After 13 years, an apology to man accused of sex abuse
Brian
Sydney Morning Herald
15 April 2000
'Sorry' to man accused of sex abuse
By Bettina Arndt
Thirteen years after accusing a solicitor of sexually abusing
his three children, the Department of Community Services has
expressed its regret for the damage it caused to the man and
his family.
Katoomba lawyer Mr Hal Ginges lost custody of his children and
had no contact with them for more than five years as a result
of the abuse allegations.
Now the department has admitted in court that its investigation
was incomplete and unprofessional and that the conclusions
reached by its officers were "not soundly based".
On Monday, the District Court in Sydney awarded a verdict in
favour of Mr Ginges, who had sued the NSW Government for
compensation for injury suffered as a result of the botched
investigation. It is believed the department has paid him
damages.
Mr Ginges says he was only able to pursue his claim because
his children came back to him.
"Without them I wouldn't have been able to prove the whole
thing was nonsense," he told the Herald.
It is the first time the NSW Government has made such an
acknowledgment. A South Australian man once received an
ex-gratia payment from the State Government for damages
resulting from an incompetent investigation leading to
sexual abuse allegations.
The allegations against Mr Ginges arose as a result of a
notification in March 1987 to the Katoomba office of the
then Department of Youth and Community services, now DOCS.
The three children, Kieran, then aged 10, and his two sisters
aged 8 and 4 had already been subjected to a sexual abuse
investigation five weeks earlier when they were taken to
Westmead Hospital by their mother, Ms Anne Morris, and her
partner, Ms Leslye Chenery.
All three children declared no abuse had taken place,
according to a Westmead Sexual Assault Centre social worker's
report.
Kieran, now a 23-year-old arts-law student, told the Herald:
"I couldn't work out what was the point of all this, but I
was adamant in saying nothing had happened to me."
The Westmead social workers found no evidence of abuse.
By the time of the department's investigation, Ms Morris
had left the children with their father, who had long been
their primary carer, to move in with Ms Chenery.
The investigation by department district officers Ms Christine
Waterer and Mr Les Cormack - described by the department as
"brief and urgent" - involved a four-hour interview with the
two girls.
A leading Sydney child psychiatrist, Dr Brent Waters,
reviewed the DOCS files to provide expert evidence for the
District Court proceedings. His report described the
investigation as "extremely coercive" and unprofessional.
Dr Waters strongly criticised the interviews for containing
leading questions and failing to acknowledge the children's
emphatic denials that any sexual activity had taken place.
The department's investigation was followed by yet another
visit to Westmead, and all three children were medically
examined.
The Westmead social workers found there was no conclusive
evidence to suggest any abuse had taken place. But the next
day Mr Cormack confronted Mr Ginges and accused him of being
a child abuser.
The department funded the children's move with their mother
and partner to Melbourne, saying the children urgently needed
"a safe place".
Ultimately, Mr Ginges's contact with his children was limited
to supervised access, yet, according to Kieran, the children
remained under pressure to say that they had been abused.
"We kept being taken to see people from DOCS and therapists
who would further push the allegations and our weakness in
not acknowledging them."
Kieran said that he made a decision to give in.
"Finally I decided that for the pressure to be removed I'd
simply say something had happened, make something up."
Mr Ginges said Kieran made contact with him in 1992
following encouragement from a foster family he had lived
with after leaving his mother's home.
By 1996 all three children were in Sydney, the younger sister
with her father and the older with her father's mother. The
children are now all very close to their father.
Ms Morris said she was very surprised by the department's
decision. Ms Morris, who now lives in Adelaide and deals with
child abuse matters for a women's health service, said she
believed the DOCS investigation had been handled "extremely
professionally and carefully".
The government statement announcing the settlement
acknowledged that the department investigation "was not
conducted in a complete and professional manner and that
the conclusion reached by its officers was not soundly
based".
It acknowledged the damage caused by the allegations.
"Following the investigation, Mr Ginges suffered the loss
of his close relationship with his children for several
years and also suffered at the time publicity adverse to
his reputation. The department regrets the damage to Mr
Ginges and his family."
Asked to comment, the department issued a statement saying
child protection practices used by DOCS had changed
significantly since 1987.
"DOCS decided it would not be beneficial to spend weeks in
court defending practices which have long since changed and
been improved."
The statement said the staff involved in the matter were no
longer employed by DOCS.
Yet this week Mr Cormack was working at the department's
St Marys Service Centre. However, a DOCS spokesperson said
Mr Cormack was a consultant to the department.
While expressing satisfaction at the verdict, Mr Ginges,
whose work as a solicitor includes family law, voiced
concern that sexual abuse allegations were often made
vexatiously, and few men had been able to prove they were
wrongly accused.
"Through my work as a solicitor, I know men who have lost
their children to false allegations who never have the
opportunity to rectify the damage done to them."
Kieran, who is studying at UWS Nepean, remains angry at
the unprofessional intervention of DOCS and other
professionals and the subsequent damage it caused to all
their lives.
"It astounds me how these professionals can be so negligent.
I find it abhorrent."
Pinus Radiata
>
>Sydney Morning Herald
>15 April 2000
>
>'Sorry' to man accused of sex abuse
>By Bettina Arndt
>
>
>The allegations against Mr Ginges arose as a result of a
>notification in March 1987 to the Katoomba office of the
>then Department of Youth and Community services, now DOCS.
>The three children, Kieran, then aged 10, and his two sisters
>aged 8 and 4 had already been subjected to a sexual abuse
>investigation five weeks earlier when they were taken to
>Westmead Hospital by their mother, Ms Anne Morris, and her
>partner, Ms Leslye Chenery.
>
falsely accused father of incest.
Why is it that a lot of women who drop their husbands for another
woman end up accusing the fathers of fiddling their kids?
Why do the child protection industries have a large proportion of
female homosexual workers in their ranks?
Why do most organisations concerned with sexual misbehaviour appear to
be organised and run by females who appear to be homosexual?
Do female homosexuals have a morbid fascination with sexual
misbehaviour?
Brian
wrote:
>On Mon, 17 Apr 2000 23:15:03 GMT, bri...@wave.co.nz (Brian) wrote:
>>
>>Sydney Morning Herald
>>15 April 2000
>>
>>'Sorry' to man accused of sex abuse
>>By Bettina Arndt
>>
> < snip >
>>
>>The allegations against Mr Ginges arose as a result of a
>>notification in March 1987 to the Katoomba office of the
>>then Department of Youth and Community services, now DOCS.
>>The three children, Kieran, then aged 10, and his two sisters
>>aged 8 and 4 had already been subjected to a sexual abuse
>>investigation five weeks earlier when they were taken to
>>Westmead Hospital by their mother, Ms Anne Morris, and her
>>partner, Ms Leslye Chenery.
>The mother Ms Anne Morris, and her NEW PARTNER, Ms Leslye Chenery
>falsely accused father of incest.
>
>Why is it that a lot of women who drop their husbands for another
>woman end up accusing the fathers of fiddling their kids?
>
>Why do the child protection industries have a large proportion of
>female homosexual workers in their ranks?
>
>Why do most organisations concerned with sexual misbehaviour appear to
>be organised and run by females who appear to be homosexual?
>
>Do female homosexuals have a morbid fascination with sexual
>misbehaviour?
I've crossposted this post containing your reply to nz.soc.queer
You've raised a very difficult subject. To suggest what you are
saying, is of course very politically incorrect, and it also walks the
fine line with tolerance on one side and sexual bigotry on the other.
On the other hand, the subject should not be left for fear of
"offence" of those who may be easily offended. The problem of false
allegations causes a much worse fate for those so accused than simply
being offended.
I'm aware of a lot of anecdotal evidence that a high percentage of the
staff of child protection industries are homosexual women who either
have a morbid fascination with sexual misbehaviour as you suggest, or
at the least have some serious psychological issues unresolved
concerning men.
If there is a problem with a minority of homosexual women, causing
unnecessary harm with regard to problems such as false allegations,
then the best people to deal with that problem in my opinoin would be
other homosexual women.
Brian
Spade
>On Tue, 18 Apr 2000 21:25:30 +1200, Pinus Radiata <sh...@plank.net>
>wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 17 Apr 2000 23:15:03 GMT, bri...@wave.co.nz (Brian) wrote:
>>>
>>>Sydney Morning Herald
>>>15 April 2000
>>>
>>>'Sorry' to man accused of sex abuse
>>>By Bettina Arndt
>>>
>> < snip >
>>>
>>>The allegations against Mr Ginges arose as a result of a
>>>notification in March 1987 to the Katoomba office of the
>>>then Department of Youth and Community services, now DOCS.
>>>The three children, Kieran, then aged 10, and his two sisters
>>>aged 8 and 4 had already been subjected to a sexual abuse
>>>investigation five weeks earlier when they were taken to
>>>Westmead Hospital by their mother, Ms Anne Morris, and her
>>>partner, Ms Leslye Chenery.
>
>
>>The mother Ms Anne Morris, and her NEW PARTNER, Ms Leslye Chenery
>>falsely accused father of incest.
>>
>>Why is it that a lot of women who drop their husbands for another
>>woman end up accusing the fathers of fiddling their kids?
>>
>>Why do the child protection industries have a large proportion of
>>female homosexual workers in their ranks?
>>
>>Why do most organisations concerned with sexual misbehaviour appear to
>>be organised and run by females who appear to be homosexual?
>>
>>Do female homosexuals have a morbid fascination with sexual
>>misbehaviour?
>
>
>I've crossposted this post containing your reply to nz.soc.queer
>
>You've raised a very difficult subject. To suggest what you are
>saying, is of course very politically incorrect, and it also walks the
>fine line with tolerance on one side and sexual bigotry on the other.
>
Our aborial correspondent has, IMO, said it as it is and called a
spade a spade.
Rosie Salas
>>
>>Why do the child protection industries have a large proportion of
>>female homosexual workers in their ranks?
>>
>>Why do most organisations concerned with sexual misbehaviour appear to
>>be organised and run by females who appear to be homosexual?
Let's put the question another way:
Why is it that so many lesbians end up in the helping professions?
It is not just the sexual help, counselling and soforth, it is
teaching and nursing and generally any profession you can think of to
do with the wlefare of people particularly women that has more than
its fair share of lesbians.
It is probably more to do with having some desire to help others out
of the hole that women often find themselves in through the actions of
violent or oppressive male behaviour rather than any morbid
fascination. Lesbians are often women who have got themselves out of
such holes and have become empowered in the process to help others.
>
>You've raised a very difficult subject. To suggest what you are
>saying, is of course very politically incorrect, and it also walks the
>fine line with tolerance on one side and sexual bigotry on the other.
I'm afraid it crashes right over that line.
>On the other hand, the subject should not be left for fear of
>"offence" of those who may be easily offended. The problem of false
>allegations causes a much worse fate for those so accused than simply
>being offended.
>
>I'm aware of a lot of anecdotal evidence that a high percentage of the
>staff of child protection industries are homosexual women who either
>have a morbid fascination with sexual misbehaviour as you suggest,
Corroborate???
I have many friends in such areas; none of them have a "morbid
fascination" as you suggest. They have a passionate zeal sometimes to
correct the wrongs they themselves have suffered.
> or
>at the least have some serious psychological issues unresolved
>concerning men.
Who says they are unresolved? Just because they haven't settled down
and got married to a nice man?
>If there is a problem with a minority of homosexual women, causing
>unnecessary harm with regard to problems such as false allegations,
>then the best people to deal with that problem in my opinoin would be
>other homosexual women.
>
Like the many in the helping professions...
Rosie
who has no "morbid fascination" with sexual misbehaviour but who sure
as dammit will go out to bat for the young women who are abused by
their "uncles" and stepfathers
David McLoughlin
>
> Spade wrote in message ...
> >
> >Our aborial correspondent has, IMO, said it as it is and called a
> >spade a spade.
>
Actually, Rosie confirmed it and gave an explantion of why, which I
thought was a very important post.
David McLoughlin
>
> David McLoughlin wrote in message <38FCF4...@iprolink.co.nz>...
> Really, David?
>
> I think Rosie gave her opinion on the matter, rather than "confirming it".
> Sounds like you agree with what Spade and Brian said but have stopped short
> of writing this.
Pardon? You read too much into it. Rosie was explaining why there are so
many lesbians in the counselling and other caring industries. I had
noticed from my investigations of the Civic case that many of the
interviewers/counsellors/welfare workers involved were lesbians but I
had really not thought about why, nor whether it was more widespread
than just the people involved in this one case. I have no view on it at
all, I just found Rosie's post interesting from a sociological
perspective as an explanation of why people from one group in society
tend to choose a particular kind of occupation.
Jane Allison
Rosie Salas wrote:
Rosie, do you know of any false allegations of sexual abuse where lesbian
women have supported a person making a false complaint of sexual abuse?
David McLoughlin
> Rosie, do you know of any false allegations of sexual abuse where lesbian
> women have supported a person making a false complaint of sexual abuse?
Well Rosie only reads/posts in nzsq which you cut from the newsgroup
line, so if you want her opinion you should post this again crossed to
both groups.
Just to save time I have done it for you.
