Date: Wed, 1 Jul
1998 23:13:13 -0600
What Business are We In?
As some may have observed, I have been the object of considerable vitriol in e-mail posts and on home pages. The latest is the attack on the Litany for Fathers which I wrote at the request of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children. Hollida has already posted the Litany in its entirety for your information.
The practice of those who seek to destroy and harm me and Hollida is to misrepresent, rip statements out of context, rely upon hostile secondary sources, fabricate documents, and endlessly repeat false accusations against us.
[liznote: misrepresent? How? fabricate documents? How? repeat false accusations? How? Now he's been "falsely accused?" Isn't that phrase getting a little old and tired?]
I acknowledge that I experience anger, frustration, and occasionally despair at the incessant drumbeat of unfair, untrue, and mean spirited personal attacks.
[liznote: Then perhaps you can imagine the "anger, frustration and despair" of a child who has been raped hearing her or himself called a liar by you, in your specious efforts to "assist" the advocacy of the justice system. "Mean?" As in cruel? I can think of few things crueler than a court order requiring a frightened, raped little girl or boy to sit in a room with you, being videotaped, and forced to answer your intimate and intrusive questions, knowing full well that your objective is to obtain defense testimony. Interesting "business" you are in. What do you do with those videotapes later, anyway, Ralph?]
As suggested in the Litany, and following the example of the imprecatory psalms, naming those whom I know seek to harm me, I have prayed that God will keep his promise and exact vengeance. Now I can let go of the anger, frustration, and despair. I need not plan nor make any effort to get back at those who are implacable foes. I can attend to business.
[liznote: Prayers to God to exact "vengeance" on those, i.e. liz et al., who disagree with him and his methods? Is this evidentiary of an objective, empirically-inclined, fact-driven mind? (But a clue, perhaps, as to why men like Underwager, Gardner, the FRs, etc.routinely perceive women as "vengeful" and "vindictive.")]
This latest round has led me to ask the basic question, what is our business? This is the question Thomas Vail asked of AT&T shortly after taking over as president in 1917. The answer, service, is what made AT&T the giant that it is still today. The answer I suggest for us, and for those like minded, is, information.
[liznote: He is comparing himself to AT&T, the telephone company, circa 1917? Yammering aside, were "information" really his business, Underwager's resume would indicate that he has testified at least a decent portion of the time in favor of an accuser, rather than a "litany" of instances where he's testified solely on behalf of the accused.]
Accurate information relative to the basic activities of our society is the business I think we are in. This is what we can do that will protect children, strengthen family life, and advance the ability of men and women to relate in productive and positive interaction.
[liznote: What "basic activities of our society" would you be referring to, Ralph? What kind of "relating" in "productive and positive 'interaction?' " Oh come on. This is babbling. The business you are in is destroying children's and women's credibility, and testifying on behalf of those accused of heinous and disgusting sexual acts with children.]
To pursue the goal of accurate information requires courage and perseverance. The truth is out there, external to humanity. But pride and arrogance of human beings will always seek to deny that and to make truth a human quality. This can go two ways. The relativist will assert there is no external truth but only your truth and my truth. There is never any need to question, argue, or attend to facts. The other way is the fanatic who is certain she is in possession of The Truth, hence you had better watch out if you think differently. She may have to eliminate you because only The Truth has the right to exist. Here, too, attending to facts is not necessary because The Truth is already completely known.
[liznote: Sorry, Ralph. The word "fanatic" and the weird and silly capitalization of the words "The Truth" are hallmarks of indoctrinated religiosity-speak. They are hallmarks of the sort of person who "prays to God for vengeance." You're the religionist, not liz. Did they teach "projection" where you went to psychologist school? (We also notice the use of the feminine pronoun in this "generic" statement.)]
Either way rends the fabric of society and destroys civilization.
So far, the attacks on the Litany for Fathers which I wrote appear to come from fanatics, those who are absolutely sure they have The Truth. Any effort to change their minds, appeal to reason, or present any contradictory factual information will fail. It will not dent the closed mindedness. Any attempt to punish them for their actions will not stop it either but will only serve to make them more sure they are noble martyrs fighting for the preservation of The Truth.
[liznote: "Martyrs?" Martyring what? Isn't this a bit of a stupid remark? Or just more religiosity-speak and projection. And who "attacked" you? Do you find your own words placed side by side upsetting? revealing? embarrassing? Do your own words not stand on their own? Do you have different "opinions" depending upon who you are talking to? You'd have a hard time interspersing anything liz has written with pro-pedophilia statements. That's because liz has never made such statements. It's your own words embarrassing you, Ralph. Not liz.]
I suggest our best response to to attend to our business, that is, continue to pursue facts and accurate data. The best way to accomplish this that human beings have yet discovered is through a rational, scientific approach that seeks to uncover bit by bit the truth that is out there. Then the next problem is to disseminate that more accurate information in the most reasonable and most widely dispersed fashion. The best that can be hoped for with some is to raise possible doubts and questioning.
[liznote: a "rational, scientific approach" like praying to God for vengeance? Or as in publishing and citing to one's own works?]
One of the facts that can be disseminated is that the fanatics, such as those who have made the most recent attacks, are likely responsible for increasing the number of children who are actually abused, both physically and sexually. They are flat out wrong when they present themselves as protecting children. Over fifty years of research on labeling, stereotyping, and the consequences of demonizing any group of persons shows that such negative stigmatizing increases the frequency of the labeled behavior.
[liznote: kind of like a threat, eh Ralph? Attempt to stop the child rapists and in retaliation they will go out and rape and torture more children? Wade Horn, in his "Importance of Being Father" does a similar sort of threat. Fail to agree with him, and supposedly children will be left to starve and women will be gang-raped.]
The research on effective treatment of sex offenders shows that harsh, confrontive, and punitive approaches do not reduce recidivism but make it more likely.
[liznote: There is no effective treatment for sex offenders, as you well should know. Most of them are slick, sly con-artists as well as perverts, who, as you have said yourself, in the Paidika interview, like to sneak around in shadows and lie and hide and and rationalize that they "love" children. They are very good at two-face sort of comments, double entrendre speeches, public pretending, and flat out bullshit. The rest are just violent evil monsters, and people completely demented by having been inculcated with religious dogma coupled with con-artists' obfuscations. There's a sure cure for recidivism. That's life in prison.]
There is no need to be apologetic or defensive about seeking greater accuracy and attending to facts. Nobody can gainsay that. That is the business we are in.
[liznote: "accuracy" like the nonsense in the Paidika interview where you intimated that pedophilia is primarily homosexual, when in fact it is a paraphilia afflicting more heterosexuals? Or "accuracy" as in name-calling -- "fanatics?" Or "accuracy" such as claiming that you have been the subject here of a "false accusation" when in fact you were "accused" of nothing. Your own words were simply placed side by side in order to shed a little light on how you think. BY THE WAY: Is it just me, or does the flowery, mawkish and oblique religiosity-speak of "Litany's" last line, about "rolling in the clover," etc., sound an awful lot like "ROLL IN THE HAY?"]
& Hollida Wakefield
MAIN PAGE | COLLECTIONS
HISTORY LIBRARY | RESEARCH ROOMS
| THE READING ROOM
FATHERLESS CHILDREN STORIES | THERAPEUTIC JURISPRUDENCE | WOMAN SUFFRAGE TIMELINE | THE LIZ LIBRARY ENTRANCE
as otherwise noted, all contents in this collection are copyright 1996-2009
the liz library. All rights
This site is hosted and maintained by argate.net Send queries to: sarah-at-thelizlibrary.org