models for thinking about CSA (triggers?)
Hi Guys,
Over the last few months as I've been posting, I've been aware that my particular slant on some elements of our healing process seems to be triggering irritation in others, and I've been trying to think about why that might be.
The underlying thing that emerges is that my own understanding of the overall problem of CSA has shifted in the last few years. I used to believe in the criminal justice model, where abusers are evil doers, and we are victims of their evil intent. I'm now accepting a public health model where abusers are psychologically damaged people who carry a very dangerous social illness that can have devastating results on those they touch.
I'll say upfront that the results are similar in that I totally agree we need to isolate the abusers from the potential victims, but in most other ways, the two approaches differ.
I'm come to this position primarily from a desire to help stop the problem. From my perspective we need to find a way to keep our malesurvivor membership down through reduction in the number of abused boys and men, and the only way I can imagine doing that is to reduce the number of abusers.
Our current criminal justice approach guarrantees there will be a never ending supply of abusers. Currently we paint all abusers as monsters and sentence them to life-threatening prisons once they have committed their acts of violence. That model makes it almost impossible for potential abusers to get any help. Even the first articulation of the phrase "I want to x" (I don't even want to put the words on the page) would so horrify most people that the abusers would never get help.
So if we want any hope of changing the dynamic, we need to change the language and the model we use to think about the circumstances we have all undergone.
I don't have the stomache to research the inner evolution of a CSA abuser, but imagine that it is similar to a "normal" person. At some point in time an urge towards their proclivity emerges. For whatever reason. I doubt any of them choose it rationally out of the many life styles they might undertake.
If that is the case, then each abuser was at one point in time a person who might have had help that would have saved one of us the major psychological trauma of a lifetime.
If that potential abuser is born into our current ciminal justice model, he or she is virtually guaranteed to abuse. We all know how silence effects the psyche when there are unexpressed needs. I can't imagine that it is different for abusers. They would have these urges that they can't express or ever discuss. How do they keep from becoming wackjobs?
If, on the other hand, their proclivity is expressed as an unfortunate reality of the general human condition along with murder, etc., the language of nonviolence can step in and they can get help. I picture my dad struggling with his own demons. What if, at whatever age the urges first emerged, he had been able to say: I want to do x or y, and I know I need help. And a public health group had welcomed him and said, we can help you. And then some guidance or structure was put in place to help him stay safe for himself and others.
I don't see any other way to keep the abusers from abusing effectually.
This has all been playing in my mind over the last few months or so, and I can imagine that it has been getting in the way of clarity. I welcome debate on this subject.
Please understand before I get any flames, though, under no circumstances am I suggesting they should be let off the hook. Bad deeds need to be dealth with. I'm really thinking more about the value of the way we see the whole problem.
Best wishes,
Danny
Over the last few months as I've been posting, I've been aware that my particular slant on some elements of our healing process seems to be triggering irritation in others, and I've been trying to think about why that might be.
The underlying thing that emerges is that my own understanding of the overall problem of CSA has shifted in the last few years. I used to believe in the criminal justice model, where abusers are evil doers, and we are victims of their evil intent. I'm now accepting a public health model where abusers are psychologically damaged people who carry a very dangerous social illness that can have devastating results on those they touch.
I'll say upfront that the results are similar in that I totally agree we need to isolate the abusers from the potential victims, but in most other ways, the two approaches differ.
I'm come to this position primarily from a desire to help stop the problem. From my perspective we need to find a way to keep our malesurvivor membership down through reduction in the number of abused boys and men, and the only way I can imagine doing that is to reduce the number of abusers.
Our current criminal justice approach guarrantees there will be a never ending supply of abusers. Currently we paint all abusers as monsters and sentence them to life-threatening prisons once they have committed their acts of violence. That model makes it almost impossible for potential abusers to get any help. Even the first articulation of the phrase "I want to x" (I don't even want to put the words on the page) would so horrify most people that the abusers would never get help.
So if we want any hope of changing the dynamic, we need to change the language and the model we use to think about the circumstances we have all undergone.
I don't have the stomache to research the inner evolution of a CSA abuser, but imagine that it is similar to a "normal" person. At some point in time an urge towards their proclivity emerges. For whatever reason. I doubt any of them choose it rationally out of the many life styles they might undertake.
If that is the case, then each abuser was at one point in time a person who might have had help that would have saved one of us the major psychological trauma of a lifetime.
If that potential abuser is born into our current ciminal justice model, he or she is virtually guaranteed to abuse. We all know how silence effects the psyche when there are unexpressed needs. I can't imagine that it is different for abusers. They would have these urges that they can't express or ever discuss. How do they keep from becoming wackjobs?
If, on the other hand, their proclivity is expressed as an unfortunate reality of the general human condition along with murder, etc., the language of nonviolence can step in and they can get help. I picture my dad struggling with his own demons. What if, at whatever age the urges first emerged, he had been able to say: I want to do x or y, and I know I need help. And a public health group had welcomed him and said, we can help you. And then some guidance or structure was put in place to help him stay safe for himself and others.
I don't see any other way to keep the abusers from abusing effectually.
This has all been playing in my mind over the last few months or so, and I can imagine that it has been getting in the way of clarity. I welcome debate on this subject.
Please understand before I get any flames, though, under no circumstances am I suggesting they should be let off the hook. Bad deeds need to be dealth with. I'm really thinking more about the value of the way we see the whole problem.
Best wishes,
Danny