Jane Allison
David McLoughlin wrote:
Well, I did purposely remove the address of nzsq because the issue is general,
but i won't censure you ... I guess a cup of tea and wait? ...
Rosie Salas
<davemcl...@iprolink.co.nz> wrote:
>Jane Allison wrote:
>
>> Rosie, do you know of any false allegations of sexual abuse where lesbian
>> women have supported a person making a false complaint of sexual abuse?
>
>Well Rosie only reads/posts in nzsq which you cut from the newsgroup
>line, so if you want her opinion you should post this again crossed to
>both groups.
>
>Just to save time I have done it for you.
To answer: Off the top of my head,no.
Rosie
Jane Allison
Rosie Salas wrote:
Rosie, do you know of any false allegations of sexual abuse where heterosexual
people have supported a person making a false complaint of sexual abuse?
Rosie Salas
wrote:
Again, personally or within my recall, no, but this isn't to say I
haven't read accounts in the media.
Why?
Rosie
Jane Allison
Rosie Salas wrote:
You do not know of any false allegations of sexual abuse that you will get clear
about: certainly you do not know of any false allegations of sexual abuse where
lesbian women have supported any person making a false complaint of sexual abuse;
you do not know of any heterosexual people supporting a person making a false
complaint of sexual abuse.
Have a think about this.
Rosie Salas
wrote:
I have no idea what you're getting at here. My original post had
nothing to do with the argument about false allegations or who was
supporting them: I know nothing about that. I was answering the
contention, put in a somewhat hostile way, that "homosexual women"
have a morbid fascination with sexual abuse issues etc. i know that
many lesbians I know have been active in Women's Refuge and Rape
Crisis, as many straight women do, so presumably they may have been
involved with supporting people who made allegations of abuse that
proved to be false. I have no expertise in that sphere, so was not
offering opinion on that.
The point I was making was to do with how most of the lesbians I know
are involved in the helping professions. Which as brazen says, may be
my impression and no one else's, but I was postulating that if it were
indeed that lesbians were a more highly represented there, that could
be because many of them feel strongly about supporting other women
through stuff that they may have had to deal with themselves.
In other words, most lesbians I know have a strong social conscience.
BTW are you the Jane Allison that sings?
Rosie
Brian
On Tue, 18 Apr 2000 21:44:14 GMT, rosie...@clear.net.nz (Rosie
Salas) wrote:
>On Tue, 18 Apr 2000 09:53:45 GMT, bri...@wave.co.nz (Brian) wrote:
>> Why do the child protection industries have a large proportion
>> of female homosexual workers in their ranks?
>>
>> Why do most organisations concerned with sexual misbehaviour
>> appear to be organised and run by females who appear to be
>> homosexual?
> Let's put the question another way:
> Why is it that so many lesbians end up in the helping professions?
>
> It is not just the sexual help, counselling and soforth, it is
> teaching and nursing and generally any profession you can think
> of to do with the wlefare of people particularly women that has
> more than its fair share of lesbians.
>
> It is probably more to do with having some desire to help others
> out of the hole that women often find themselves in through the
> actions of violent or oppressive male behaviour rather than any
> morbid fascination. Lesbians are often women who have got
> themselves out of such holes and have become empowered in the
> process to help others.
Fascinating insights. :-(
(1) Rosie states that lesbians have more than their share of people
interested in welfare, presumably as compared to all males and
hetereosexual women. Her only explanation for this is that lesbians
are often women who have suffered from the actions of "violent or
oppressive male behaviour".
I'm interested in supporting references that indicate that lesbians
are victims of such crime, more than heterosexual women.
(2) I noted that Rosie did not answer negatively my question asking
why most organisations concerned with sexual misbehaviour appear to be
organised and run by females who appear to be homosexual. She has
effectively agreed with the assertion that such organisations have
more than their "fair" share of lesbians.
(3) I was more concerned about the statement of Rosie that the reason
many of these lesbians end up in these positions is because "they have
suffered through the actions of violent or oppresive male behaviour".
Now that may be true, or not, which is a separate issue, but I'm
concerned aboout the rhetoric, in which the fact that *who* they have
suffered from, seems to be as important as the fact that they have
suffered at all.
I have concerns about people who voice their justification for
"helping others" on such a basis. The words provide some indication
that there may be unresolved issues, and that the "helper" is using
her clients for her own needs, and is less capable of providing
objective support.
This I think is a far more serious problem than the issue of the
person's sexuality. Rosie's statements are interesting for providing
some indication that there may be more such "wounded healers" amongst
the lesbian population than there are for example in the population of
hetereosexual women.
(4) The subject of "wounded healers" is an important part of the
jigsaw. Being a "wounded healer" (I've suffered, so I'm going to
use the experience of my suffering to help others), is a very common
sentiment amongst people who have suffered some trauma. In itself,
it is a noble sentiment, but it is also one that can act in both
positive or harmful ways.
The desire to help is the motivation, but what often does not go
alongside that desire, is a willingness, or even an understanding that
there is a very critical first step required to "heal" themselves,
before they can even begin to "heal" others.
And there is often not a willingness, or an understanding of the need
(and often not even a requirement from some voluntary organisations)
to obtain appropriate training and expertise.
Ethically psychologists do not operate in the area where they have
unresolved issues. They are also (often) well enough trained to
recognise issues that they have unresolved, and recognise also that to
have an unresolved issue is no criticism of themselves as people. The
same cannot often be said for many voluntary and semi-professional
counsellors who operate on the basis of a far more limited training
than registerd pychologists.
Just as there is a place for technician engineers to assist and have
responsibilities in the building of roads and bridges, there is a
place for counsellors who recognise their capabilities, but just as
importantly recognise their limitations.
>>You've raised a very difficult subject. To suggest what you are
>>saying, is of course very politically incorrect, and it also walks the
>>fine line with tolerance on one side and sexual bigotry on the other.
>
>I'm afraid it crashes right over that line.
I'm dealing with a subject that has involved a tragedy for hundreds of
New Zealanders, and mainly males .... involving the false allegations
of sexual abuse, and in some cases wrongful imprisonment. These
accusations involve arguably the most serious crime there is ... the
sexual abuse of children. The consequences for people wrongfully
accused, whether or not they are convicted, are horrendous, and your
imagination is probably good enough to imagine what these may be.
What I do know, is that almost all of these cases of false allegations
have a strong counselling component.
You have admitted yourself, that lesbians are disproportionately
represented in this profession.
I have no wish to right any wrong (such as false allegations), by
committing another sin, such as spreading malicious propaganda against
homosexuals, and adding to the bigotry that already exists against
homsexuals in some quarters of the community
On the other hand, the problem is so serious that I am not about to be
intimidated by accusations that raising the issue of female
homosexuality as a subject in the debate about false accusations is
"wrong", and I am not about to be intimidated by by accusations that I
have crashed over the line into an area of sexual bigotry.
