dangerousmeta!, the original new mexican miscellany, offering eclectic linkage since 1999.

The New Yorker: The Sandusky Case - Four Questions, for Starters.

Abusers persuade their victims that they are isolated, that, even if they tell, no one will believe them or care, that they are, in the fullest sense, on their own.” Any organized group dealing with young boys or young men seems to attract these sickos.

I remember one individual we all warned each other about, who was ‘helping’ with our local Boy Scout troop. The troop leaders had been told, multiple times - but a child’s word was not as ‘good’ as an adult’s. The circle of authority closes around the fault, and ends up enabling it. Back then, in the absence of real authority, we kids had the gumption to commit eye-for-an-eye revenge - I somehow doubt today’s kids are quite as devious. [I recall hearing something about a well-concealed rat trap being used.]

Anyone know why 10-year-old kids were interacting with college football coaches? I can’t seem to find any context. My concern is that there’s a homoerotic flavor to the horseplay and social strata around college football players that would create a very ‘lucrative’ atmosphere for a clever exploiter, when young boys are added to the mix. They idealize sports heroes, and will go far for approval.

The whole thing makes me retch. If I’d seen it, I wouldn’t have gone to tell authority. The guy would have been pulp when I got through with him. Then I’d’ve threatened authority with the best son-of-a-bitch lawyer I could find.

11/12/11 • 05:35 PM • ChildhoodLawSports • (6) Comments

Comments:

A time line for work from: http://ccfinlay.livejournal.com/189381.html

Posted by Dan Bowman on 11/12/11 at 06:55 PM

> final paragraph

Damn straight. I can’t figure out why no one interfered or at least said, “WTF are you doing?!?”

Posted by Hal on 11/12/11 at 06:56 PM

A charity for kids. *sigh* Not unprecedented, unfortunately. All the more reason he should be taken out and horsewhipped.

Posted by Garret P Vreeland on 11/12/11 at 07:49 PM

He was still involved with young boys because the chickenshits at his charity refused to step up and remove him. Of course I wonder why it took two plus years from the time the police began a formal investigation until now for any of this to become public so parents would know better than to let him get enar their kids.

Posted by BillSaysThis on 11/13/11 at 05:12 PM

Speaks to modern social isolation, that the kids never shared their experiences between each other - or so I theorize.

Posted by Garret P Vreeland on 11/13/11 at 05:49 PM

Insights to be had about why the boys kept it to themselves: John Bradshaw’s book on toxic shame.  What an eye-opener!

Posted by Evelyn in Iowa City on 11/13/11 at 07:58 PM

 

Leave a comment:

name:

email:

url //:

Your email is not published.
Basic HTML is allowed. Smileys are available, if you're so inclined.

Save personal info (so you don't have to keep entering it)?

Send an email if someone else comments on this thread?

Submit the word you see below:



<< Previous entry: YouTube, Tom Ferguson: Congress for Sale.

Next entry: The Millions: Of Fracking and Franzen - Is Strong Motion Coming True in Oklahoma? >>