Abusers force secrecy upon their victims the moment boundaries are crossed. Whether explicitly stated or implied, the abuser asks the victim to become a co-keeper of at least two weighty secrets:
1. The truth about the abuse. 2. The truth about the abuser.
1/8
The disruptive power of the secrets oppresses the victim.
Like any weight, the secrets become harder to carry over time.
The victim feels trapped as a desire to be free from the burden of secrecy is repeatedly met with a fear of what will happen if the truth is revealed.
It is a reasonable fear.
Many abusers coerce victims into silence with threats meant to give the victim the impression that telling anyone will cause some kind of destruction.
The decision to tell is an act of tremendous courage infused with the hope of finally being free of the burden of secrecy.
Yet, many have experienced a profound betrayal when those they tell demand they continue to carry the secret.
Fears become a reality and hope is shattered.
A refusal to believe a victim and to respond with justice and care asks the victim to bear new secrets, making the oppression even weightier as they carry:
1. The truth about the abuse. 2. The truth about the abuser. 3. The truth about the telling. 4. The truth about the told.
Victims live with a profound and disillusioning sense of injustice when their abusers and those who cover for them, absent any accountability, move through life with apparent ease, while the victims, absent support, struggle to survive under the weight of such painful truths.
It’s often been the case that the abuser, equipped with charm and charisma, continues to accumulate power, influence, and attention.
This makes their secrets even more disruptive, and therefore, more oppressive.
Sadly, the one most affected becomes the one most forgotten.
Our communities, schools, churches, and homes are safer when they are free of such secrets because victims no longer have to keep their stories close to their chest for fear of how others will respond.
We must break down these walls, believe survivors, and restore their hope.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Guidepost Solutions has been hired by The Summit Church, RZIM, and most recently, the SBC Executive Committee, to help these churches and ministries respond to allegations. Here is why this concerns me:
They have historically served wealthy individuals and corporations. Here's an interview where one of their leaders discusses how they address "delicate matters" like abuse allegations.
In 2011, they were hired by former IMF head Dominique Strauss-Kahn to probe into the "background of the 32-year-old hotel maid whose allegations" led to charges of attempted rape against Strauss-Kahn. macleans.ca/news/world/sup…
2. Excuses - “I didn’t mean it.” “It was out of my control.” “Someone else is to blame.”
3. Justifications - “No real harm was done.” “It was consensual.”
4. Comparisons - “We’re all human.”
I’ve found these defenses are raised like the walls surrounding a fortress. When denials fail, excuses are used, when excuses don’t work, justifications are made, and when there are no more justifications, comparisons are drawn.
It is difficult to get through these defenses.
Those who try are likely to be met with attacks against their credibility, character and, in some cases, physical safety.
These attacks take different forms depending on the situation - but just about every defense will be accompanied by an attack against the truth-teller(s).
The goal of the "victim scale" is to manage the impressions others are forming of the victim by presenting only their shortcomings so others conclude the victim is partly to blame, deserved it, isn't innocent in the matter, should have done something to prevent, etc.
The victim might also be weighed against others, in this case Martin Luther King, Jr., Malcolm X, and Philando Castille, and then made to appear worse by proclaiming how they are not like those individuals - suggesting that the victim is not a "real victim" like the others.
High praises and underlying fears often coexist in a coercive environment.
This can be a confusing experience as you struggle to reconcile the flattery you hear with the fear you feel.
That fear is telling you something important about the flattery: it’s meant to ensnare you.
It can be hard to tell the difference between flattery and sincerity.
Flattery mixes exaggerations and untruths with compliments and always has selfish motives.
Flattery is given to get something from you - like compliance - so it might feel like nets are being laid around you.
A common example is when the flatterer tells you how exemplary you are without actually knowing you well enough to determine that - needlessly comparing you to others in a way that is intended to make you feel special.
When the “relationship” is defined by the predator who intends to harm, pushing reconciliation is like asking the victim to walk back into a trap to see if it will close on them again.
When abuse is seen as an issue of conflict, victims are asked to engage in private meetings with the abuser, own their own contribution to the abuse, put away bitterness, extend forgiveness, and agree to non-disclosure.
When you present a difficult truth to others, you hope the focus will remain on what you presented. You might expect straight-forward denials like “I don’t believe you” or “That could not have happened” or outright lies. But comparisons introduce what I call “complex deception.”
Comparisons take various forms:
You might hear a comparison to a past event: “This is a witch hunt!”
Or a comparison to others: “Nobody is perfect.”
Or a comparison to a supposed greater trauma or wrong: “It’s not as bad as...”
Each comparison adds complexity to deception.
It’s as if the person reaches their hand through a portal to another dimension and pulls material into the conversation that you weren’t expecting to have to address. The deceiver accesses arguments you didn’t even know were there and then presents them to you for your response.