This is no topic, where there is any room to be precious.
I have said previously, that if there is a problem with some lesbians
being implicated in the field of false sexual abuse allegations, then
the best people to sort out the problem would be other more rational
lesbians.
I do not expect any group of people, including a group of lesbians,
would wish to defend all the actions of others of their group, simply
based on their common interest .... justice requires a little more
objectivity than that.
>>On the other hand, the subject should not be left for fear of
>>"offence" of those who may be easily offended. The problem of false
>>allegations causes a much worse fate for those so accused than simply
>>being offended.
>>
>>I'm aware of a lot of anecdotal evidence that a high percentage of the
>>staff of child protection industries are homosexual women who either
>>have a morbid fascination with sexual misbehaviour as you suggest,
>
> Corroborate???
Perhaps a better way of looking at the issue, than the anecdotal
evidence that I cannot elaborate further on in this forum, is to ask
what quality assurance, and screening programmes do counselling
services have to screen out people who do have a morbid fascination
with sex, a titillating interest in sex, or have unresolved issues
with regard to their own history?
Organisations such as Scouting, have reacted positively to do whatever
they can to help prevent tragedies of pedophiles being involved and
causing harm to boys.
What have counselling organisations done, to prevent undesirable
people doing harm under the name of "counselling"?
>I have many friends in such areas; none of them have a "morbid
>fascination" as you suggest.
And you would know this how, specifically?
>They have a passionate zeal sometimes to
>correct the wrongs they themselves have suffered.
I have no doubt that almost all have such passion. It is not the
motives that are at issue, or that cause the harm. It is the actual
harm done by incompetents under that name.
Having a worthy cause ...eg "preventing child abuse", is no
justification for all that may be done on the basis of that cause.
The cry is often heard, at least implicitly : "Don't dare criticise
me, because of my worthy cause, and my worthy aims"
I will not attack the cause, but the very problems that I am talking
about are done under the umbrella of such worthy causes.
I have already talked about the problems of people who are act on the
basis of "correcting wrongs they themselves have suffered". Wounded
healers. You have shown absolutely no understanding that being a
wounded healer is even an issue ... you appear to be under the working
assumption that beinga wounded healer is a positive attribute. I
hope that I have explained well enough that it *may* be a positive
attribute, but such people may also be the people who are most likely
to perpetrate serious harm.
>> or
>>at the least have some serious psychological issues unresolved
>>concerning men.
>Who says they are unresolved? Just because they haven't settled down
>and got married to a nice man?
And your comment betrays the absolute lack of understanding that you
have about the issue.
>
>>If there is a problem with a minority of homosexual women, causing
>>unnecessary harm with regard to problems such as false allegations,
>>then the best people to deal with that problem in my opinoin would be
>>other homosexual women.
>>
>Like the many in the helping professions...
Of course. They first have to recognise that there is a problem.
They are the best people to make effective change. But that will
not happen as long as criticism of some, is taken as a criticism of
all.
>Rosie
>who has no "morbid fascination" with sexual misbehaviour but who sure
>as dammit will go out to bat for the young women who are abused by
>their "uncles" and stepfathers
And you closing line says much about where you are coming from.
Your concern is as much about who the abuse is done by, as it is about
any abuse. Specifically a group of me: "uncles and stepfathers".
Your concern is about going out to bat, and there is little about
support.
Your concern is not about people who are abused, but only for young
women.
There is nothing that you have said that indicates that you are any
different from the majority of counsellors, who swarm around the honey
pot, when there is an allegation of sexual abuse ... all wanting to
"help". Morbid fascination? Cheap titillation? Whatever.
If you really want to help ... first go and do something about your
issues of women against men, and maybe whatever you have personally
suffered at the hands of a man, or men. And then come back and
consider supporting victims of abuse ... in general. Your personal
war against men, is quite inappropriate in helping another person with
*their* problems.
Get an education, and understand that your uncritical and emotive
"sure as dammit" batting for young woman, is precisely the reason why
there has been an epidemic of false accusations of sexual abuse in New
Zealand over the last decade.
But when you get that education, do not talk only to men such as
myself who are concerned about the issue... talk to some of the young
women who were given that uncritical and so-called support ... and are
now beginning to retract their false allegations of abuse that were
made, or invented, with the so-called "help" of their counsellors.
Yeah .. go to bat ... for them.
Brian
paraNews
"Rosie Salas" <rosie...@clear.net.nz> wrote in message
news:38fd1c91...@news.clear.net.nz...
> On Wed, 19 Apr 2000 04:39:58 -0700, Jane Allison <jan...@clear.net.nz>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Rosie Salas wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 19 Apr 2000 14:08:26 +1200, David McLoughlin
> >> <davemcl...@iprolink.co.nz> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Jane Allison wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Rosie, do you know of any false allegations of sexual abuse where
lesbian
> >> >> women have supported a person making a false complaint of sexual
abuse?
> >> >
> >> >Well Rosie only reads/posts in nzsq which you cut from the newsgroup
> >> >line, so if you want her opinion you should post this again crossed to
> >> >both groups.
> >> >
> >> >Just to save time I have done it for you.
> >>
> >> To answer: Off the top of my head,no.
> >>
> >> Rosie
> >
> >Rosie, do you know of any false allegations of sexual abuse where
heterosexual
> >people have supported a person making a false complaint of sexual abuse?
> >
> Again, personally or within my recall, no, but this isn't to say I
> haven't read accounts in the media.
>
> Why?
>
> Rosie
>
By way of explanation: Just suppose: if Homo sexual activity of any sort
has been traditionally abhorrent to the average NZ male , then try
reversing this to see if from a lesbian point of view:
What do you think sexual activity between male and female would be like to
a 'hetrophobic' lesbian - I would imagine that all forms of heterosexual
activity would be disgusting to them and it's very plausible that associated
beliefs could cloud ones feelings on any sexual contact between the woman
and the 'animal subhuman male' .
I suspect that they could not could not think of anything worse that could
happen to a female than to have any sort of sexual relations with a male -
now just suppose that this clouding of thinking is pushing society into a
view that all hetero sexual activity is disgusting and should be illegal -
starting with false sexual abuse claims is a good way to move towards this
goal. After all it's not that long ago that homosexual activity was
illegal. Sexual abuse is one area that most people are likely to by
understandably horrified and become so blinded by the considerable
emotions that such a traumatic event can give rise to, that the facts can
and do get ignored. Thus achieving progress in a small way to discrediting
of male and therefore adult heterosexual activity in general -
contributing to the possible objective of outlawing sexual relations
between male and female. And removing males from sight. (That does sound
paranoid! but what if... )
The above is likely to be ill- informed fiction but one I place it here to
promote debate. It would explain some of the more radical "all sex is rape"
views that have and do exist. Such extreame view might look almost normal
in the eyes of a lesbian just as the jsutification for homosexual activity
being illeagal was excepted until reacently by the general population as
being 'right'.
