Tuesday, January 22, 2019

Mother breast-feeds older boys.  Child abuse?

Leftists will no doubt proclaim that only shell-backed antediluvian conservatives will be critical of this and I must admit that it at first seemed to me like a harmless eccentricity.  A psychologist with vast experience in counselling thinks otherwise however.  I reproduce his words to me below:

Lisa Bridges deludes herself that breastfeeding her four and seven year old boys is the boy's choice, when in fact it is her choice. She says she will continue to breast feed them "for as long as the boys want", which really means, for as long as she wants. 

There is a fair bit on the internet about her. She does not mind attention. She even enjoys breast feeding her boys in public. See here

She says she "is not harming anybody". I cannot agree with that.

She says she "is following her boys lead". That is utter nonsense. She is the adult, she is the governor of the dynamic between herself and her children. She enables, initiates, sets the momentum and steers the interpersonal cycles between herself and her children.

She says the boys are autistic and that breast feeding the boys calms them down. I am suspicious of any single mother who says she has an autistic son.

When counselling single mothers of primary school aged boys, I found that many of them falsely claim to have autistic sons, or sons with ADHD and other fashionable syndromes.

And when counselling imprisoned male sex offenders and other offenders, I found most were raised by single mothers -- about three quarters of them. And many resented their mothers for their abusive behaviour, including emotional and sexual abuse.

Naturally the stats sheets recorded that the prisoner reported childhood sexual or other abuse, but the electronic copies did not record the gender of the abuser. Those looking at such stats naturally assume the abuser is male, probably a father, even though most criminals do not have a father figure in their lives. The public perception is that most abusers are male. But men's and women's hearts are as dark and light as each others. It is how their abuse manifests that differs. Generally, we have our eye in for male abuse but are mostly blind to how female abuse manifests.

I have, on occasions, tried telling colleagues in welfare work about the sorts of abuse that some single mothers do to their boys, but generally they cannot accept it, even though they frequently discuss male abusers.

I can understand their initial recoiling. It is hard to face that some practices could be so frequent when women are considered to be so caring in comparison to men.

Breast feeding growing boys might seem harmless enough to some. But what other unusual attitudes and practices might be part of the family's dynamic. Perhaps the family is otherwise quite healthy and ordinary.

We all have a psychological schema, that is a network of mental-emotional-behavioural patterns that are in keeping with each other, some harmonic and supportive of each other, some locked in disharmony and opposition with each other. What the fuller picture is, healthy or unhealthy, we don't know. I do know that Lisa Bridges' attitude to breast feeding her growing boys would operate in keeping with other attitudes she holds towards men, women, children, relationships, sexuality, gender, society, likes-dislikes, desires, operative values, beliefs about herself and society, and so on. 

Lisa Bridges, to some extent, is currently sexually wiring her two boys. When they are grown men trying to establish relationships with women, and the memories flood in of their mother enticing them to lay back with her and suck her breasts, then what conditions of mind and emotion might arise in the men? internal conflict? confusion? emotional turmoil? resentment? betrayal? disgust? And how might their attitudes and behaviour towards women and themselves be effected? I could suggest several possibilities because I have seen them in other men.

If such men forgive their mothers her errors, then there will be no harm done. For there is no hurt where there is forgiveness, and subsequently no resentment and other consequences. Forgiveness does that; it cancels hurt and resentment, and dissolves unhealthy and troublesome personal and interpersonal psychological loops. But if we don't or won't forgive, then all sorts of psychological (attitudinal, mental-emotional and behavioural, and interpersonal) conditions arise and circulate through the psychological mechanism as unhealthy maladjusted loops and patterns. I have seen many examples of this outcome, not just in prison cells but in people in general.  


Journalists believed the aggressive Leftist guy, not the students in MAGA hats he was harassing.  Videos show that the students were in fact a paragon of restraint in response to a barrage of hate.  I don't think I would be so restrained if someone came up to me abusing me and banging a drum in my face




Phillips put himself between the teens and the black nationalists, chanting and drumming as he marched straight into the middle of the group of young people. What followed was several minutes of confusion: The teens couldn't quite decide whether Phillips was on their side or not, but tentatively joined in his chanting. It's not at all clear this was intended as an act of mockery rather than solidarity.

