Thanks Woof, sorry about using the term "temper tantrum" bad choce of words. I just got ugly with dude on FB again. I know I shouldn't but couldn't really help it after I read his latest post to another survivor on that same thread. I did decide not to address that individual directly though. I will limit any response to just letting people know that he is a former staffer only interested in continuing his work from Straight. It's not healthy for us to get so pissed, i know thats true but the fact is, I am pissed. There are some things in life which have no gray area. For me, child abuse is one of those things that are Black and White. Either you condone it or you don't. If you condone it then you are evil scum. So to me that cat on FB falls squarely into the evil scum category. Anyway, there I go ranting again, sorry. Shag
Shaggy
No worries in regard to the "Temper Tantrum" thing. Your choice of words wasnt what struck me, it was the accuracy that floored me the most. As I read your post I think it interesting that you "got ugly", but you did so because of his responce to "another survivor". Similarly, my last encounter with with the guy on FB was also a result of his responce directed towards you.
I can only imagine the "guy's" responce to this conversation here. 'They are "cliche'ing"(sp)' or, "They are ganging up, joining forces" or some other inane nonsense. Which of course is silly, I don't even know you in the traditional sense. Our times in Straight Inc. propably differs by as much as a decade. If there would be a "cliche", it would be based on the notion of "Stomp on anothers emotions, experience and actively dismiss them as, less-than"...well, some one is going to call him on the calliousness of his words.
The challenge is whether we (as a group or as individuals) can approach him, without loosing our dignity by writting inflamatory remarks or loosing our "religion" in the process of responding. I think you are absolutely on target when you wrote "It's not healthy for us to get so pissed, i know thats true but the fact is, I am pissed." What we know intellectually, doesnt always match what we know emotionally.
Personally, I like to think of myself as being a well balanced, well rounded, kinda guy. Then next thing I know, I am blasting the "guy", my adrenal glands dump their load into my circulatory system, all the way to the capilary levels dialate, my pupils dialate, and my jaw tightens. Everything about my person is litteraly prepairing for battle.
As a child/adolesent, the flight or fight responce was...all but null and void. There were no real resources or experience in "flight"...no 'street smarts' to enable me to survive. And there was no experience in 'fight'..no 'street smarts' or experience. No defence for the mind fuck we were confronted with. For me, the only option was endurance. Of course, the lesson I walked away with is the knowledge, I am capable of enduring an abnormal abundance of fear, despair and hopelessness. (now there is something to put on a resume).
32 years later, and having gained some of those "street smarts" to prepair for that "fight or flight" responce and honed them with experience. It would be very interesting to me if we all were in the same room, under those same circumstances armed with the knowledge we have since gained. The control they had over us would no doubt be put to the test, and I suspect "they" would fail the test.
I have never looked at the "dude" on FB as condoning or not condoning child abuse in a serious manner, because he refuses to admit their was child abuse during his stint in the DC 'building' (2 years?). This direct contradiction of my experience (to get further along in the program, that is to say one didnt 'cop out', or 'spilt'...one had to be brutal towards another group member) eat or be eaten, kill or be killed was the general rule of thumb. Assuming (giving the benifit of the doubt), he went thru Straight Inc. without intentionally hurting or unintentally hurting another group member...well, strikes me as less than probable. Yet that experience, he adimantly denies and claims only to have had a "blast", and goes one step further, thanking " God, Straight, Staff and some folks that are in this group."
This direct contridiction, real or imagined (mine or his), is the source of irritability and animosity for myself. His blatant dismissal of others experience, runs a close second as a source of animosity. The question that is consistantly thrown in our faces, is one of tolerance. I have be accused of being intolerant, yet the accusation was inaccurate. I understand there are many who for whatever reason, have abstained from drug or alcohol since their time in Straight Inc. Actually, this is more than an 'understanding', I KNOW these folks. Yes, they are 'thankfull', that Straight Inc. interfered/interviened in regard to their personal downward spiral. Yey, they do not dismiss the abuses, the hostile/volatile milieu of Straight Inc. Understand, I respect and to some degree admire these good folks and their accomplishments. But the respect is mutual. They do not discount my experience, nor insult me with waves of arrogance. So, there is a tolerance for those whose experience differs from mine, although the tolerance is not recipricated by this individual.
The people I know that have abstained, are simply happy with their sobriety. And how can I begrudge one of the happiness they have experienced in their sobriety? I can not. Sobriety in and of itself does not suggest one condones Child Abuse, as one who smokes pot does not suggest one condones Child Abuse. As such, sobriety, and for those who 'partake' does not indicate whether one condones Child Abuse or not. I fail to see the advantage of thinking those that Straight Inc steered towards a life of sobriety, as condoning Child Abuse, because my experience indcates otherwise.
So, the B/W thinking, in regard to Child Abuse, isnt, or rather shouldnt be based on those sober, and those that indulge. The boat won't float, the dog won't hunt, the bucket simply doesnt hold water. Ones actions speak as loud as their words. Unfortunately, we can not see one anothers actions using this medium for communication, only their words. Strickly going by this individuals words, there was no abuse despite hundreds of others that simply state otherwise (along with my own direct personal experience). If it is not seen as abuse, there is nothing to refute...in effect, supporting the abuse we all endured. It has nothing to do with his wonderful life, his adoration for his family, his succesful buisiness, but everything to do with the denial of what undoubtably took place around him and quite possibly by him.
Then comes the question of, was he on staff? Is this a "for sure"? Is this a fact? Are their others from the DC 'building' that can verify this as a fact? If it is fact, well, that explains alot! It explains the denial, it explains the dismissal of others experience and it further explains the sense of desperation emminating from his own posts. If he were not on staff, understanding him remains as murky as before.
Much Peace
Much Healing
woof