On the subject of false complaints I feel sorry for the two victims of this
process, the accused AND the complainant neither should be used as prawns
in the larger game of political chess.
Jane Allison
Jane Allison
Rosie Salas wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Apr 2000 04:52:02 -0700, Jane Allison <jan...@clear.net.nz>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Rosie Salas wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 19 Apr 2000 04:39:58 -0700, Jane Allison <jan...@clear.net.nz>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Rosie Salas wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Wed, 19 Apr 2000 14:08:26 +1200, David McLoughlin
> >> >> <davemcl...@iprolink.co.nz> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >Jane Allison wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> Rosie, do you know of any false allegations of sexual abuse where lesbian
> >> >> >> women have supported a person making a false complaint of sexual abuse?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Well Rosie only reads/posts in nzsq which you cut from the newsgroup
> >> >> >line, so if you want her opinion you should post this again crossed to
> >> >> >both groups.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Just to save time I have done it for you.
> >> >>
> >> >> To answer: Off the top of my head,no.
> >> >>
> >> >> Rosie
> >> >
> >> >Rosie, do you know of any false allegations of sexual abuse where heterosexual
> >> >people have supported a person making a false complaint of sexual abuse?
> >> >
> >> Again, personally or within my recall, no, but this isn't to say I
> >> haven't read accounts in the media.
> >>
> >> Why?
> >>
> >> Rosie
> >
No, I'm Nancy using a borrowed computer for a few weeks.
You don't seem to know of any false allegations of sexual abuse yet you are writing
responses around the issue of sexual abuse. I'm implying that in New Zealand you
should know of cases of false allegations of sexual abuse, as there are a rather well
known one or two of them now.
I am wondering if you could not admit to yourself that any woman you know might have
made, or in theory some woman you know might make, false allegations of sexual
abuse. I'm sorry if I didn't make the point clear before. Its a bit of a delicate
matter having to specify exactly what I'm getting at.
Alpruneco
concerned aboout the rhetoric, in which the fact that *who* they have
suffered from, seems to be as important as the fact that they have
suffered at all.
I have concerns about people who voice their justification for
"helping others" on such a basis. " writes Brian.
Me, I'd rather learn baking from someone who has experience of baking,
budgeting from someone who knows what it's like to live on the smell of an
oily rag. Like I'd rather be helped deal with abuse in my life by someone
who knew what abuse feels like and hasn't just read about it. If helping me
helps the baker, the budgeter, the Refuge helper, the nurse - great! I
helped a kid with reading difficulties for a while, we both got a lot out of
it. Is that bad? Why do people do Meals on Wheels, because they hate every
minute of it? Helping people makes you feel good. Sometimes you learn
stuff from them. Some people just enjoy nurturing and watching people grow
in strength and wisdom and independence. Good parents are like that but
they are not the only ones.
There are unfortunately more people with problems than fully trained people
can deal with. Yes, you're right, it would be better if everyone in these
helping roles got full training and was helped to get over any issues that
prevented them being as beneficial in their roles as they'd like to be. But
where are the resources coming from?
And what's this crossness about Rosie saying she'd go to bat for young women
who were abused by male rellies? If that's what she knows about and feels
strongly about, why shouldn't she? Shouldn't "young" women in those
circumstances be offered all help? Or only if she seeks out and helps
equally the non-young, who were abused by non-males and non-relatives? Go
criticise somebody who isn't helping old or young male or female, someone
who turns a blind eye to abuse.
So in the meantime what do you suggest? Nobody who isn't fully trained
should help the people who cry out for help? People like Rosie who express
a willingness to help *some* people shouldn't be allowed to unless they help
*all* people? Wouldn't it be okay for Rosie to help the people she wants to
help and knows about and has time to help, and you do likewise. If everyone
who had the time and a bit of kindness helped where they could, it might be
a better world than where those who get involved get criticised for not
solving all the problems at once. Don't bitch at the people who are getting
involved, whatever their shortcomings. Have a go at the ones who aren't
doing anything. If all the unbiased people got involved they'd outnumber
the biassed ones and sweet harmony would prevail.
I'm sorry if you or someone you care about has had a bad experience with
false accusations of abuse. To me you sound like you've had quite a bad
time People do horrid unjust things and hurt the victims and at best waste
other people's time. At worst they create a whole bunch of new victims with
reduced ability to trust others and a lot of harsh feelings that they carry
around for a long time. Sometimes the accusations are part of the accuser's
sickness, stories that have somehow become true enough to convince the
accuser and then the helpers. Sometimes the accusations are pure malice, and
sometimes they are a way for the accuser to shift attention from their own
actions (I was late home because I was taken away in a car...) and then get
a momentum that was never intended. Sometimes.... People are weird and we
often do dreadful things to one another. But please nurture the caring
spirit that leads people to want to help and support each other. If you see
some unsupported, unnurtured kind of people get in and get helping. Show
everyone how to do it well, it'll be more convincing than saying lesbians
ain't right and men get picked on.
Agnes Lovejoy Prune
Michael Wilson
Alpruneco wrote:
> Me, I'd rather learn baking from someone who has experience of baking,
(snipped for brevity)
>
> Agnes Lovejoy Prune
Michael Wilson
Brian
<blue...@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
>"Now that may be true, or not, which is a separate issue, but I'm
>concerned aboout the rhetoric, in which the fact that *who* they have
>suffered from, seems to be as important as the fact that they have
>suffered at all.
>
>I have concerns about people who voice their justification for
>"helping others" on such a basis. " writes Brian.
>
>Me, I'd rather learn baking from someone who has experience of baking,
>budgeting from someone who knows what it's like to live on the smell of an
>oily rag. Like I'd rather be helped deal with abuse in my life by someone
>who knew what abuse feels like and hasn't just read about it. If helping me
>helps the baker, the budgeter, the Refuge helper, the nurse - great! I
>helped a kid with reading difficulties for a while, we both got a lot out of
>it. Is that bad? Why do people do Meals on Wheels, because they hate every
>minute of it? Helping people makes you feel good. Sometimes you learn
>stuff from them. Some people just enjoy nurturing and watching people grow
>in strength and wisdom and independence. Good parents are like that but
>they are not the only ones.
You seem to have missed the "on such basis" in what you have quoted
from me.