One student did not get out of Phillips way as he marched, and gave the man a hard stare and a smile that many have described as creepy. This moment received the most media coverage: The teen has been called the product of a "hate factory" and likened to a school shooter, segregation-era racist, and member of the Ku Klux Klan. I have no idea what he was thinking, but portraying this as an example of obvious, racially-motivated hate is a stretch. Maybe he simply had no idea why this man was drumming in his face, and couldn't quite figure out the best response? It bears repeating that Phillips approached him, not the other way around.



It was at this moment that Phillips, who had attended a nearby peace protest led by indigenous peoples, decided to intervene. He would later tell The Detroit Free Press that the teenagers "were in the process of attacking these four black individuals" and he decided to attempt to de-escalate the situation. He seems profoundly mistaken: The video footage taken by the black nationalists shows no evidence the white teenagers had any intention of attacking. Nevertheless, Phillips characterized the kids as "beasts" and the hate-group members as "their prey":

"There was that moment when I realized I've put myself between beast and prey," Phillips said. "These young men were beastly and these old black individuals was their prey, and I stood in between them and so they needed their pounds of flesh and they were looking at me for that."

Again, all the evidence suggests that Phillips got it backward.

He also claimed that he heard chants of "build the wall." While I cannot rule out the possibility that some of the kids indeed chanted this—those who were wearing MAGA hats are presumably Trump supporters—I did not hear a single utterance of the phrase in the nearly two hours of video footage I watched. Admittedly, the kids do a lot of chanting and it's not always possible to tell what they are saying. Their stated explanation is that they engaged in a series of school sports chants: That's what one student told a local news reporter. His account largely tracks with the video.

"We are an all-male school that loves to get hyped up," said this student. "And as we have done for years prior, we decided to do some cheers to pass time. In the midst of our cheers, we were approached by a group of adults led by Nathan Phillips, with Phillips beating his drum. They forced their way to the center of our group. We initially thought this was a cultural display since he was beating along to our cheers and so we clapped to the beat." According to this student, the smiling student was grinning because he was enjoying the music, but eventually became confused, along with everyone else. (Indeed, multiple people can be heard to shout, "what is going on?")

It would be impossible to definitively state that none of the young men did anything wrong, offensive, or problematic, at some point, and maybe the smiling student was attempting to intimidate Phillips. But there's shockingly little evidence of wrongdoing, unless donning a Trump hat and standing in a group of other people doing the same is now an act of harassment or violence. Phillips' account, meanwhile, is at best flawed, and arguably deliberately misleading.




The ugly truth behind the women's march

The ABC carries a Reuters report that hypes an anti-Trump protest:

Women have marched in hundreds of US cities to mark the second anniversary of the demonstrations that took place the day after President Donald Trump's inauguration in January 2017...

They are aiming to mobilise women to vote ahead of the 2020 elections, when Mr Trump is expected to be the Republican nominee for president.

But the ABC/Reuters fails to note the bleeding obvious - that the crowds were way, way down, as other outlets have conceded:

the third annual Women’s March events on Saturday attracted much smaller crowds than in years past.

That is putting it very gently indeed.

In 2017, between 500,000 and 1 million women reportedly marched in Washington alone. This year just 100,000, says AP, generously. The Washington Post suggests merely "thousands".

In 2017, 400,000 reportedly marched in New York. This year just 25,000, say NY police, espite the drawcard of far-Left Democrat star Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Why didn't the ABC note this?

But the ABC did in passing note - in a single paragraph - one possible cause for the collapse in numbers:

In some cities, like New York and Washington, there were more than one march or demonstration due to criticism that some Women's March leaders are anti-Semitic — a charge those leaders have sought to dispel in recent interviews and statements.

Again, that puts it mildly. Imagine what the ABC would have said if Trump had made the alleged comments that some of the march organisers made in 2016, when seven women met in New York to plan the first women's march:



To this day, Mallory and Bland deny any such statements were ever uttered, either at the first meeting or at Mallory’s apartment. “There was a particular conversation around how white women had centered themselves...,” remembered Bland. But she and Mallory insisted it never had anything to do with Jews. “Carmen and I were very clear at that [first] meeting that we would not take on roles as workers or staff, but that we had to be in a leadership position in order for us to engage in the march,” Mallory told Tablet, in an interview last week, adding that they had been particularly sensitive to the fact that they had been invited to the meeting by white women, and wanted to be sure they weren’t about to enter into an unfair arrangement. “Other than that, there was no particular conversation about Jewish women, or any particular group of people.”

Six of the seven women in attendance would not speak openly to Tablet about the meeting, but multiple sources with knowledge of what happened confirmed the story.

There was more of the same after the women met to discuss the success of their 2017 march:

At the end of January, according to multiple sources, there was an official debriefing at Mallory’s apartment. In attendance were Mallory, Evvie Harmon, Breanne Butler, Vanessa Wruble, Cassady Fendlay, Carmen Perez and Linda Sarsour. They should have been basking in the afterglow of their massive success, but—according to Harmon—the air was thick with conflict. “We sat in that room for hours,” Harmon told Tablet recently. “Tamika told us that the problem was that there were five white women in the room and only three women of color, and that she didn’t trust white women. Especially white women from the South.


The racism got worse:

In October 2017, the group held a Women’s Convention. Attendance was reported to be high for the whole event, and was packed for the summit’s most popular panel, “Confronting White Womanhood.”

On March 11, 2018, the Women’s March had their biweekly phone call with national organizers. The public controversy had started to explode over Mallory’s attendance at the Saviours’ Day event, during which, in the course of a three-hour speech, Farrakhan blamed Jews for “degenerate behavior in Hollywood, turning men into women and women into men.” Angie Beem, president of the Washington state chapter, remembered that phone call...

Beem described a sense of awkwardness as Mallory went on to defend Farrakhan to over 40 women on the call. And she wasn’t alone, Beem said; Perez and Bland jumped in to defend him as well. “They said to us: ‘You know, he has done some great things for people of color.’ They didn’t denounce anything he said, they only did that recently..."


It was around this time that Morganfield says she first heard that Nation of Islam members were acting as security detail and drivers for the co-chairs. “Bob called me secretly and said, ‘Mercy, they have been in bed with the Nation of Islam since day one: They do all of our security,’” Morganfield told Tablet.


Australia: Vicious false rape accuser jailed at last

An email from Bettina SArndt

For years I have been following a terrible case where a young prison officer was sent to prison following false rape accusations from his ex-partner. Today that young woman, Sarah Jane Parkinson was sentenced in Canberra to 3 years in prison, with two years non-parole. 

I’ve made a video with Dan, the young man whose life she destroyed. It is the most extraordinary story – I’m sure one day it will end up as a movie. It starts with Parkinson having an affair with a policeman which leads to Dan breaking off their engagement. Boy, talk about the wrath of the scorned. Parkinson, with the help of her crooked cop boyfriend and his mates, embark on a crusade to destroy Dan and his family. False domestic violence accusations, AVOs, alleged breaches and then a doozy of a fake rape scenario where she smashes her own head with a brick, plants empty condom packets (very considerate rapist, using a condom, eh?) and then claims the cat ate the condom.

But then the cavalry arrives, good cops led by a female detective who’s onto the corrupt antics of the Parkinson’s police mates. “Don’t fucking touch anything!” the good cops warn the bad guys. Yes, I know… It reads like a very bad script for The Bill. But it is all totally true.

Dan is immediately sent to prison following the fake rape allegations – the earlier violence accusations meant no questions asked. He’s in a maximum security prison at Goulbourn, a very scary place for a young prison officers who knows screws get a very bad time inside. He spends four months in an isolation cell for his own protection, suicidal and knowing he faces up to 15 years if convicted on the trumped up charges.

Meanwhile, with Dan taken care of, Parkinson goes after Dan’s family with false violence accusations against his dad, planting stolen goods, all manner of shenanigans. But little does she know that the good cops are running a sting on her and her copper mates, tracking their movements. So it goes on – for five long years.  

My interview with Dan is pretty long but I hope you will agree it is an amazing story. And, thankfully for once it has a good ending. Not that Parkinson’s prison sentence is any consolation for Dan losing his reputation, his job, and having to move to another state, while his parents blow their life savings paying legal bills.

Please like the video and help me circulate it:







1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Re. Breast feeding older boys. So much depends not upon what happens to us, but upon our attitude to what happens to us. The best attitudes are loving, forgiving and thankfulness. A healthy heart makes a healthy mind.