Well said. People are gonna think what they want to anyway.

yep yep!

I don't think it's closed-minded to not want to read that book! I've never read it, I never will, I'll never see the film. Eroticizing children is WRONG.

There are gray areas - some people might think profanity is wrong, or certain types of music, views about political issues, or whatever. In those cases, you are free to choose what you want to believe, and hopefully you are open to what other people think.

But there are other things that are just WRONG. I don't need to see or experience it to know that it's wrong. I don't have to see snuff films to know they're wrong, and I don't think it's closed-minded at all. Why support something that's inherently wrong?

I'm probably more closed-minded than you are anyway!

I agree! At some point you have to draw the line.

that's !@#$ing ridiculous that someone is calling you closed-minded.

i could just repeat everything you've said here because that's what i'd say, but i don't want to be redundant. I'll save that for my own journal.

thank you dahling, you made me feel so much better. ;-)

I would just like to say that I never once asked you to read the book. I offered to share an unbiased opinin(not specific details) of the book with you, once I had read it. I never said that my opinion had to "sway" you. I just thought that you would be open to me sharing my opinions. Clearly, you aren't. And like I said in my post...that's fine...I don't condemn you for it. I made the effort, and you declined. It was an OFFER. Not an instance where I tied you down and forced it down your throat. Like I said in a comment during the original discussion, like you, I know someone who has been molested. I know several people. We just have different ways of handling our individual situations. You had every right to express your opinion. You have done so, and so have I. So I guess that's the end of it.

for not wanting to read the book 'Lolita' or hear anything about it

it was the "or hear anything about it" part that relates to what you said. I am fine with you sharing your opinions, of course -- but talking about that particular book is not something I am at all interested in. And it has nothing to do with being 'closed-minded,' which is what I was getting at. It is not 'closed-minded' to not want to talk about one specific book. I'm fine with the topic -- NOT fine with the way it is handled in that book. I posted this because this is my opinion of what it means to be open-minded -- and 'cause I think that me not wanting to read or hear about one book while you do does not make you more open-minded than me. It simply means that we differ in this area. I am sure that there is something that I am interested in that you would not be interested in -- and I wouldn't consider you less open-minded than me because of it.

I'm not angry at you, I just wanted to express my reasoning.

and the reason I posted this in my journal rather than in yours is partly because you were not the only one to insinuate that I was 'closed-minded' about this, and partly because I like to note when I learn something new. Because of the teeny clash I had with you (and others) over it, I developed a new point in my definition of open-mindedness.

I remembered your last post and remembered their being only 4 comments. So when I went to look back I was surprised to see 99!! Honestly, I can see where the opposition is coming from and they made good points, BUT damn, you made it more than clear that you didn't want to read the book and why you didn't want to read the book. Why all the big hoo-ha? It's a sensitive subject for you and people should respect that.

Thank you, I appreciate the support. ;-)

Well ya welcome! I don't where people get off trying to tell you it's a good book and you should accept that. You don't like how the book was written, I find it disturbing, and so people shouldn't be flipping out when we disagree.

my only concern about this is that you're talking about something you've never read. I know sexual abuse is a big issue with you though, so I understand.

the book is not pro-pedophelia though.

well, I haven't actually read the book, but I have read a pretty detailed description of it, and quotes from the book. I know that it comes from the mind of the perp and that it uses poetic language to describe the perp's lust for the victim. I understand that it includes the results, descibing how the girl's life is destroyed, but that is not enough, in my mind, to counter the effect of vicariously living as a child molester. I don't think that it is pro-pedophelia, but I also don't think that it is positive at all.

You don't need to eat a whole plateful of something to know that you don't like it -- one taste is enough when that one taste makes you nauseated.

I thought I should add that in my other comment I wasn't suggesting that you read the book. I agree that the content would probably offend you greatly, given your experiences with abuse. I was just pointing out that even though pedophelia is (arguably) the subject of the book, it isn't glorified - a big chunk of the book deals with the grim aftermath.

the reason oprah (it was oprah, right?) called the book important is probably because it brought the subject out into the open, that's all.

I appreciate you rephrasing out of care for my feelings. Thank you. ♥

no prob. *hugs*

As a slightly abstract opinion (I haven't read the whole thing myself, it just doesn't keep my interest and isn't to my taste) that is very to the point, I feel that the book actually discourages pedophillia and molestation (it is about the former but not so much about the latter). I think that the consequences for everyone involved in that story are probably pretty realistic and none of them seem to be good.

However with that said, if you strip the book to it's essence it's basically about the negative aspects of desire, about letting desire control you/go too far etc. So considering that and your background I don't necessarilly see it as being beneficial to you in particular or to sexual abuse victims in general.

Anyway I hope you'll enlighten me on something that I've pondered for some time. Generally speaking from a psychological point of view, if something bothers a person it's best to get it out in the open, to work at getting accustomed to it, in other words to deal with it. In my personal experience and to my minorly educated knowledge that should hold true to anything so should it not be true of your own experiences? I realize that they are very painful but since everyone deals with pain differently it's even possible for a particularly sensitive individual to have been hurt more by being slapped by their mother one time than some people are by protracted sexual abuse. I realize that sounds a bit preposterous but I can assure you that people are so different that it's indeed so. The point I'm trying to make there is that I don't think the source of the pain should dynamically change the way that the pain should be dealt with.

I only say this since even though I can understand your desire to not be hurt unnecessarilly by things I think that the time is past when it's a good idea to try and hide yourself from that which might hurt you. Instead you should work to rise above it and not let it bother you anymore. Or so I think. That's getting to it more directly though, the method for treating sexual abuse victims might be a bit more roundabout and subtle, it's not my field of expertise. In case your curious my expertise is dreams and withdrawal, I had hoped to be a counsellor specializing in social withdrawal syndrome and the like but it turns out that's probably not the path for me. I remain a busybody who approaches things with psychology and personal logic though as you can see.

the time is past when it's a good idea to try and hide yourself from that which might hurt you

I'm not hiding, I assure you -- I am quite willing to approach the issue in other, healthier manners. I don't need to read that particular book. I read others that are NOT written from the point of view of the perpetrator. I really don't think that living vicariously as a child molester is positive in any way. If I was hiding, I would never have brought up the subject of that book -- I would have blocked it out of my mind immediately. I do indeed work to rise above it, and have been for some time. I was able to continue the argument from an intellectual perspective when last year I would have just deleted all comments and disabled them because I wouldn't have been able to handle it.

And sexual abuse IS a whole different world than any other form of abuse. In most things, yes, one slap could hurt one child more than a hundred slaps hurt another, but sexual abuse is different -- it's destructiveness reaches much farther than any other. I am not just saying that out of opinion, professional therapists say it's so.

Well I didn't put that whole thing well sorry. I didn't mean you were hiding to not read the book, as I said (I think?) I don't really see any reason for you to read the book. I meant that to not want to hear what other people had to say about it (which you seem to be doing now anyway whether you had wanted to or not so I'm really mooting out tonight but anyway) seemed like hiding to me.

Well, I can recognize that sexual abuse affects a person on many levels so it doesn't seem far fetched that it's worse/harder to deal with. But nonetheless is treatment of that issue really that different from others? I might look into it if I have the oppurtunity, alas that it was just when we were getting to diagnosis and treatment in school that I dropped out otherwise I might have learned about such things already and had something better to say.

Anyway I can't remember if I said it before but I do really respect your efforts in dealing with your past I am just... Harsh? Critical? All or nothing? Pushing things to the edge? Something like that. Ah "forceful" was the word I was looking for in particular. Anyway I'm sorry about that but the world is a weird place so even people like me have a time and a place sometimes. Perhaps moreso the way I deal with things is different from others and I seem to have forgotten that not many people can handle living the way that I REALLY do (as opposed to how I say I do or seem to, that's less about intentional deception than how hard it is for me to convey certain things).

Alright well I'd better go to bed and actually I'd imagine that you should too so let me wish you pleasant dreams. Also if it is not too much to ask I would appreciate it if you said a prayer for me since I seem to be losing sight of god and frankly everything else right now. I'm not sure if you've kept up with my journal lately but I'm waiting for the results of a biopsy on my mouth to tell me if I have cancer there or not (meh I didn't even think about the fact that I could still have it somewhere else until now... damn). And even if I don't the benign disease I have there is more or less incurable (I think it can go away on it's own and also go dormant but there's nothing that can get it to go away without causing worse problems) so the threat will always be hanging directly over me...

Anyway as a result of that I'm in total chaos right now trying to live without hesitation (which I can imagine being a source of pain for others) because when I look back on my life all I see is myself in my parents' basement and I want to accomplish SOMETHING before I do die whether it's tomorrow or next year or 90 years from now.

Oh having brought that up, what do you think a person should try to accomplish in life? I haven't come up with an answer yet, I don't think there's a single right answer or perhaps even any wrong ones, I'm just trying to get other people's opinions so I can come up with one of my own. I think that's an important question to be able to answer so if I can at least do that...

Here is what I think:

You are not close-minded for not wanting to read the book. Your feelings about the subject matter and your personal experiences would make reading the book quite unpleasant, if not terribly painful.

You would be close-minded, I think, if you refused to see that ANYONE ELSE could gain something from the book. If someone else reads it and gains insight into how painful and sick incestual abuse is, then the book has made a positive impact. I do remember that you asked people what they liked about the book. Your curiosity about it said to me that you were at least open-minded enough to try to see why someone else would value a piece of literature that you find offensive.

It's your prerogative as to whether or not you want to read the book. It's the choice of others to do or not do the same. Being open-minded, to me, means that you would be willing to see that someone else has a different opinion and that their decision and their opinion may be right for them even if it's not right for you.

*hugyou*

you would be willing to see that someone else has a different opinion and that their decision and their opinion may be right for them even if it's not right for you.

EXACTLY. or, phrased a little differently, being open-minded means seeing that a book that you might think has value could be utterly worthless, or have negative worth, to someone else.

Useful to others? okay, that's them. Useful to me? not in any way, shape, or form, and don't try to make me agree that it would be. *nods*

Always do what you know is right, don´t accept any attack from anybody about what you believe, they must understand your position(YOU HAVE AN EXCELENT ARGUMENT TO HAVE IT!), It´s not about any artistic matter, it´s about the topic in our days!, It´s about something that it´s considered a crime in may countries!, it´s something against God Laws!!.

Remember, you are open-minded...not mindless!!

P.S: I agree with you in this.