I went to what I thought was a great deal of explanation,
distinguishing between the advantages of "wounded healers" (having
knowledge of "what it's like", as you describe), and the potential
disadvantages (those who haven't worked through the issues, and are
using other people's problems as a way to work out their own anger.
You do not seem to have picked up on this.
>There are unfortunately more people with problems than fully trained people
>can deal with. Yes, you're right, it would be better if everyone in these
>helping roles got full training and was helped to get over any issues that
>prevented them being as beneficial in their roles as they'd like to be. But
>where are the resources coming from?
You seem to be implying that anyone is better than nobody.
I disagree.
The scouting organisation has problems with recruiting leaders, but at
the same time has rigorous screening procedures to try and ensure that
tragedies do not occur because of the wrong people that may volunteer.
I ask the same of counselling and other "helping" organisations.
>And what's this crossness about Rosie saying she'd go to bat for young women
>who were abused by male rellies? If that's what she knows about and feels
>strongly about, why shouldn't she? Shouldn't "young" women in those
>circumstances be offered all help? Or only if she seeks out and helps
>equally the non-young, who were abused by non-males and non-relatives? Go
>criticise somebody who isn't helping old or young male or female, someone
>who turns a blind eye to abuse.
Of course *all* people who are making complaints that they have been
abused need support.
Unfortunately they are almost never offered "all help", by many of the
so called "helping organisations" who offer their services. And the
channces of being offered "all help" is almost nil from a counsellor
still personally consumed by anger from what has been done to her.
The help that is provided is almost always *conditional* upon the
complaint being true. Counsellors and angry refuge workers will ooze
out of the woodwork offering their "help" and another opportunity to
vent their anger ...... but the test of that so called "help" and
support" really becomes known, when (some) complainants finally admit
that the allegation was not true. These so called "supporters" are
often shown for what they are in those circumstances ... as people who
really couldn't give a damn about the complainant herself ... but are
really totally concerned about the crime of abuse.
But take a person, who has used the experience of their own personal
trauma (whatever that is) to gain an understanding of the pain of
another person, without reference to their own pain, and I would agree
with almost all you have said.
>
>So in the meantime what do you suggest? Nobody who isn't fully trained
>should help the people who cry out for help? People like Rosie who express
>a willingness to help *some* people shouldn't be allowed to unless they help
>*all* people? Wouldn't it be okay for Rosie to help the people she wants to
>help and knows about and has time to help, and you do likewise. If everyone
>who had the time and a bit of kindness helped where they could, it might be
>a better world than where those who get involved get criticised for not
>solving all the problems at once. Don't bitch at the people who are getting
>involved, whatever their shortcomings. Have a go at the ones who aren't
>doing anything. If all the unbiased people got involved they'd outnumber
>the biassed ones and sweet harmony would prevail.
The argument that you have expressed is the justification for
accepting any help offered. And the help that is able to be given is
indeed useful for many people.
But the analogy that I would use is whether it would be advisable to
only have a surgeon capable of doing knee surgery in a hospital. If
everyone coming through the door was operated on for a bad knee, the
surgeon would make everybody with bad knees very happy .... but for
those with heart problems, others with broken arms, and others with a
spot of measles, the "help" of the knee surgeon, would be very
questionable.
If the "helpers" are incapable of seeing anything beyond the abuse
that they have suffered, then they will do very well with helping
other people who have been abused.
But that blindness to other possibilities was a real factor in driving
the sexual abuse hysteria of the 1990's, and what is becoming
recognised as a witch hunt ... New Zealand following the lead of
America by about 5 years.
>I'm sorry if you or someone you care about has had a bad experience with
>false accusations of abuse. To me you sound like you've had quite a bad
>time
The personal story of any one person, is not so much of a concern. By
any measure there has been an epidemic of false allegations of sexual
abuse in the last ten years, and almost all of these have been
associated with counselling. But the story of any one particular
case, unless it has come to the conclusion of a retraction, is more
difficult to quantify. People who claim that they have been falsely
accused, may very well be lying themselves.
(And interestingly, the typical reaction of counsellors to learning
that the person they have supported has retracted, is one of disbelief
about the retraction. Believe the complainant, it seems, but only as
long as the story is of abuse)
But if you are sorry about the stories of false allegations of sexual
abuse, I hope the sorry is more than the lip service given to that
possibility by too many counselling and "helping" organisations. "Yes
it happens, but....."
>People do horrid unjust things and hurt the victims and at best waste
>other people's time. At worst they create a whole bunch of new victims with
>reduced ability to trust others and a lot of harsh feelings that they carry
>around for a long time. Sometimes the accusations are part of the accuser's
>sickness, stories that have somehow become true enough to convince the
>accuser and then the helpers.
You have the story round the wrong way, for many stories of false
allegations. While it may be comforting to think that all helpers,
counsellors etc, are not capable of causing iatrogenic harm, that is
far from the truth.
The accusations are just as typically invented by the counsellors
themselves, combining the personal anger of counsellors, with leading
questions, greater support for disclosures of abuse than the more
mundane reasons for depression etc, therapeutic techniques that are
now recognised to be of concern.
What you are saying, implies the problems are all in the hands of the
clients of counsellors. "They lied" "They are at fault".
In reality the counsellors themselves are often just as guilty, or
even more guilty than their clients in causing the subsequent
devastation.
>Sometimes the accusations are pure malice, and
>sometimes they are a way for the accuser to shift attention from their own
>actions (I was late home because I was taken away in a car...) and then get
>a momentum that was never intended. Sometimes.... People are weird and we
>often do dreadful things to one another. But please nurture the caring
>spirit that leads people to want to help and support each other. If you see
>some unsupported, unnurtured kind of people get in and get helping.
That's wonderful stuff. I mean that.
What I hope to have described are good reasons why the Pollyanna
approach to "help" can be, and has been, a pivotal reason for an
epidemic of false allegations. An epidemic that came through like a
wave in New Zealand, starting in the first couple of years of the
decade, and to a large extent ending in the last couple of years of
the decade.
If no lesson is learned from this tragedy, we will be condemned at
some stage to repeat the mistakes.
> Show everyone how to do it well, it'll be more convincing than saying
> lesbians ain't right and men get picked on.
Obviously picking on lesbians indiscriminately is just as much a sin,
as picking on any other group in our Society.
But if there is an issue about lesbians, within the context of the
helping professions, then to shy away from discussing the subject will
not in the end help.
When I first replied to a reader who commented on a lesbian
relationship being associated with a case of a false allegation, and
also in reply to questions about the number of homosexual women in the
child protection industries, the hypothesis that I had in my mind, was
that there may be more false allegations against men associated with
such women, because of a lack of empathy or understanding of men.
Rosie's comments raised other possibilities. She made the claim that
the reason why there were more "than their fair share" of lesbians in
the helping professions, was because many lesbians had been abused by
men. Her comments, confirming the early writer's claim that there
are indeed a large number of lesbians in such industries, and that
many have suffered abuse, gives more credence to the possibility that
I have raised that it is not so much the sexuality of the women that
is important, but the problems associated with some "wounded healers"
that is of concern.
Brian
David McLoughlin
> The scouting organisation has problems with recruiting leaders, but at
> the same time has rigorous screening procedures to try and ensure that
> tragedies do not occur because of the wrong people that may volunteer.
>
> I ask the same of counselling and other "helping" organisations.
There is a nasty debate going on now in the US because the Scouts there
have banned gay male Scout leaders for on the grossly misguided
assumption that a gay male is ipso facto a child abuser, which is
absurd, as many studies have shown that most pedophiles are heterosexual
men.
I think it is equally asburd to suggest that lesbians should not be
sexual abuse counsellors. It seems that opposition to lesbians holding
such a job stems from a mistaken belief that lesbians ipso facto hate
men and gravitate to such jobs to "get" men. In my experience none of
the lesbians I know/have met hate men and many quite like men (they just
like women better). That said I do know *of* one lesbian counsellor in
the child-abuse industry who appears to be bitterly anti-men (because
she was allegedly abused as a child) but I don't judge all the others by
what she seems to be like.
I don't think a pedophile of whatever sexual orientation should be put
in charge of a scout troop (or the guides for that matter), nor should a
man-hater of whatever sexual orientation be a sexual abuse counsellor.
One of my biggest concerns with the counselling industry is its complete
lack of requirement for any kind of professional
standards/qualifications and the fact it is driven by the ability to
milk ACC and the Family Court, in other words, the growth in this
industry is almost solely where taxpayer funding has become available in
the past two decades.
Brian
I wrote in the previous post, about the seriousness of the issue of
false allegations, and the role of counselling concerning the issue:
> I'm dealing with a subject that has involved a tragedy for
> hundreds of New Zealanders, and mainly males .... involving
> the false allegations of sexual abuse, and in some cases
> wrongful imprisonment.
> These accusations involve arguably the most serious crime
> there is ... the sexual abuse of children. The consequences
> for people wrongfully accused, whether or not they are
> convicted, are horrendous, and your imagination is probably
> good enough to imagine what these may be.
>
> What I do know, is that almost all of these cases of false
> allegations have a strong counselling component.
Instead of leaving it totally to people's imaginations, I've enclosed
below a quotation which may be helpful in explanation:
The Supreme Court of New Hampshire, USA,
in Hungerford v Susan Jones,
[ U.S. District Court No. 97-657
Joel Hungerford v. Susan L. Jones
December 18, 1998 ]
This judgement spelt out the gravity of the consequences of false
allegations:
"It is indisputable that being labelled a child abuser
is one of the most loathsome labels in society and most
often results in grave physical, emotional, professional,
and personal ramifications.
"This is particularly so where a parent has been identified
as the perpetrator.
"Even when such an accusation is proven to be false, it is
unlikely that social stigma, damage to personal
relationships, and emotional turmoil can be avoided.
"In fact, the harm caused by misdiagnosis often extends
beyond the accused parent and devastates the entire family.
"Society also suffers because false accusations cast doubt
on true claims of abuse and thus undermine valuable
efforts to identify and eradicate sexual abuse.
The court found the public interest was best served by restricting
therapists immunity :
"A therapist owes an accused parent a duty of care in the
diagnosis and treatment of an adult patient for sexual
abuse where the therapist or the patient, acting on the
encouragement, recommendation, or instruction of the
therapist, takes public action concerning the accusation.
"In such instances the social utility of detecting and
punishing sexual abusers and maintaining the breadth of
treatment choices for patients is outweighed by the
substantial risk of severe harm to falsely accused parents,
the family unit and society.
Brian
Brian
<davemcl...@iprolink.co.nz> wrote:
>Brian wrote:
>
>> The scouting organisation has problems with recruiting leaders, but at
>> the same time has rigorous screening procedures to try and ensure that
>> tragedies do not occur because of the wrong people that may volunteer.
>>
>> I ask the same of counselling and other "helping" organisations.
>
>There is a nasty debate going on now in the US because the Scouts there
>have banned gay male Scout leaders for on the grossly misguided
>assumption that a gay male is ipso facto a child abuser, which is
>absurd, as many studies have shown that most pedophiles are heterosexual
>men.
If gays are banned from scouting organisations, or from counselling
organisations, or any other type of organisations, because they are
gay, that is simply bigotry.
I would expect that the percentage of male pedophiles who are gay,
would be the same percentage of men who are gay.
I think that that two high profile cases of false allegations (the
Ellis case and the Edgar case) involving gay men, is partly a
reflection of society (and in particular, police) prejudice against
gays.
That being said, I would question the wisdom of any organisation
employing without a lot of thought any male to provide support to
female rape victims ... and similar other gender qualifications.
Political correctness should not take the place of common sense.
This discussion is treading a line that is not so black and white.
Given that counselling organisations stand indicted as being a
significant factor in the problem of false allegations, then what
factors may be involved in the problem.
I will not ignore any possibilities, even one that falls close to the
edge of bigotry, by questioning the role and the involvement of
lesbians in such counselling groups.
Let us recap some of the discussion. The correspondent, only
identified as "Pinus Radiata <sh...@plank.net>" raised the following
questions:
"Why is it that a lot of women who drop their husbands
for another woman end up accusing the fathers of fiddling
their kids?
"Why do the child protection industries have a large
proportion of female homosexual workers in their ranks?
"Why do most organisations concerned with sexual
misbehaviour appear to be organised and run by females
who appear to be homosexual?
"Do female homosexuals have a morbid fascination with
sexual misbehaviour?
The first question has not been discussed, and I know of no study that
supports such a proposition. Perhaps "Pinus" has some knowledge, or
anecdotal evidence for this, and could refer to this further. The
particular story that he/she commented on involved this situation, but
that should not be generalised.
The second and third questions have been referred to. Rosie made the
claim that the reason why there were more "than their fair share" of
lesbians in the helping professions, was because many lesbians had
been abused by men.
Rosie's statement raises it's own question as to whether more lesbians
than heterosexual women are abused by men, which she implies to
justify her proposition that lesbians are more caring etc, as a result
of their particular traumatic experiences.
In answer to the last question, Rosie did deny the possibility that
this may be a factor.
I am less inclined to dismiss the possibility. Just as scouting
organisations have accepted that men attracted to boys may choose to
become scouting leaders, and have taken steps to prevent that
happening, I suggest that counselling organisations should consider
the likelihood of some people who are titillated by suggestions of
abuse may gravitate to counselling organisations.
