Theos-Talk Archives (June 1997 Message tl00580)

In message <19970622.230023.8559.0.trr@juno.com>, Tom Robertson
<trr@juno.com> writes
>I don't see the harm that a child can
>be caused in a sexual context if nothing is done against his or her will.

Then you have a lot to learn.  I had a little (all too little) contact
with Tillet (~The Elder Brother~ man) before he died, and there was no
dount that his book would have contained much more explicit material had
not some of his sources chickened out at the last minute.

The possibility - probability even - is that some of "the boys" who
slept naked in CWL's bed were psychologically manipulated by him using
the promise of "spiritual advancement."  It is clear, even from within
Tillet's book, that one man (formerly one of CWL's "boys" in Sydney,
Australia) was severely traumatised by his experiences, and remained so
to such a degee that he remained terrified of being named himself, and
withdrew permission to use diary materials at the very last moment.

Some have argued that CWL did not abuse boys known to them or friends of
theirs. That is not surprising, as I doubt if anyone fancies every other
human being. The records are quite clear that *some* boys were at least
"used" by him, as the parents COMPLAINED after they found out. (The
abuse charge was NEVER concerned with girls: why not?).

If someone tells me (say) that I have two choices; to be slapped around
or murdered, I guess I would truly *want* to be slapped around.  BOTH
options would be against my will.

And addressing a real possibility, a child may well agree to something
sexual being done to it *if it does not know what it is like to
experience the act concerned.*  So the act is done with the consent and
will of the child, and NO HARM IS DONE?

Get real.

AB
---------
THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age:
http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/
E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk