- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Roy wrote:
To me this goes to leadership roulette and the predicament that the church has of having a largely untrained lay clergy and leadership.
This
untrained lay clergyhas immense power in people’s lives when they can control whether someone can or can’t attend a given university, or when they control whether someone is scarred for life for something THEY DIDN”T DO NOR WANTED TO HAPPEN! This whole thread makes me shudder.
I know someone close who was raped. I remember the treatment she received from those who should have loved her, and basically held her accountable for the act. I remember that of her own accord, and early on, aborting the result of that rape inside her. There was no support for her to have the baby, there was no sympathy, and she handled it in her own way as best she could. She was NOT LDS at the time, and there is no possibility in the world that she will ever return to her LDS roots.
Because now she is a murderer as well.
I can’t even imagine the horror a woman would experience if she were rapped, and then became pregnant from that.
Seems like in some situations we are in the business of destroying people.
I’ve read most of the posts on this thread….this thread more than any other makes me shudder because the fallout is immense. People’s lives are destroyed.
[Admin Note]: For anyone who reads this site and doesn’t understand the LDS Church’s official stance on abortion: Abortion is seen as murder by too many members, but it isn’t murder by actual LDS doctrine / policy. In fact, the Church’s official position on abortion leaves the final choice to the mother / parents and explicitly allows for it in the cases of rape, incest, and when the health (not just life, and not just physical health) of the mother is in jeopardy.
Thank you so much for that note, Ray. That is important for people to know. Quote:Right now, though, the Newsroom statement makes it seem like church leadership has simply gone into defensive mode.
Ugh, that article from the newsroom was so tone deaf, as if the church’s PR department was claiming THEY were the real victim here. No, the women who were victimized and then disbelieved and hounded and threatened by BYU’s HCO are the victims.
Old-Timer wrote:[Admin Note]: For anyone who reads this site and doesn’t understand the LDS Church’s official stance on abortion:
Abortion is seen as murder by too many members, but it isn’t murder by actual LDS doctrine / policy. In fact, the Church’s official position on abortion leaves the final choice to the mother / parents and explicitly allows for it in the cases of rape, incest, and when the health (not just life, and not just physical health) of the mother is in jeopardy.
And I do understand that. But from my perspective, I am not sure many of the general members do…like you pointed out Ray.
However,…isn’t there something in the handbook about elective abortion being something that can be disciplined? With some of the discussions happening on this thread, if we are in “blame the victim” mode, its not a big stretch to take it further to the choice of dealing with potential consequences of rape.
For completeness, I’m bringing that up. And, all I am saying is what a horrible way to throw someone to the wolves…its is just wrong.
Elective abortion is generally considered immoral because it’s using abortion as a means of birth control. The simple fact of the matter is that rape means it is not elective. The woman did not have a choice in deciding to have sex. hawkgrrrl wrote:Elective abortion is generally considered immoral because it’s using abortion as a means of birth control. The simple fact of the matter is that rape means it is not elective. The woman did not have a choice in deciding to have sex.
I understand. What i’m saying is if there is a big stigma about rape being the “fault” of the victim because of things like honor code, is there any chance that if the rape results in pregnancy the victim blaming will be carried to the pregnancy as well?
Don’t know the answer to this. But I will say that if it does in ANY WAY lean in that direction, I think it is like throwing the victim to the wolves. I think it is VERY wrong.
About abortion .. My DD had a friend at BYU Provo who was raped. She ended up pregnant. She and her bishop decided on an abortion. The abortion was done in California. My DD and another BYU co-ed both traveled to California to be with her through the abortion. It was done at a Planned Parenthood clinic. The check was written out to Planned Parenthood. The check was from the church. The girl’s bishop wrote and signed the church check.
There is a time and a place for all things.
hawkgrrrl wrote:The woman did not have a choice in deciding to have sex.
Some BYU administrators would like to investigate that first before you make such a sweeping case.:silent: amateurparent wrote:About abortion ..
My DD had a friend at BYU Provo who was raped. She ended up pregnant. She and her bishop decided on an abortion. The abortion was done in California. My DD and another BYU co-ed both traveled to California to be with her through the abortion. It was done at a Planned Parenthood clinic. The check was written out to Planned Parenthood. The check was from the church. The girl’s bishop wrote and signed the church check.
There is a time and a place for all things.
Thank you for sharing this. I believe the same–a time and place for everything.
I am noticing something. In the video link with Elizabeth Smart one of the rape victims was raped by her boyfriend. She later consented to repeated follow-up sexual contact – saying something about “this is my life now.” It sounded to me like she had low self esteem to begin with and almost no self esteem after the first rape – so why bother resisting? This made me realize how messy some of these cases are. What if a woman was in an abusive relationship (maybe he hits her or maybe he just treats her like dirt verbally). The boyfriend is the aggressor and pressures/manipulates/cajoles her into having sex? She feels trapped and the sex happens (even though she didn’t really want it to). Her self esteem plummets and she does not resist follow up encounters because “this is my life now.”
