Home  Forums |
|
|
|
|
Topic History of: Charities and sex abuse
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
|
hedda |
"I'm not Jesus. I'm not Allah. I'm not Buddha. I'm not Moon (though Everyone's Gone there)."
a bit frigging hard when I could well be Jesus re-incarnated as I share the same birthday (he was a Virgo, not a bloody Capricorn) 
This tale of charity workers going with prostitutes in Third World countries is painted in one dimension and ignores how the West basically helps create the conditions via poverty where people sell themselves.
We really are a competently rotten thing, us Humans. 
If I was God I'd wipe us out.
## Jesus was an Alien so God wasn't his Dad..it's too complicated to explain.  |
|
JK2006 |
Oxfam are severely criticised for not sufficiently investigating workers visiting prostitutes. Fair enough although personally I'd have preferred the millions spent on the "Inquiry" to have saved children' lives by giving them clean water. I'd have preferred the 12 million pounds removed from Oxfam in donations to have been spent helping homeless women and innocent men rebuild houses in Haiti. But, of course, that would have meant no "Great Stories" for the media to gain prurient readers, viewers and listeners. And no "Moral Righteousness" from people who consider the lives of suffering innocents to be less important than the sexual behaviour of a few charity workers.
I've never used a prostitute of either gender. Not through moral outrage. Not because of the health dangers. But because, personally, the enjoyment of the other person having sex with me is a crucial element of my own enjoyment. And, to be honest, my ego could never allow me to accept that someone only had sex with me for financial reward. How deeply insulting!
But I don't believe that others who may have different attitudes should adhere strictly to my personal code of sexual behaviour. I'm not Jesus. I'm not Allah. I'm not Buddha. I'm not Moon (though Everyone's Gone there).
As long as third parties are not harmed, are willing and desire sexual interaction - for whatever reason - that's OK with me. If both parties are consenting (and old enough or wise enough to be able to consent), I'm not bothered.
But I don't feel my personal morality should dictate the behaviour of others - or even corporations or charities or media.
I do, however, feel that we are sadly lacking, as a society, in responsibility. Editors of newspapers, Twitterers, TV owners, Facebookends - the ramifications of decisions seem to have escaped the vast majority. Brexit and Trump fine examples.
By publicising the sexual indiscretions of a few people (usually without examination - "please ravage my body in order to give me a few pennies to feed my family" and other such nuances) because "it's a good story", thousands die. As a direct result.
Jimmy Savile is dead so what is there to lose by smearing his reputation? Fine - except it means millions went into the pockets of a few greedy lawyers, a couple of compensation seeking fantasists and some rich media proprietors instead of into Leeds Hospital, saving the hearts and lives of sick (now dead) children.
We appear to have become incapable of complex thought. Consequences is too long a word to mean anything to simplistic humanity. "Give us a good headline and a simple slogan and we don't need to think further" is the mind set of this century's humanity.
The actions of a few (probably excellent) charity workers should have got them reprimanded and, possibly, disciplined. Thanks to our greed for good, simplistic, moral stories those actions have now caused hundreds of Haitian children to die.
As a species, we really deserve what's coming. As a fine cartoon philosopher once said - DOH! |
|
|
|
