'Abuse' What Does It Mean To You?

[Khandro]

In no way do I wish to condone the Archbishop's silence, but I was amazed tonight listening to the man who had instigated his downfall, being introduced as someone (forgot his name) who, as a child had been 'abused'.

Images of dreadful acts being being perpetrated on him of a sexual nature when he was a child sprang to my mind.

However, after listening to his suffering for 5 minutes he related how he was 'beaten', he said he was now 60ish.

As a child at Manchester Central Grammar School I was 'beaten' like all the other little swines quite often - deservedly so, and think nothing of it.

When we young rogues and reprobates were in need of chastisement we were sent to the study of the Headmaster, - (a Dr de la Perrelle) and were caned on the ***, (we used to stick blotting paper down our trousers before entering the room).

I think nothing of it, though this current episode has now reminded me. We were also 'strapped' frequently on the palms of our hands with a leather strap which I can still see, bearing the initials M.E.C. (Manchester Education Committee).

Later, rules came in that corporal punishment was  forbidden, something though which went back through Dickens' Victorian England & way further - even to Buddhist Zen Masters slapping the faces of their grateful novices.

I'm not condoning it, but was I 'abused' and was ignoring such abuse worthy of bringing down the Archbishop of Canterbury ?                        

 

 

 

 

[barry1010]

He did more than touch a girl's bottom.  In court he admitted to grabbing two women by the crotch, very different from touching a bottom, don't you think?

[DDIL]

Barry, I was just looking up what he did, absolutely not just a 'touch on the bottom or knee'

[drmorgans]

 

A Sky article says he was arrested after a boy died in Zimbabwe, no charges were made, and he moved to South Africa:

https://news.sky.com/story/who-was-john-smyth-the-barrister-at-the-centre-of-the-church-of-england-abuse-cover-up-13252818

 

[Khandro]

Please understand, I'm not in any way wanting to exonerate John Smyth, but I think we need a clearer definition of what is meant by assault, and as I said in the OP, the man who brought about the accusation was talking only about a beating he had received, without mention of anything of a sexual nature.

Maybe Welby wasn't sure, though if he wasn't he should have made certain.

[Hazi-Hammenuhoth]

One of John Smyth's victims wrote a book about him years ago, which I read- there was a lot more too it than caning- this man was a sexual abuser, prolific and is responsible for at least two deaths, one in this country, one in South Africa.  The scale of his abuse is detailed in the book.  Welby knew about this years ago, and yes, it was abuse.

[Hazi-Hammenuhoth]

It makes for horrendous reading, but will leave any reader in absolutely no doubt this was abuse.  It's called "Bleeding for Jesus" by Andrew Graystone.

[jackthehat]

They were habitually beaten until they bled and Smyth provided them with nappies to wear to soak up the blood.

He had a sexual interest in the boys and it gave him sexual gratification to inflict pain and humiliation of these vulnerable children.

A monster who was enabled by those who should have known better.

[Khandro]

I agree with ^^ but I think a different definition than 'abuse' is required in law.

[naomi24]

I don't understand what you're getting at, khandro.  The term 'abuse' covers a multitude of sins - literally.   Why complicate it?

[Untitled]

i agree with naomi's point about cruelty but would add that neglect is also a form of abuse... indifference to somebody's suffering and their needs especially when they are a dependent or vulnerable person

sadly i think abuse of children is a lot more common than one might think

[Khandro]

naomi; //I don't understand what you're getting at, khandro.  The term 'abuse' covers a multitude of sins - literally.   Why complicate it?//

It is the use of the one word for widely different things which is causing the confusion.

Actually words do exist; I suggest they are used to differentiate, so we know clearly of what we speak, they are;  'corporal punishment' and 'sexual abuse'.

[Untitled]

i would speculate that some people who are beaten when they are children might develop some very harmful traits e.g.

supine and deferential attitudes toward those in authority, especially "strongman" figures

sadistic delight when other people receive punishment from said authorities

conviction that those on the receiving end of violence from the authorities must have deserved it

sound like anyone you know?

[naomi24]

It doesn't confuse me, khandro,  My post at 08:25 Wed explained why.  For the purpose of clarity charges of abuse usually carry an explanation anyway.

[jackthehat]

khandro - Corporal puishment, which seems to be viewed as  benign physical inconvenience often tips over into abuse.

Smyth would contend that he was dishing out the former, where it is patently obvious that he was inflicting the latter.

[Khandro]

naomi; Please read again the opening two paragraphs of the OP.

Would it not have been clearer if he had said he suffered corporal punishment - like several of us did on this thread?

btw.  'Corporal punishment was prohibited in all state-supported education in 1986. The prohibition was extended to cover private schools in England and Wales in 1998, in Scotland in 2000, and in Northern Ireland in 2003.'

[fiveleaves]

What Smyth did was plain sadistic abuse. Absolutely nothing like corporal punishment in schools before the 80s. It doesn't take a genius to spot the difference.

Also he had absoutely no authority whatsoever to these beatings. It was totally illegal.