To dismiss the possibility is a "head in the sand approach" at best.
Numbers of professional therapists have lost their registration to
practice therapy, because of sexual impropriety. There is possibly an
even greater likelihood that a small minority of counsellors, who are
not subject to rigorous professional screening, may be there for their
own perverted pleasure.
>I think it is equally asburd to suggest that lesbians should not be
>sexual abuse counsellors. It seems that opposition to lesbians holding
>such a job stems from a mistaken belief that lesbians ipso facto hate
>men and gravitate to such jobs to "get" men. In my experience none of
>the lesbians I know/have met hate men and many quite like men (they just
>like women better).
I think the possible reason of being "anti-men" is not likely to be so
valid as the possibility that some are not involved with men
significantly, and have less empathy as a result.
People form beliefs to a large extent based on their own experiences
and the people that they know. Your own statements about your
beliefs about whether lesbians hate men, appears to (possibly!) be
consequential on the lesbians you know, for example.
But even this argument falls away to some extent, when I consider that
both men and women are quite capable of seeking justice about issues
they are not familiar with, when it comes to participation on juries
etc.
>That said I do know *of* one lesbian counsellor in
>the child-abuse industry who appears to be bitterly anti-men (because
>she was allegedly abused as a child) but I don't judge all the others by
>what she seems to be like.
Now you are raising a much more likely scenario, in my opinion, and
one that may have significance based on the contribution from Rosie.
Are a large number of sexual abuse counsellors (lesbian or not) doing
the job, as a consequence of having been abused themselves?
Other readers, such as Agnes and Michael, are strongly of the opinion
that this is only a positive credential and attribute to bring to the
field of counselling. I have attempted to stress that such an
experience may indeed be a positive attribute to helping, but it can
also be a negative factor.
But it still is probably not necessarily a case of being "anti-men".
More a problem of being unable to accept or even conceive of any other
explanation than male guilt ... all as a result of what they have
personally gone through. They are not anti-men, but are strongly
"anti-abusers", and they wear their abuse tinted glasses on, as they
"help"
>I don't think a pedophile of whatever sexual orientation should be put
>in charge of a scout troop (or the guides for that matter), nor should a
>man-hater of whatever sexual orientation be a sexual abuse counsellor.
I personally would like to see all "sexual abuse counsellors" tipped
out on the nearest garbage heap. In their place I would put more
generally trained, (and preferably better trained) people, who do not
put all life's problems down to be consequential on abuse, or at least
capable of seeing alternative explanations which may form part of the
distress of a young woman.
I'm aware of a horror story, where a young teenage girl was treated as
a victim of sexual abuse for at elast a year ... despite the girl
protesting that she had not been. All the counsellors saw were
symptoms that they could only attribute to sexual abuse. If they did
not think, live, sleep, and dream sexual abuse all of their lives, the
counsellors may have been able to better recognise that there could be
alternative explanations.
>
>One of my biggest concerns with the counselling industry is its complete
>lack of requirement for any kind of professional
>standards/qualifications and the fact it is driven by the ability to
>milk ACC and the Family Court, in other words, the growth in this
>industry is almost solely where taxpayer funding has become available in
>the past two decades.
I endorse all that you say here.
Brian
Brian
wrote:
>No, I'm Nancy using a borrowed computer for a few weeks.
I suggest that you go to your options menu, and modify the name
"Jane Allison" to "Nancy". Leave the email address the same.
Your post will then appear as
Nancy <jan...@clear.net.nz>
instead of
Jane Allison <jan...@clear.net.nz>
M...@whatever.com
>
> On Mon, 17 Apr 2000 23:15:03 GMT, bri...@wave.co.nz (Brian) wrote:
> >
> >Sydney Morning Herald
> >15 April 2000
> >
> >'Sorry' to man accused of sex abuse
> >By Bettina Arndt
> >
> < snip >
> >
> >The allegations against Mr Ginges arose as a result of a
> >notification in March 1987 to the Katoomba office of the
> >then Department of Youth and Community services, now DOCS.
> >The three children, Kieran, then aged 10, and his two sisters
> >aged 8 and 4 had already been subjected to a sexual abuse
> >investigation five weeks earlier when they were taken to
> >Westmead Hospital by their mother, Ms Anne Morris, and her
> >partner, Ms Leslye Chenery.
> >
> The mother Ms Anne Morris, and her NEW PARTNER, Ms Leslye Chenery
> falsely accused father of incest.
>
> woman end up accusing the fathers of fiddling their kids?
Obviously they may simply be selfish and deceitful. But, the
bureacracy tends by default to pit women versus men (it's dominated by
feminist wackos).
>
> Why do the child protection industries have a large proportion of
> female homosexual workers in their ranks?
Because those corrupt wackos have an ideology with no basis in
reality. Hence the only way to get their corrupt feminist ideology
manifest in reality is by imposing it in others people lives.
[See also: school sex "education", pregnancy "counselling", compulsory
immunisation, child discipline within the home (this via the social
services gestapo, again).]
Consider: WHEREVER these people are found (in whatever organisation),
they dominate: not People, or even just Women - but Feminists.
Likewise, consider: EVERY mechanism by which these people promote
their ideas is via an undemocratic socialist government agency. It
allows them to dictate to people how to live their lives, which is
what they see as the answer. Clearly no one is asking for what they
are doing - they are merely propogating on social disorder. These
people do not represent children, mothers, women, families, parents...
society. They are simply trying to impose their wacky ideas in other
peoples' lives.
>
> Why do most organisations concerned with sexual misbehaviour appear to
> be organised and run by females who appear to be homosexual?
What needs to be understood, and the reason why it is so corrupting,
is that fundamentally feminism is an ideology which ASSUMES such
dysfunction as the norm. They are happy to assume every kind of
failure in relationships, families, society in general, because
afterall they get to blame men for it - and normal human relationships
appear abnormal to them anyway! Consider the feminist societal
solution to marriage break-up: don't get married. Consider the
solution to irresponsible womanising males: get an abortion.
However, this only empowers those males and promotes more of the same
dysfunction. But since feminists see no human value in what is lost in
the existing situation, they don't care!
Their ideology is simply one of failure and despair. It's completely
empty. Which is why the only people attracted to it are those with
nothing to lose or no capacity to take part in normal human life -
only a need to justify their maladaptive condition.
Feminists are simply corrupt women.
> Do female homosexuals have a morbid fascination with sexual
> misbehaviour?
Because they are sick, corrupt people.
--
Feminists must be purged from society.
Jane Allison
Brian wrote
> I suggest that you go to your options menu, and modify the name
> "Jane Allison" to "Nancy".
I can't see where to do this on the (Mac) menu.