of them, and the father must be gone, and not in the picture. Otherwise it's more trouble then it's worth.
To my mind, referring to someone in such a manner based on their past relationships and past in general is about the nastiest and most hurtful thing that could be said to another person. I've seen a lot of posters here use such terms when offering "advice" particularly in reference to women who have been in badly abusive relationships. I.E. "She's damaged goods man. Run as fast as your feet will carry you". What a thing to say. Even on an anonymous board. The worst verbal wounding I ever received was to be referred to by a woman as "leftovers". Like I was some sort of byproduct of my former marriage.
This particular woman had no problems sleeping with me and such, but stated flatly anything more was out of the question because she wouldn't take another woman's leftovers. She didn't even get sex, I sent her out the door. And she had the gall to be angry at me. Regardless of the very short nature of that association, those words stick with me to this day. I honestly can't think of a more cruel thing for a man or woman to say to the opposite sex. Talk about being judgemental. What a high horse to sit.
So, any thoughts from the board on this? Personal experiences and/or opinions on such terminology? Like I said, I've seen such used here a lot and it would certainly be interesting to see someone defend such verbage. Oh, I'm sure there are those who feel they can, but from where I'm sitting it would take a seriously cruel person to do so. Yes, I will say that there are people who are carrying some heavy emotional loads from past relationships. Particularly abusive ones. Such associations leave wounds that may not heal readily. But these are people we're talking about here. Not cars that were drove into the ground.
Verily, I see little difference in referring to a man or woman in such a way than using racist terms that people get so bent over. That is how I see it anyway.
Yes.
As someone who has had to go through therapy to rid himself of past relationship demons—IMHO there's nothing wrong with making an assessment that someone is "damaged goods" because of their past. Quite often this is very true, and I have been very guilty of romanticizing someone's problems as being a project that the two of us could fix.
While the phrase may be overly blunt, there are far greater things to worry about relationship-wise... like whether or not Mr. or Ms. Damaged Goods is doing anything to repair the damage.
To my mind, referring to someone in such a manner based on their past relationships and past in general is about the nastiest and most hurtful thing that could be said to another person. I've seen a lot of posters here use such terms when offering "advice" particularly in reference to women who have been in badly abusive relationships. I.E. "She's damaged goods man. Run as fast as your feet will carry you". What a thing to say. Even on an anonymous board. The worst verbal wounding I ever received was to be referred to by a woman as "leftovers". Like I was some sort of byproduct of my former marriage.
This particular woman had no problems sleeping with me and such, but stated flatly anything more was out of the question because she wouldn't take another woman's leftovers. She didn't even get sex, I sent her out the door. And she had the gall to be angry at me. Regardless of the very short nature of that association, those words stick with me to this day. I honestly can't think of a more cruel thing for a man or woman to say to the opposite sex. Talk about being judgemental. What a high horse to sit.
So, any thoughts from the board on this? Personal experiences and/or opinions on such terminology? Like I said, I've seen such used here a lot and it would certainly be interesting to see someone defend such verbage. Oh, I'm sure there are those who feel they can, but from where I'm sitting it would take a seriously cruel person to do so. Yes, I will say that there are people who are carrying some heavy emotional loads from past relationships. Particularly abusive ones. Such associations leave wounds that may not heal readily. But these are people we're talking about here. Not cars that were drove into the ground.
Verily, I see little difference in referring to a man or woman in such a way than using racist terms that people get so bent over. That is how I see it anyway.
Well look at it this way. At least you know where she stood.
She had no problem wanting to sleep with you yet you're damaged goods? Wtf over. You should of taken her up on the offer and banged her till that thing looked like a bad pastrami sandwich. Then send her on her way.
Truthfully I give you props because you didn't do that. Sounds to me like she lost out on what could of been a good thing. Don't sweat it. Someone who appreciates you will come along
Last edited by Electrician4you; 03-27-2017 at 08:02 PM..
"Damaged goods" certainly isn't the most appropriate way to describe someone but on occasion it does have a hard ring of truth to it.
I've had two lady friends of thirty years now, both just friends, and while friend "a" always kept in touch, friend "b" went off to her own life, leaving us both behind for a couple of decades. Recently we had a chance to catch up as "b" finally decided to leave a 16 year abusive marriage behind and start fresh. The reunion was fantastic, smiles and memories all around with a good dose of ear-bending as we listened and sympathized with her troubles.
We vowed to keep in touch as best we could even though we both agreed "b" wasn't the gal she used to be. Not unexpected of course considering the circumstances. But then the tide turned, the bi-polar set in, jealousy perhaps that "a" and me were still so tight over the decades without any complications from our own damaged relationships.
The venting went from mild to threatening for me, as if I was the cause somehow, "a" noticed that she was being ignored more and more. We both decided to back off and haven't heard from her in months now. The mutual opinion was that our friend needed more help than we could give and much more than we were willing to offer.
Other than "damaged goods", which she sadly appears to be, how would you describe her?
I can't think of a good reason why someone would call someone else "damaged goods". There's an implication that the person is beyond repair, but people can and do survive some horrible circumstances every day, and come out all the stronger and wiser for it. My guess is that someone who refers to someone this way wants to feel superior somehow, or that, by seeing this person as "other" or "less than", they are in fact saying that THEY would never find themselves in a bad situation. No. They are too smart or well-adjusted. The truth is, anyone can find themselves in an adverse situation. I don't know. Maybe there is an element of fear that they themselves could find themselves in a toxic relationship or the midst of a nasty divorce, or some other circumstance. Anyway, it shows a lack of humility and compassion.
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.
Like I was some sort of byproduct of my former marriage. 
Regardless of the very short nature of that association, those words stick with me to this day. I honestly can't think of a more cruel thing for a man or woman to say to the opposite sex. Talk about being judgemental. What a high horse to sit. 