This woman is clearly a victim but is she a victim of rape? Must she remain silent about at least the sexual aspect of the abuse because to speak up would subject her to scrutiny, ostracism, and possible official punishment? How can she get help? How can the church, the bishop, BYU, and the honor code office respond to this?
Roy wrote:I am noticing something. In the video link with Elizabeth Smart one of the rape victims was raped by her boyfriend. She later consented to repeated follow-up sexual contact – saying something about “this is my life now.” It sounded to me like she had low self esteem to begin with and almost no self esteem after the first rape – so why bother resisting?
This made me realize how messy some of these cases are. What if a woman was in an abusive relationship (maybe he hits her or maybe he just treats her like dirt verbally). The boyfriend is the aggressor and pressures/manipulates/cajoles her into having sex? She feels trapped and the sex happens (even though she didn’t really want it to). Her self esteem plummets and she does not resist follow up encounters because “this is my life now.”
This woman is clearly a victim but is she a victim of rape? Must she remain silent about at least the sexual aspect of the abuse because to speak up would subject her to scrutiny, ostracism, and possible official punishment? How can she get help? How can the church, the bishop, BYU, and the honor code office respond to this?
OK…for those of you out there who have been bishops and such,…..when a court of
loveis held on a woman, is she allowed to have other female’s present with her during the proceedings? And, have any of you ever known of situations where another woman was consulted BEFORE action was taken for such drastic measures like an excommunications? Also, are there any rules to limit the depth of discussion during the proceeding so the woman isn’t required to describe what happened “in detail”? I ask because I know a woman who was exed at the stake level, and she was required to tell, “IN DETAIL” what she did. She felt like it was a room full of dirty-old-men who were enjoying the recitation. She felt mortified and utterly violated through the court.
I’m just curious….
Rob4Hope wrote:Roy wrote:I am noticing something. In the video link with Elizabeth Smart one of the rape victims was raped by her boyfriend. She later consented to repeated follow-up sexual contact – saying something about “this is my life now.” It sounded to me like she had low self esteem to begin with and almost no self esteem after the first rape – so why bother resisting?
This made me realize how messy some of these cases are. What if a woman was in an abusive relationship (maybe he hits her or maybe he just treats her like dirt verbally). The boyfriend is the aggressor and pressures/manipulates/cajoles her into having sex? She feels trapped and the sex happens (even though she didn’t really want it to). Her self esteem plummets and she does not resist follow up encounters because “this is my life now.”
This woman is clearly a victim but is she a victim of rape? Must she remain silent about at least the sexual aspect of the abuse because to speak up would subject her to scrutiny, ostracism, and possible official punishment? How can she get help? How can the church, the bishop, BYU, and the honor code office respond to this?
OK…for those of you out there who have been bishops and such,…..when a court of
loveis held on a woman, is she allowed to have other female’s present with her during the proceedings? And, have any of you ever known of situations where another woman was consulted BEFORE action was taken for such drastic measures like an excommunications? Also, are there any rules to limit the depth of discussion during the proceeding so the woman isn’t required to describe what happened “in detail”? I ask because I know a woman who was exed at the stake level, and she was required to tell, “IN DETAIL” what she did. She felt like it was a room full of dirty-old-men who were enjoying the recitation. She felt mortified and utterly violated through the court.
I’m just curious….
In my experience at both the ward and stake level the “rules” are the same for men and women – they are generally alone in the meeting (which is a council, not a court). Both the bishop/SP and the accused can have “witnesses” but in my experience with several of these at both levels there has never been a witness (which is probably because most people got there by confessing). IIRC, “character” witnesses are specifically excluded – that is to say, there is no necessity for speaking to the good character of the individual. I will also say that the level of detail is probably a matter of leadership roulette. On the most recent one in which I was involved the accusation was adultery (the individual confessed and admitted it but had been caught in the act by the spouse) and we were told little else about it except that the individuals met at work and much of what happened was also at work. There were no other details relating to exactly what happened or how often except it was several times over the course of several months.
[Admin Note]: Court of Love is NOT the correct name for disciplinary councils, and it is used generally now as a mocking term. Let’s not use it here. Oh how I wish BYU would say SOMETHING about progress of the committee looking into title IX/ Honor code office. The silence after several months does not bode well. I do hope they say something before school gets started later this year.
I still feel the longer they wait, the more people will come out and more bad press will follow. Now the feds are looking into this
Federal investigation into BYU’s handling of sex-assault reportsAnd if that isn’t bad enough press for BYU today, they also have what could be some bad news for the sports team
http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2016/08/09/lgbt-groups-urge-big-12-to-pass-on-adding-byu-to-conference.html ” class=”bbcode_url”> http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2016/08/09/lgbt-groups-urge-big-12-to-pass-on-adding-byu-to-conference.html I have heard stirrings from more that one that they think something is brewing with reversing the November policy. I don’t know if items like the above makes the leadership dig in their heals more to resist looking like they are caving in, or the pressure will move things along quicker.
I was glad to read in the article that an amnesty clause is on the table. Other than that I agree with LH – some news would be nice.
- The topic ‘Sexual assault and its aftermath at BYU’ is closed to new replies.