Re: Woke up Free but Branded by his Fans Too?

["L. Bird" <pkeets@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

> >On this same subject, Pete has already apologized in a public statement,
> though again I forget the details of where and when. (Too many articles to
> keep up with.)
>
> HE HAS NOT!  He has only stated that he was wrong for going to the site and
> accepts his punishment.  But then he continues to deny blame.
This is curious language, but let's work through the implications.  Blame is 
censure, or condemnation, and it's a loaded word.  You mean that Pete is 
denying responsibility for his actions by not making an immediate abject and 
emotional apology--his actions being the moral sin of visiting the site and 
paying, thereby encouraging the rape of children.  However, you've said 
something different.  That word blame is often used in the process of 
employing scapegoats.  What you're saying is that everybody else will be 
absolved of the sin because you managed to blame some poor sod (Pete) who 
happened by. (Nothing personal--I hear NASA has managed to find a retired 
engineer to blame for the Columbia disaster.)

Again, I think you've nailed what's going on perfectly.  Pete's not going to 
take the blame for this industry, and he shouldn't.  This is what he will 
have to deal with in interviews and etc., the implied blame that he is now 
responsible for the whole child porn industry because he's a highly visible 
celebrity and thus an easy poster child for the "survivors" and their 
advocates who are looking for a symbol for their mistreatment.

Although Pete is very articulate, he's not always good at dealing with 
attacks.  This might be a good occasion for him to read up on techniques to 
deal with verbal, and also implied, attacks before he does any interviews or 
further statements.  He needs to shut this down and channel the discussion 
into what he wants to do to stop child porn.  Pete needs to REFUSE to be a 
victim in this situation, not encourage more BLAME by continual apologies.  
This is my opinion, of course, but I think it's valid.

Interviewers and tabloids will always try to push the discussion in this 
direction, and Pete will need to change the subject back to what we're going 
to do about child porn every time.  Stonewall; Yes, but...; Always deal with 
the leader of the pack, etc.  There are techniques to handle it.


> Lool people, these are my opinions.
> Take them or leave them, I don't give a rats ass.
> But stop attacking them like you hold a chance at changing my mind or prove 
> my opinions wrong.
> If you have an opinion on this, simply state it without replying to mine, 
> putting me on the defensive.
This is the email I was looking for a while ago.  Don't worry about this.  
You're very good at verbalizing your feeling, Kevin, and so you're providing 
a great forum for us to discuss what Pete is up against.  :) I know it's 
uncomfortable, so thanks again.


keets

_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail