Penn State: When Adults Do Nothing, Life-Long Emotional Damage Is Embedded in the Victim

I don’t think people realize what their lack of action against evil, can truly do to a victim.

When McQueary and the University janitor did not (allegedly) physically intervene on those acts of oral rape and sodomy on the children, this put (or reinforced) in the child’s mind that he is at fault for the sexual assaults.

It can take years of deep therapy to reprogram the mind of the victim into understanding that it is the adult who holds every ounce of guilt.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Child Abuse, child molestation, child sexual abuse, Crime, rape and abuse and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Penn State: When Adults Do Nothing, Life-Long Emotional Damage Is Embedded in the Victim

  1. Shana Dines says:

    Believe me I believe that McQueary was wrong in not intervening. I would like to believe that I would have. I may be wrong but I think that he was the age as Sandusky’s boys. I wonder if he could have been a victim too? It would be possible that he was traumatized by what he saw and flipped into a childlike state. I don’t know, but I have to wonder, Who knows maybe he was a victim too. I can’t believe that I wouldn’t have went after that sick son of a bitch and tried to rescue that little boy, but I don’t know. He is a monster and I wish that they could drag him behind a car until there was nothing left of the lying sack of shit.

  2. little nel says:

    Children do not understand that the adults who molest them prefer children as sex partners and go to extremes to hide that preference from everyone including the child.

    I agree that the officials at Penn State reinforced to those children that they were at fault for the unwanted sex or “not good enough” to be protected.

    Many of Sandusky’s victims were showered with gifts and attention to keep them silent and co-operative. The same thing that Michael Jackson did to his “boys.”

    Victim #4 said that Sandusky gave him $50 for pot and let him smoke it in his car. Sandusky can “spin” this event and say that he caught the boy smoking pot, so the boy threatened to tell someone that Sandusky sexually abused him, if Sandusky reprimanded him and took his pot away. Drug abusers lie and Sandusky can defend himself with that in court.

    • Alethea says:

      “Children do not understand that the adults who molest them prefer children as sex partners and go to extremes to hide that preference from everyone including the child.”

      This is true for pedophiles, but just for the record: “Situational offenders” (people who are not pedophiles, but sexually abuse kids of all ages because they have access to them in the home) usually prefer to have sex with adults.

      • little nel says:

        What would category of sex offender would you put Sandusky in?

        • Shana Dines says:

          Without a doubt! Sandusky is a pedophile! He manufactured situations because he is a Pedophile!

        • Alethea says:

          Sandusky might fall under the category of pedophile, unless he had victims over the age of 12. If so, he might be called a “hebephile,” which is a sexual preference for children between the ages of 11 to 14 years of age, or those on the cusp of puberty. Pedophiles have a sexual preference for prepubescent children. hebephiles are usually male. They usually abuse male boys, and set themselves up to be around kids in order to molest them. They often have hundreds of victims.

          • Shana Dines says:

            I guess I really don’t care what he is called pedophile, or hebephile, he still is a disgusting revolting human being that should be locked up forever.

            • Alethea says:

              Hi Shana. I care because my father does not fall in line with the word “pedophile” as we see them on TV, in films, and in cases like Penn State. Society in general tends to get this image in its mind and then when someone like my father is looked at, society can sometimes disbelieve that he, and men like him, are child sexual abusers.

              I think it’s important to differentiate between the different abusers –and to do so for the victim’s sake.

              • Alethea says:

                I don’t like labels in general, for anything. Labels put perpetrators in a box and categorizes them to the point of people then being able to say, “well, he could not have done that to a 15 year-old boy, he is a pedophile, they only like little children.” Or… “He would never have raped his daughter, he is not a pedophile, he likes older teenage girls; his daughter is 7 years-old.”

Comments are closed.