Posted on 11/11/2011 6:47:52 PM PST by Hoodat
How does a survivor of sexual abuse respond to students rioting at Penn State?
"You're not getting it. You just don't get it," said Dave Lorenz who was abused by a priest as a teen.
"It's just stupid youthfulness."
Earlier this week, legendary head football coach Joe Paterno was removed in the midst of a scandal involving sexual abuse allegations against a former defensive coordinator, Jerry Sandusky.
-snip-
Watching footage of Penn State students rioting in the streets Wednesday night, Lorenzo shuddered, then hung his head.
What bothered Lorenz is that students "rallied around (Paterno's) house, cheering him up."
"The kids up there just don't understand what this does," he said.
"Stop thinking of the adult and start thinking of what happens to a child that goes through this. You love the adult, you may not know the kid. Start thinking of the kid and the horror they go through, because it's hell."
-snip-
Kayla Garriott, a 22-year-old college student who was sexually abused as a child, said the open support for Paterno was disrespectful to survivors.
"That's the first thing people look at -- that their football team is without their head coach that's been there so many years. Nobody looks at the eight children."
The rioters are "never going to be in those children's shoes. It's not about football. It's about eight children who are never going to get back their lives back. They're going to live with this the rest of their lives. They might not get over that."
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
(I hope you took the sand of your own eyes before you typed that)...
Then another poster will come along and type: Colofornian, I hope you took the sand of your own eyes before you typed that to antceecee)...
And then some poster could address that poster with the same Q.
See how "fun" that never-get-off merry-go-round goes?
Bottom line here is that when you make a statement like that, you imply YOU are the one that has no sand in your eyes, and therefore ONLY your vision is trustworthy.
Come now. Making statements like that is worse than the chain letters people start.
The abuser isn’t getting a pass, he is under indictment.
Paterno is dealing with moral ones.
We are allowed to make moral judgments based on the facts.
That is fact.
The leadership of the institution is guilty.
Paterno did nothing to stop his friend, he just did the least he was required to do to protect himself.
Yes, but he wasn’t good enough to resign, he had to be fired.
These people sound like the defenders of Clinton.
Because it is allowed to continue.
Moreover, McQurry states that he did tell the details to Paterno.
Stop blowing smoke!
#1 Did you see this Friday column from the former sports editor in State College? Ron Bracken: Climate of secrecy led to crumbling of Camelot
What did Ron Bracken conclude as to how long JoePa knew?
"He may not have known what happened prior to 1998 when the first incident involving Sandusky and a child are reported to have occurred but from that moment on he should have been on high alert to the possibility of it happening again."
#2 Barry Switzer said this week that the coaching community is a tight-knit group and that "they ALL" knew. This is actually exemplified by the reality that here, Jerry Sandusky, was THE top defensive coach in the nation...and applied at the University of Maryland and a few other schools after leaving Penn State...yet NONE would take him...tho he was only 55 when he "retired" [more likely "coerced" into retirement]
...2002, at which point he knew that his graduate assistant had seen something. Paterno has said repeatedly that what was told to him was not explicit or detailed, which explains why he would still not be certain what Sandusky was doing.
ALL: Do you think flintsilver can get any more vague than that?
(a) "something of a sexual nature to a young boy" (Joe's testimony before a grand jury) gets "edited" to just "something..."
(b) "fondling" -- a very specific word -- gets spun into "not explicit or detailed"
ALL: Just skip Flintsilver's consistent Grand Jury "edits" and read it yourself...p. 7.
Oh, and btw, Flintsilver:
* When did "fondling" of 10 yo boys become less than a "felony" in your eyes? [Something not worth following up and thru over the months and years?]
* When did "fondling" of 10 yo boys become something that didn't need attention by responsible adults who might protect them?
Even if we grant the "delegation" of Joe lateraling this report to his superiors in 2002. What? This boy (or boys) didn't need protection in '03? In '04?
Are you telling us, Flintsilver, that if McQueary had seen Sandusky BEATING up a 10 yo boy...and came and told Paterno that he saw Sandusky "doing something of a VIOLENT nature" to a 10 yo boy, that this was "something" that wasn't "explicit" or "detailed" enough for Joe to have followed up over the long run?
What? Joe NEVER had ANY opportunity to even follow up that convo with McQueary? What, was McQueary too busy recruiting or workin' with the wide receivers for Joe to get a clarification on ANYTHING over a 6-year period or so?
Why do you and other Paterno supporters keep telescoping an entire relationship into a single weekend?
And, as both McQueary and Paterno realized that the admins were perhaps "stonewalling" any investigation, are you saying that perhaps the most powerful man in Pennsylvania had NO moral influence or could not give directives to an underling to go spend an hour or two or three talking to authorities by 2003, 2004 or so?
Really?
Your arguments are so pathetic that you insult the intelligence of so many others!
The local police were never notified, where are you getting this information from?
Sandusky was dealt with in 1998 in regards to showering with young boys.
And how do you know his wife didn't know?
If Paterno is a messenger, it took 9 years for us to get the message.
And Sandusky had access to the University for all that time.
When Clinton shamed his office, we blamed those who should have known and did nothing and those who tried to defend what he did by making it trival, as well as him.
I don't think Sandusky is doing any laughing now, but he was while his buddy Paterno was in charge.
Facts are unimportant to these people, they are defenders of the evil.
I second that!
You're missing the point, which is that both of them are hanging out in the wind, more likely to get whacked or suicided, before every similar sports program across the country gets exposed to investigation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.