TruthOT, I notice that you didn't respond to the bulk of my post, just the bit at the end.
Do you have any response to my other points and questions:
1. in the long-term it's possible, according to statistical evidence, that she suffered psychological harm. We don't know, and we'll never know. But you claiming that she definitely didn't seems to be wishful-thinking.
2. you haven't cited a single source to support your position. You cite your childhood experiences, and your parental experiences, and you've freely expressed your opinions, as you did just there. Whereas plenty of evidence has been presented to support our point of view. Have you read any of it? Do you have any counter-evidence?
3. if you as a seven-year-old had been sent to talk to a school-counsellor for some reason, and you told her what was going on in your life... ... then that counsellor would have done something about it. They would be legally obliged to do something about it.
The whole situation was abusive in a number of ways; the older children were abusing the youngest by forcing them to fight; the middle kids were abused by being intimidated into collusion; animals were being abused by torture. And everyone involved was being abused by neglect, by being allowed to run wild.
Do you agree, Truth OT? Do you agree that this was a situation that parents and other authorities would have wanted to know about, so that they could do something about it?
If your little nephew was involved in such a situation right now, would you want him to ask you for help? And would you help him if he did ask you? And would you whip him?
Those aren't rhetorical questions.
Maybe I was jaded or perhaps just arrogantly overconfident, but truthfully, I never told because I didn't feel telling was necessary
Hard to believe, Truth OT. You just said:
I was always confident that I could bring any worries or concerns to my moms,
Are you telling us that you had no concerns or worries about what you were all doing? Are you telling us you didn't know it was all very wrong?
Of course you knew it was wrong; that's why you concealed it from your parents. That's why you all concealed it.
Please understand that I am not intending to criticize your actions; you were a little boy out of his depth, doing his best to survive an awful situation. What I'm exploring is the dynamics which allowed that abusive situation to persist. And part of that dynamic is that none of you asked for help from an adult.
BTW, who likes tattletales and whistle blowing snitches?
And this nonsense is part of the dynamic. Obviously children shouldn't appeal for help in every incidence of wrong-doing - sometimes they can work it out for themselves. But in the case of serious wrong-doing, such as setting dogs on fire, talking to an adult is the right thing to do. And any child that does should be praised for it.
I never wanted to be that dude as it comes across as whiny and incapable of handling one's own affairs.
You didn't 'handle' that situation, Truth OT. 'Handling' it would have meant stopping it, which is what responsible adults would have done. But you were helpless to stop it, so you colluded with it in order to survive. You pretended that torturing animals to death was 'fun', even though it was nauseating. You joined in the bullying of your younger bothers and cousins - (the same siblings that later spent significant time in prison, I wonder?) - and felt guilty inside, because you knew it was wrong.
The correct way to 'handle' it would have been to ask for help. Yet you rejected that option, in spite of your assertion that you could always share your worries with your mom.
For you to assume that I ever feared my father is an incorrect and flat out wrong assumption. Reel that in homegirl.
Why so indignant? You've said several times in this thread that fear is an essential component of the parent-child relationship e.g. CG, I expect my kids to have a healthy fear of me.
So it seems reasonable to assume that you feared your parents - particularly as you admitted that in your childhood whipping was sometimes "overused and administered unnecessarily
And to go back to the central argument, you admitted there that on at least some
occasions in your childhood, your parents deliberately inflicted pain on you unnecessarily
. How is that not physical abuse?
My upbringing helped mold me into a well-rounded, adaptable person.
I'm sorry, but I disagree.
1. You have rigid views on gender roles; in one thread you admitted being 'bothered' by men who don't act like real men, and described yourself as homophobic.
2. You think that the state-inflicted torture is permissible in some circumstances, e.g. in war-time
3. You think that the state should be able whip/beat criminals.
4. You think that the state should be able to castrate convicted paedophiles and rapists..
5. You think that appropriate authorities should be able to whip/beat children.
I don't call that well-rounded. I call it a worrying authoritarian fixation on the deliberate infliction of physical pain, and some rather conflicted feelings about sexuality.
Which is also odd, because in another part of your mind you also profess to be a libertarian who dislikes authority on principle:
But on a more serious note, why is it that libertarian ideas are considered as "chaotic evil?" The way I see it is kinda like this: 1. I don't want some authority dictating to me what I can and cannot do. In other words, I am a rational, capable, able-bodied adult that means my neighbor no harm, so leave me the hell alone.
So you want the State to leave people the hell alone, but you want the State to castrate people in certain circumstances?
I said it before, Truth OT, your views are extreme.
And somewhat contradictory.