Not all tickling is abuse, but some cases certainly are.
From here: http://www.geocities.com/HotSprings/Spa/1109/behavior.html
“How can something that is fun possibly be abusive? Most times tickling is fun, but is it still fun when the adult refuses to stop the tickling? Children have been tickled by adults or teens who are much stronger until they cry, become hysterical, or lose bladder control–all humiliating experiences for the victim. Children who can’t escape this treatment often experience nightmares for years. Tickling is not considered abusive, until it’s carried to extremes.”
From here: http://www.ivillagehealth.com/experts/emotional/qas/0,,242102_150620,00.html
“Continuing any behavior that causes pain or discomfort to an individual – child or adult – despite pleas to stop is abusive. Tickling may sound like an innocuous activity, and indeed it can be fun and harmless if it’s engaged in voluntarily. But it’s clear from your description that what both your younger son and you experienced was painful and distressing.”
OK, now these statistics are starting to jive with what I have see of the world. According to these kind of ideas, 90% of people with older siblings would be abused.
Okay, you’ve given descriptions of acts that are noticeably causing discomfort or distress. That seems to me to be qualitatively different from acts that seem innocuous, don’t feel bad, and are forgotten.
On the other hand, anyone with a family, or as flight says, older siblings, is going to experience some distressing or upsetting or cruel behaviour. Is all such behaviour to be categorised as abuse?
And even if it is, the descriptions of abusive tickling don’t seem to me to constitute sexual abuse.
[QUOTE=AHunter3]
Dunno about porn stars, but I recall seeing some quantitative evidence supporting the connection for prostitution. Not as strong as the connection to drug abuse and “cutting” (self-inflicted non-lethal injuries such as wrist slitting or maceration of the abdomen) but statistically significant.
I think the point is that children sometimes run away from abusive family environments, and runaways are often forced into prostitution. So, yes, many prostitutes were abused as children.
However, sometimes grown ups choose that line of business because it appeals to them. I can’t see that having been abused would influence their decision.
For that matter, does it count if the causation is abused=run away from home=destitute, desperate and vulnerable=prostitution? I don’t know how much of a factor that chain is, but it must contribute something to the statistic.
That’s because you are ignorant and shoot from the hip. Before you respond to a question or post one, you should first do some research. Most 99 to 100% of prostitutes were molested – I don’t know what is meant by molested as children, as that is the only way one can be “molested.” The Trauma associated with incest/molestations drives the survivor to replay the indent(s) in order to understand and make sense out of a traumatic experience.
Jdepp, why can’t adults be sexually molested? Also, do you have a cite for your figures? I find it difficult to believe that all prostitutes were sexually abused as children.
ETA: Chronos beat me to it. Are you indeed the god of time?
Perhaps being molested takes the edge off of it. For instance, the could say, “no point in saving myself since I’m not a virgin anyway.”
A large part (if not almost all of it these days) is drugs. The dealers give you free drugs get you hooked and boom how else do you get money for the drugs once the dealer cuts off the free drugs. You go to work for your dealer.
How good are memories of people who are all drugged up anyway? Are they going to be looking for reasons to justify what they did. I mean geez I do it with a cake. I ate the cake cause it was looking all delicious at me
If one can find an excuse to justify eating too much, you can bet someone would want to find a reason to justify being a prostitute.
I think the danger is in back measuring.
You’d really have to find people that were molested as children and follow them forward in life.
I can believe most prosititues were molested as kids. But I can also believe most pilots probably liked to fly as kids or most soliders in the army liked to play war as kids or most models liked to dress up as kids.
That doesn’t follow that all kids who play dress up will be models or all kids that play war will be soldiers or all kids that like to fly will be pilots.
In these types of discussion it usually comes down to arguments between the perspectives
“If practically everything related to talking, touching and sexuality in childhood is somehow tantamount to “sexual abuse”, then nothing is abuse. The abuse definition filter in these studies is absurd.”
and
“There’s lot of abuse people keep hidden” and “Who are you to say what is abuse and what is not. If professionals define an activity or action as abuse I trust their judgement more than I do yours.”
In various candid interviews I’ve read with porn stars over the years, it was suprising to me how many said (when questioned) that were not molested or sexually traumatized as children, but generally made the porn choice almost 100% because of the big money they could make, and for a lot of them that lifestyle led to drugs.
I’m not a prostitute or a porn star, but I was raped as a kid, so here’s how I can *imagine *the thought process going:
Sex isn’t sacred. Sex is sex. It’s a physical activity shared by two or more people. I like sex. I may even be good at it. If I was good with my hands, I could get a job as a carpenter. If I was strong, I could use my body and get paid to move furniture. If I ran fast, I could use my body to get paid as a runner. If I wanted to, I could get licensed as a massage therapist, physical therapist or nurse, and make people feel better by touching them with my hands. Why on earth shouldn’t I get paid to use my body to give someone pleasure with my mouth or cunt?
It’s the first sentence that kicks things off, and that you’ll have the hardest time getting “normal” people to agree with, even if they are not religious. Even atheists in our culture still have the sense that there’s something extra special about sex, that is should be shared only with someone you love, that it’s something that should only be shared for the pleasure of it and not made monetary.
But if your early experiences with sex aren’t in the context of a romantic, consensual relationship, then you have two options: you can believe that sex is sacred and beat yourself up for violating that sacredness (or allowing that violation to occur), or you can conclude that maybe sex isn’t sacred at all. If sex isn’t sacred, why *not *get paid for it?
And that’s a huge load of crap when they say that. They say that because it’s better for them and for the industry financially to say that. I have seen interviews with former porn stars who said that their studios basically told them to always publicly deny any sexual abuse no matter what. The audience doesn’t want to know that they’re jerking off to a girl who was raped whn she was nine. They want to hold onto the complete and utter fantasy that some women are just “really sexual,” that they just sincerely love doing 10 man anal gangbangs, and that they’re completely healthy and happy doing what they’re doing. Bullshit.
I’m all for porn, and think prostitution should be legal, but they’re’s no denying that most women don’t end up in the sex industry if nothing ever happened to them as children.
This is a false dichotemy. Sex isn’t sacred, but it IS intensely intimate and personal for most people (women especially), and it isn’t emotionally or socially normative to do it for money, do it in public and do it with strangers. People don’t arrive at those kinds of behaviors organically. It’s not like being a carpenter, don’t be ridiculous. And people who haven’t had the experience robbed of emotional connection, intimacy and love are not making it “sacred.”
A number of these interviews were alternative newspaper type interviews and were done well after the porn star’s porn career had been over for quite some time, so I’m not sure I entirely buy into the “studio pressure” explanation. Beyond this if it was for the audience to like them they wouldn’t say “it was all about the money”. Being greedy and grasping doesn’t make you any more sexy than being abused.
Even in indy papers, sexual abuse isn’t a wound that most people want to open up. It’s a lot easier to say it was about the money, even the money isn’t usually enough for most women. Something else was already going on for them to have been ok with making money that way.
Nobody said that the money would be enough for most women. In fact, the hypothesis that the money isn’t enough for most women would neatly explain the observed fact that most women aren’t porn stars.
All women certainly, there are tons of women with killer bodies, who love sex and who would never be porn stars, but I would submit there probably “a” women (or two) out there who has a great body, is not sexually shy, looks at her alternatives and decides making 6 figures a year as a porn star is better than working at McDonald’s.
