|
|
Post by hnau on Aug 6, 2015 8:45:16 GMT
I'm really hoping that as the result of this whole conversation, and perhaps some strong words from Donnie to his friend, the chapter ends with Annie knocking on Tony's door, or vice versa, and the chapter ends with a hug. "Hi Dad. My name is Antimony Carver. I would like to share with you the strange events that took place while I attended school at Gunnerkrigg Court..." [The End.] |
|
Pig_catapult
Full Member
Keeper of the Devilkitty
Posts: 171
|
Post by Pig_catapult on Aug 6, 2015 9:10:19 GMT
Communication nightmare, episode 568. We'll get answers later but Tony now appears to be the perfect example on how you should /talk to people instead of having massive guilt trips and real world trips by yourself/, which confuses me a bit because on the other hand he's not just cold and awkward to Annie, he's mean. Annie has done nothing but smile and nod when he was there - Tony isn't Master of Reading People but he could "just" have acted distant, seeing that his daughter is obviously trying to be nice to him. Oh god, I don't think Anthony knows that Annie knows why Surma died? He's being a shit to make her hate him because he thinks she doesn't understand that he "killed her mother" and it would be easier for her to find that out about a father she already can't stand. No, self-loathing doesn't excuse abuse (neither does PTSD) but I'm getting a horrible suspicion that's what's going on here. ... Oh gosh. That makes a lot of sense, on top of being really tragic. /me joins the "0% Approval Rating Gambit" theorists |
|
|
|
Post by bluevitriol on Aug 6, 2015 9:55:27 GMT
"Cool motive, still child abuse." /endthread. Not Quite. Tony has not been abusive AT ALL. I know, I work in place where I've seen parents abandons their children, have them taken away, and have to write up and file some of the most despicable things you could imagine in reports. He has not caused Mental Anguish (Acute embarrassment yes), nor Physical harm, nor has he deprived her of necessities. if you think he has, then you are out of touch with reality and what actually constitutes child-abuse. -No he did not abandon her. He made it so the court would look after her until he was ready. -He provided for her even in his absence, she had a clean safe place to live and those who would look after her. -He provided for her access to education and even Freedom to leave the campus if the campus allowed it, since GKC was watching out for her. -He did not mentally abuse her, he may have embarrassed her but that is a far cry from abuse. -Having her repeat content she cheated on to avoid expulsion is normal, this is not abusive, In fact he may think the forest and the other students are taking her attention away from her academics and is FULLY within his rights to deny her access to either. Just because you don't like the guy or he makes your skin crawl does not mean he is abusive. |
|
|
|
Post by Kitty Hamilton on Aug 6, 2015 10:50:46 GMT
Not Quite. Tony has not been abusive AT ALL. I know, I work in place where I've seen parents abandons their children, have them taken away, and have to write up and file some of the most despicable things you could imagine in reports. He has not caused Mental Anguish (Acute embarrassment yes), nor Physical harm, nor has he deprived her of necessities. if you think he has, then you are out of touch with reality and what actually constitutes child-abuse. -No he did not abandon her. He made it so the court would look after her until he was ready. -He provided for her even in his absence, she had a clean safe place to live and those who would look after her. -He provided for her access to education and even Freedom to leave the campus if the campus allowed it, since GKC was watching out for her. -He did not mentally abuse her, he may have embarrassed her but that is a far cry from abuse. -Having her repeat content she cheated on to avoid expulsion is normal, this is not abusive, In fact he may think the forest and the other students are taking her attention away from her academics and is FULLY within his rights to deny her access to either. Just because you don't like the guy or he makes your skin crawl does not mean he is abusive. ...'not caused mental anguish'? Antimony has literally had to cut away a part of herself in order to cope. And abandonment and abuse aren't just about physical things. Disappearing without warning from your daughter's life for over two years is emotionally neglectful at the least. |
|
Garbage
New Member
ANTHONY CARVER DEFENSE FORCE, 1ST LIEUTENANT OF THE SUPPORT DIVISION
Posts: 29 
|
Post by Garbage on Aug 6, 2015 11:27:31 GMT
Not Quite. Tony has not been abusive AT ALL. I know, I work in place where I've seen parents abandons their children, have them taken away, and have to write up and file some of the most despicable things you could imagine in reports. He has not caused Mental Anguish (Acute embarrassment yes), nor Physical harm, nor has he deprived her of necessities. if you think he has, then you are out of touch with reality and what actually constitutes child-abuse. -No he did not abandon her. He made it so the court would look after her until he was ready. -He provided for her even in his absence, she had a clean safe place to live and those who would look after her. -He provided for her access to education and even Freedom to leave the campus if the campus allowed it, since GKC was watching out for her. -He did not mentally abuse her, he may have embarrassed her but that is a far cry from abuse. -Having her repeat content she cheated on to avoid expulsion is normal, this is not abusive, In fact he may think the forest and the other students are taking her attention away from her academics and is FULLY within his rights to deny her access to either. Just because you don't like the guy or he makes your skin crawl does not mean he is abusive. I wanted to say how much I agree with you but what you wrote was so amazing I accidentally fell in love with it. [TL,DR: Thank you, this is amazing] |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2015 12:34:31 GMT
Then what would be a good reason for disliking a fictional character? Villains and antagonists are required for the plot, after all, so what is the protagonist without them? I take this as a challenge to present you twenty stories without any "antagonists" in the conventional sense (i.e. when people wish to avoid the word "villain", or even "rival", by furnishing it with chic Hellenic robes). Of course, in typically lazy fashion, I've only assembled half that number: Vita Nova Pique Dame Elective Affinities The Dream of the Red Chamber The Sentimental Education The Dead (from Dubliners) In the Penal Colony Pale Fire Transparent Things The Man in the High Castle Bonus: Beyond Petsora Eastward (a book for Kat) Pique Dame, for instance, intrigues the reader precisely because the existence of an antagonist outside of Hermann's own perception remains in doubt, thereby avoiding a flat fable. Pale Fire explores the question you posed above through Kinbote's invention of "Gradus", but also more deceptively through Shade's being appalled at his daughter resembling him in appearance, but (as he fears) not having inherited his gift of "five senses, one unique" -- or if she did, that it could not save her. But apparently we like Coyote, but the whole forum just wants(ed) to strap Tony to a guillotine and throw the lever. You could have arrived at that impression of a forum-wide attack vector because some people enjoy the challenge of building magnificent Great Walls of text against dreamlike Huns with their pale horses and strange phonology. In fact, I might be doing the same, except that my chosen emblem is not an argument for or against child abuse, as I have no interest in seeing stories substituted by court cases, however well-reasoned the execution -- especially given that Antimony has displayed the same behaviour as her father under emotional duress, raising the question of how much either can be held accountable for it. While Jones certainly believes that Antimony's choice to stay in the Forest was informed by free will, she is not exactly human; by her nature, she can more authentically pronounce the verdict "you let your emotions get the better of you". The most powerful Etheric creatures in Gunnerkrigg Court, Jones and Coyote, always act entirely according to their own nature (this is still not "free will", but the most persuasive illusion of it), whereas the less-powerful Renard and Ysengrin make self-contradictory decisions, but they are also able to find bliss in their affinity with others. In contrast, Coyote can only imbue the environment with his natural magnificence ( "My ever-watching eyes, the Sun and the Moon!"). Jones shows a curiosity for everything outside of herself which far surpasses even that of humans, as a consequence of being perfectly safely encapsulated from all external influences; but she cannot tune into the Ether, and all of her interaction with humans is ultimately mirrored human behaviour, not original to her. Neither of them could act like Zimmy did here. What constitutes selfishness, then? Speaking of which, both Renard and Ysengrin attempted to kill a child, even though both of them were appalled at their insanity in retrospect, that is, the inability to act in concord with their Etheric images. |
|
|
|
Post by Refugee on Aug 6, 2015 13:33:49 GMT
Not Quite. Tony has not been abusive AT ALL. I know, I work in place where I've seen parents abandons their children, have them taken away, and have to write up and file some of the most despicable things you could imagine in reports. He has not caused Mental Anguish (Acute embarrassment yes), nor Physical harm, nor has he deprived her of necessities. if you think he has, then you are out of touch with reality and what actually constitutes child-abuse. Thank you. Although I think Anthony is a terrible father, and has denied Annie his love out of cowardice, I still do not think he was abusive--the charge that originally inspired me to defend him. Abuse is an extreme charge, which is diluted and weakened when invoked too easily. |
|
|
|
Post by pxc on Aug 6, 2015 13:47:03 GMT
I'm glad the comic took this course the last few pages. Would have been boring, if Tony was a flat antagonist. Not really Toms style. I hope we get to explore a lot more of Tony in the next weeks  While I agree that his depth is a good thing, I don't agree that more time (weeks?!) spent on Tony Carver is a good idea. |
|
|
|
Post by Refugee on Aug 6, 2015 13:50:10 GMT
...'not caused mental anguish'? Antimony has literally had to cut away a part of herself in order to cope. No, she reduced the influence of a supernatural being who was, she believed, interfering with her ability to cope with an admittedly bad situation that she did not understand. No telling what she would have done had she allowed the elemental to control her. Indeed, she may well have saved her own life. And abandonment and abuse aren't just about physical things. Disappearing without warning from your daughter's life for over two years is emotionally neglectful at the least. Perhaps, but in my mind Tony's disengagement does not rise to the level of abuse. The key thing here is that you can be a terrible parent without being an abusive one. |
|
|
|
Post by pxc on Aug 6, 2015 13:50:40 GMT
I'm really hoping that as the result of this whole conversation, and perhaps some strong words from Donnie to his friend, the chapter ends with Annie knocking on Tony's door, or vice versa, and the chapter ends with a hug. That's maybe a little too neat. Annie needs to confront him and tell him the truth about what he's done to her. I'm fine if the reconciliation takes months. I'd like Annie to re-associate w/herself and be functional, and I'd like Tony to finally realize the mistakes he's made and still currently making. The actual reconnection of father and daughter, once all the facts are out in the open, seems like it should be a process interspersed with other stories. |
|
|
|
Post by Refugee on Aug 6, 2015 14:05:59 GMT
I'm really hoping that...the chapter ends...with a hug. That's maybe a little too neat. I'd even go so far as to accept Annie and Anthony never really reconciling. Even as Annie has partially cut herself off from her elemental, I think she might well cut herself off from her Father to the same degree. I'm hoping that what Don is showing her allows her to keep loving her Father without it curdling into hate, while also allowing her to not blame herself for his failure to love her. In other words, I'll settle for the abscess to be lanced and drained so it can begin to heal. |
|
|
|
Post by pxc on Aug 6, 2015 14:16:55 GMT
Not Quite. Tony has not been abusive AT ALL. I know, I work in place where I've seen parents abandons their children, have them taken away, and have to write up and file some of the most despicable things you could imagine in reports. He has not caused Mental Anguish (Acute embarrassment yes), nor Physical harm, nor has he deprived her of necessities. if you think he has, then you are out of touch with reality and what actually constitutes child-abuse. -No he did not abandon her. He made it so the court would look after her until he was ready. -He provided for her even in his absence, she had a clean safe place to live and those who would look after her. -He provided for her access to education and even Freedom to leave the campus if the campus allowed it, since GKC was watching out for her. -He did not mentally abuse her, he may have embarrassed her but that is a far cry from abuse. -Having her repeat content she cheated on to avoid expulsion is normal, this is not abusive, In fact he may think the forest and the other students are taking her attention away from her academics and is FULLY within his rights to deny her access to either. Just because you don't like the guy or he makes your skin crawl does not mean he is abusive. It is ridiculous that some of you keep wanting to move the goalposts and try to re-establish what has actually happened. Regardless of your local legal definition of abandonment and the truth that other parents have done far worse to their children, Tony left without explanation right after Annie's mother died. She had no one to help her cope. She had no initial emotional support, and what she did finally gain she had to find herself. Helping your daughter deal with the death of her mother is ABSOLUTELY in a father's figurative job description. This is not your local courtroom. Regardless of a legal definition, as a father, Tony absolutely abandoned his daughter. GKC was watching out for her? You mean that faceless, intrusive, untrustworthy entity that Surma couldn't bear to have her child be born into, and that Tony couldn't handle returning to? That's who he decided would "watch out for her"? Really? He didn't mentally abuse her? The abandonment is the start. It lasted for years. He then returned and removed her from all support systems (those systems she had to develop herself, because of his previous abandonment), withheld affection and basic parental interaction, and (arguably) unjustly punished her for poor choices he, as her father, should have been there to help her avoid. "These are your extreme consequences for making the bad choices I wasn't here to teach you to not make." Again. Your anecdotal experience and local legal definitions have nothing to do with this story, and IMO it's disrespectful to those that have lived similar stories for you to diminish the vocabulary you think they and others should be allowed to use on the basis that other parents have done worse things than this to their children. There's no one way to be abusive, nor is there a distinct threshold for it to reach that level. Legally, yes, there is a threshold. But the legal definition is not the only valid definition. edit: This same argument has been ongoing since March. Other than Refugee it's unlikely most will change their minds, so maybe I should've just left this alone. I don't understand the desire of some to bend over backwards to justify Tony's behavior and mindset. But maybe I don't need to. |
|
Ombre
New Member
Posts: 21
|
Post by Ombre on Aug 6, 2015 14:21:54 GMT
Tony is turning in to Orpheus. Let's hope his journey fairs better. Quoted for interest. Quoted for truthness. Tony messing with the afterlife is a rather worrying perspective for me. Not only because his situation is screaming irony, as has been said before in this thread (he went on a trip for several years while his daughter was, like, chatting with psychopoms on a daily routine), but also and mostly because he does. Not. Understand. Anything. To. Ether ! And another ironic thing is that, in this regard, Tony and Kate are very close. Remember how Kate didn't see anything during her and Annie's whole afterlife trip as psychopomps for Morty ? But if Tony really begins to research about afterlife and psychopomps, we may get more info about the degree of reality of the afterlife, and of the psychopomps. Which is one big mystery in GC's universe which has been kept quite fogged until now. Of course, in the "See Ya!" chapter, some people hinted at the ROTD being some sort of a necessary lie, but things seem to be more complicated. The psychopomps do exist, after all. |
|
|
|
Post by imaginaryfriend on Aug 6, 2015 14:33:24 GMT
Then what would be a good reason for disliking a fictional character? Villains and antagonists are required for the plot, after all, so what is the protagonist without them? I take this as a challenge to present you twenty stories without any "antagonists" in the conventional sense (i.e. when people wish to avoid the word "villain", or even "rival", by furnishing it with chic Hellenic robes). A villain has a waxed vaudevillian mustache, of course. It may never be pictured or described but it clearly appears in the discerning reader's mind as growing on the upper lip of the character in question the more you read about him/her/it/they. I'd include under the banner of "antagonist" any conflict where there's anthropomorphism going on in the mind of the protagonist, including the environment or setting if a main character develops in response to that (if not, then it could be a foil) or where a protagonist is modifying teleological positions over the course of the work regarding the specific setting (alternatively, the antagonist and the protagonist being arguably the same person in this latter case). This does leave a window for true antagonist-free work but I've never enjoyed any of the experimental stuff I recall sampling. I'm not familiar with the works you cite and post-college my recreational reading list has been limited to the backs of packages of food when they are brightly-colored, so it's not likely to increase at any time in the near future. Maybe I can take early retirement and get caught up on reading and tv watching. Speaking of which, both Renard and Ysengrin attempted to kill a child, even though both of them were appalled at their insanity in retrospect, that is, the inability to act in concord with their Etheric images. Well, they are animals. If they are human creations then they are struggling with contradictory projections because their powers are so limited. Coyote's powers are greater so he can shrink the moon on a whim and doesn't struggle with the same... economics? |
|
|
|
Post by fish on Aug 6, 2015 15:42:24 GMT
It will take some time and really, the two of them have a lot to discuss and understand about each other, but I'm looking forward to Awkward-Family-Carver-Action. They act so similar a lot of times... they would make a great team when they are acting on the same side of an issue. I see their combined blank stare when someone comments that one of their plans really isn't a good idea! I'm glad the comic took this course the last few pages. Would have been boring, if Tony was a flat antagonist. Not really Toms style. I hope we get to explore a lot more of Tony in the next weeks Considering their similarities, Tony needs someone like 'Ysengrin, the forest therapist': "You did not take your wife's life. She gave it to your daughter." I hope Annie can be that person to her Dad at some point; helping him overcome his darkness, making their relationship grow through that. I understand it is not Annie's job to help her father deal with his terribleness but I think she is the only one who can at this point. Of course we are probably just at the beginning of this arc, the situation might change entirely in a few chapters or even pages. Let's find out more about the psychopomps and their motives. Only 15h till the next page. |
|
|
|
Post by sable0aria on Aug 6, 2015 16:13:37 GMT
Not Quite. Tony has not been abusive AT ALL. I know, I work in place where I've seen parents abandons their children, have them taken away, and have to write up and file some of the most despicable things you could imagine in reports. He has not caused Mental Anguish (Acute embarrassment yes), nor Physical harm, nor has he deprived her of necessities. if you think he has, then you are out of touch with reality and what actually constitutes child-abuse. -No he did not abandon her. He made it so the court would look after her until he was ready. -He provided for her even in his absence, she had a clean safe place to live and those who would look after her. -He provided for her access to education and even Freedom to leave the campus if the campus allowed it, since GKC was watching out for her. -He did not mentally abuse her, he may have embarrassed her but that is a far cry from abuse. -Having her repeat content she cheated on to avoid expulsion is normal, this is not abusive, In fact he may think the forest and the other students are taking her attention away from her academics and is FULLY within his rights to deny her access to either. Just because you don't like the guy or he makes your skin crawl does not mean he is abusive. She's had a mental breakdown, and spiritually mutilated herself because of him. I fail to see how that is not mental anguish. |
|
|
|
Post by darklingthrush on Aug 6, 2015 16:16:28 GMT
Look, I respect some people choosing to be more defensive of Tony, but taking a different stance doesn't make you better than the haters/critics unless your behavior is different. For example, do we let out dislike towards him blind us to any respectable traits? Maybe. But then Tony defenders tend to dismiss any legit problems on his part and are unwilling to express any criticism on the man. Even mild criticism. Heck, if Annie being a teenager means that she's old enough to be held accountable for her behavior, isn't it fair to expect the same and much more for an adult who had years of growing? Not to mention that for all of the backpatting that Tony fans are doing here, they fell into Tom's trap of thinking that Anthony was unable to express emotions until the recent weeks which we all find him smiling. I don't need to try. This is more or less the excuse Gendo Ikari used to explain his treatment of Shinji, and that wasn't in any way justified either. Anthony quite obviously never considered that Annie might disagree, or might want him around, or would want or should have any kind of say in the matter at all. And how hard would it have been to leave a note at the hospital telling her he wasn't going to be seeing her for a couple years? We all pretty much knew that Tony wasn't going to be a cardboard cut out, the question is, are his actions still inexcusable even taking into account his motives for taking them? The answer, for me, is yes. This. Even if one is feeling guilt, it doesn't mean one is selfless. And doing something solely to ease a guilty conscience is a form of selfishness. And while there is room to feel sympathy for someone like Tony, well, look at Fire Spike. Basically Annie was downright cold to Reynard. But the following chapter has her recognizing that and seeking to make amends. The moment that Tony recognizes that his actions can't be excuse and does the right thing, then I'd be inclined to give the character more of a break.Bolded by me, because YWTF and AntiYonder can clearly express ideas better than I can. I'm not foaming at the mouth in my hatred of Tony, and it's nice his character has been given more dimension. I just don't think his actions have become justified even given the current and likely continuing revelations. Hopefully he finds it in himself to apologize and mend some of the hurt he's inflicted upon his daughter. Granted my "/endthread" was more me being facetious than anything. Barring exactly what was going with the bone surgery thing chapter, I would not formally label him a child abuser. Just an asshole, and a bad father. Really looking forward to finding out what was up with the "bone thing when Zimmy had to punch him in the face", though. One of my favorite chapters of Gunnerkrigg. |
|
|
|
Post by Rasselas on Aug 6, 2015 16:46:20 GMT
I'll be honest, I get pissed off when people call Tony abusive. Don't you think that it's a bit offensive to people who might've gone through actual parental abuse? He's not gonna be winning "parent of the year" and his behavior has caused Annie pain and anguish, yeah. Abuse is when you're afraid of your parent because of how they act towards you. When you have to look over your shoulder for fear of what they're going to do next. When you have no trust left in them or the world around you that everything will somehow be alright. Abuse makes you feel like this: www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEz5il1SyhcI just think it's really inconsiderate and shows a grave lack of perspective. |
|
|
|
Post by sable0aria on Aug 6, 2015 17:49:45 GMT
I'll be honest, I get pissed off when people call Tony abusive. Don't you think that it's a bit offensive to people who might've gone through actual parental abuse? He's not gonna be winning "parent of the year" and his behavior has caused Annie pain and anguish, yeah. Abuse is when you're afraid of your parent because of how they act towards you. When you have to look over your shoulder for fear of what they're going to do next. When you have no trust left in them or the world around you that everything will somehow be alright. Abuse makes you feel like this: www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEz5il1SyhcI just think it's really inconsiderate and shows a grave lack of perspective. I have gone through parental abuse. There is no by the book standard for abusive situations. Perpetrators, and victims are all different, and react in different ways. I have no doubt there are abuse victims who will agree with you, I can't speak for them, I can only speak for myself. ANTHONY CARVER IS ABUSIVE. |
|
|
|
Post by pxc on Aug 6, 2015 17:59:28 GMT
I'll be honest, I get pissed off when people call Tony abusive. Don't you think that it's a bit offensive to people who might've gone through actual parental abuse? He's not gonna be winning "parent of the year" and his behavior has caused Annie pain and anguish, yeah. Abuse is when you're afraid of your parent because of how they act towards you. When you have to look over your shoulder for fear of what they're going to do next. When you have no trust left in them or the world around you that everything will somehow be alright. Abuse makes you feel like this: www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEz5il1SyhcI just think it's really inconsiderate and shows a grave lack of perspective. I'm sorry, truly, for what sounds like a hard life growing up. Your value as a person, especially as a child, should be cherished by parents and if it was instead mistreated and abused, then they were wrong and I'm sorry for your pain. That said, your own experience doesn't invalidate the experience of others even if you perceive it to be easier or less than what you've gone through. Physical and fear-based abuse isn't the only form of abuse. www.thehotline.org/is-this-abuse/abuse-defined/ Not trying to minimize you or your thoughts on the subject. I should probably step away from it myself. |
|
brokshi
Full Member
About as furious as my icon appears ecstatic.
Posts: 108
|
Post by brokshi on Aug 6, 2015 18:59:55 GMT
"Cool motive, still child abuse." /endthread. there ain't an excuse under the sun for the things this man's done |
|
|
|
Post by Rasselas on Aug 6, 2015 19:09:13 GMT
]I have gone through parental abuse. There is no by the book standard for abusive situations. Perpetrators, and victims are all different, and react in different ways. I have no doubt there are abuse victims who will agree with you, I can't speak for them, I can only speak for myself. ANTHONY CARVER IS ABUSIVE. Well, sorry, but I find that offensive and it actually hurts to read. It diminishes and trivializes what I've been through. I agree that abuse is not easy to define. It's why I hadn't said anything this drastic until this point. I've done my best to be diplomatic and polite. But all this dumb outrage is getting to me. I have no intention of playing the game of "who's had it worse." If you think Anthony is an abuser, I don't know what to tell you. Bad parent, yeah, clumsy and inconsiderate adult, yeah for sure. A person acting out of malice towards his own child, he isn't. He's a deeply caring, tragically misguided, misled and misunderstood man. For example, my father has done things similar to what Annie's gone through, but I never saw him as the abuser - my mother was the one. The things my father's done I may resent, but it's my mother who still gives me nightmares, to this day. It's a huge difference in degree, it almost can't be compared. I have a friend who almost killed himself and his brother in a pact out of sheer desperation to get out of their parents' abuse. Then the parents made him look like a deranged murderer and stuck him into a psychiatric institution. It took him ages to get out, and convince the doctors he was sane. Calling Anthony Carver an abuser is spitting in my friend's face and trivializing his experience. Or there's that girl I know about, who was placed in a psychiatric institution by her parents because she was lesbian. You're crying "abuse" about a situation that is basically a huge tragic misunderstanding. That is disrespectful to actual abuse victims. If this is abuse, then it falls somewhere on the lowest spectrum of it and does not warrant the outrage. Especially not when people out there in the real world are suffering much worse. I also find these knee-jerk sentiments of outrage to be dangerous. People like to think they're enlightened and progressive-minded but they eagerly participate in the same mentality that made mobs cheer at guillotines and lynchings. |
|
|
|
Post by Rasselas on Aug 6, 2015 19:28:20 GMT
I'm sorry, truly, for what sounds like a hard life growing up. Your value as a person, especially as a child, should be cherished by parents and if it was instead mistreated and abused, then they were wrong and I'm sorry for your pain. That said, your own experience doesn't invalidate the experience of others even if you perceive it to be easier or less than what you've gone through. Physical and fear-based abuse isn't the only form of abuse. www.thehotline.org/is-this-abuse/abuse-defined/ Not trying to minimize you or your thoughts on the subject. I should probably step away from it myself. Thank you for being so considerate. For what it's worth, I weighed heavily whether I should post anything. I probably shouldn't have. I agree that defining abuse is difficult. I just find that the outrage is disproportionate to the offense. But I guess that's something to be expected online and I should've stayed out of it. Let people have their outrage orgy and feel good about themselves. I've just seen this sort of thing cause a lot of suffering. |
|
|
|
Post by sable0aria on Aug 6, 2015 20:17:42 GMT
]I have gone through parental abuse. There is no by the book standard for abusive situations. Perpetrators, and victims are all different, and react in different ways. I have no doubt there are abuse victims who will agree with you, I can't speak for them, I can only speak for myself. ANTHONY CARVER IS ABUSIVE. Well, sorry, but I find that offensive and it actually hurts to read. It diminishes and trivializes what I've been through. I agree that abuse is not easy to define. It's why I hadn't said anything this drastic until this point. I've done my best to be diplomatic and polite. But all this dumb outrage is getting to me. I have no intention of playing the game of "who's had it worse." If you think Anthony is an abuser, I don't know what to tell you. Bad parent, yeah, clumsy and inconsiderate adult, yeah for sure. A person acting out of malice towards his own child, he isn't. He's a deeply caring, tragically misguided, misled and misunderstood man. For example, my father has done things similar to what Annie's gone through, but I never saw him as the abuser - my mother was the one. The things my father's done I may resent, but it's my mother who still gives me nightmares, to this day. It's a huge difference in degree, it almost can't be compared. I have a friend who almost killed himself and his brother in a pact out of sheer desperation to get out of their parents' abuse. Then the parents made him look like a deranged murderer and stuck him into a psychiatric institution. It took him ages to get out, and convince the doctors he was sane. Calling Anthony Carver an abuser is spitting in my friend's face and trivializing his experience. Or there's that girl I know about, who was placed in a psychiatric institution by her parents because she was lesbian. You're crying "abuse" about a situation that is basically a huge tragic misunderstanding. That is disrespectful to actual abuse victims. If this is abuse, then it falls somewhere on the lowest spectrum of it and does not warrant the outrage. Especially not when people out there in the real world are suffering much worse. I also find these knee-jerk sentiments of outrage to be dangerous. People like to think they're enlightened and progressive-minded but they eagerly participate in the same mentality that made mobs cheer at guillotines and lynchings. Recognizing abuse in other situations, even those you consider not bad enough to qualify as abuse, is nothing more than recognizing that situation is abusive. It's unfair, and hypocritical to say the suffering of children in situations like Annie's just isn't enough to count as abuse. You are doing to others exactly what you don't want anyone to do to you. |
|
|
|
Post by Per on Aug 6, 2015 20:30:02 GMT
I just find that the outrage is disproportionate to the offense. Not to mention to the level of being non-fictional.  |
|
|
|
Post by antiyonder on Aug 6, 2015 21:35:43 GMT
I have no intention of playing the game of "who's had it worse." If you think Anthony is an abuser, I don't know what to tell you. Bad parent, yeah, clumsy and inconsiderate adult, yeah for sure. A person acting out of malice towards his own child, he isn't. He's a deeply caring, tragically misguided, misled and misunderstood man. For example, my father has done things similar to what Annie's gone through, but I never saw him as the abuser - my mother was the one. The things my father's done I may resent, but it's my mother who still gives me nightmares, to this day. It's a huge difference in degree, it almost can't be compared. Ok, I'm still not ready to declare it abuse myself, but isn't it inaccurate to insist that abusive parents are basically like mustache stroking supervillains? mean as deplorable as they are, said parents don't necessarily take pleasure in their behavior and might even try to convince themselves they are in the right. edit: This same argument has been ongoing since March. Other than Refugee it's unlikely most will change their minds, so maybe I should've just left this alone. I don't understand the desire of some to bend over backwards to justify Tony's behavior and mindset. But maybe I don't need to. Given some people being a strong advocate of the tough love approach, I imagine relatibility is a factor. Thus by extension we're critiquing the posters who might share traits with Tony. Tough love mind you might be necessary on a case by case basis, but even if it doesn't lead to abuse, tough love can easily be overdone to an unhealthy and unproductive degree. Now for those who are still in Camp Tony, you are entitled to your stance, but at least have the courtesy not to dodge arguments and actually try harder to rebuke comments against him. Otherwise if you can't rebuke an argument, then you need to reconsider your stance or at least not be claiming we're wrong. -No he did not abandon her. He made it so the court would look after her until he was ready. -He provided for her even in his absence, she had a clean safe place to live and those who would look after her. -He provided for her access to education and even Freedom to leave the campus if the campus allowed it, since GKC was watching out for her. Well, we're living beings, not machines. Knowledge, skills and the like are important, but emotional needs also need to be considered when evaluating a parent's capability. Leaving her without anyone she can turn to for emotional support or companionship is a serious act of stupidity. And you can't even say that Anthony doesn't understand the need for such as Surma's death affected him greatly, plus the fact that he can express emotions. Now up until recently it could be assumed that he set things up so that the Donlans would discover Annie was attending, thus giving her people who could lend her support, but the mention of him avoiding contact after Surma's death leads me to thinking that Anja getting a notice of Annie's attendance was fate working in Annie's favor. But yeah, companionship is just as important as skills, morality and health. Heck, some anti-social folks may have the luxury of a high paying job that lets them work in an isolated cubicle, but a good plenty of folks have to work in an atmosphere which requires interaction with, well other people. And if the job requires understanding how to deal with people, lack of social skills can be a legit reason for firing or denying employment to the social outcast. Bottomline, emotional stability and companionship for the most part can be arguably just as important as academic skills and health, something Tony neglected. I'll give you this to a point, but there is also the unneeded coldness to her such as Anthony rudely dismissing Annie's concern for his hand rather than saying "I care not to discuss my well being for the moment.[/quote] Near isolation is still not the answer. Not to mention that even with his disappointment in her, their meeting in the classroom is the first time they've been together for quite a while. He doesn't need to praise her unconditionally, but at least show her that he cares for her. And while discipline is something that many parents need to be willing to do and is a sign that some care about their children, sometimes it's done simply because the parents are more concerned about saving face. After all, if you are well regarded for being an intellectual and your offspring is average or cheating. Why do I emphasis average? Well given Tony's egotism, plus Annie thinking that asking for legitimate help on understanding subjects, I'm wondering specifically what Tony thinks of her work. I mean lets say that she performed well on an assignment without cheating, but doesn't get 100%. I wouldn't be surprised if Tony frowns on that kind of work. Basically like those parents who expect complete As from their kids and will piss and moan if there's even a single B or mostly As with an -A. Now for those who find Tony to be a good parent, fine. Then it should be easy to rebuke my points directly. |
|
|
|
Post by keef on Aug 6, 2015 21:53:17 GMT
[wild spec]He promised he could help. Could it be she chose him over Eglamore because of that? Sounds a bit calculating for Surma. On the other hand she seduced Renard because she was ordered to do so. [/wild spec]
Where is Rey anyway?
|
|
|
|
Post by Rasselas on Aug 6, 2015 22:09:24 GMT
I also find these knee-jerk sentiments of outrage to be dangerous. People like to think they're enlightened and progressive-minded but they eagerly participate in the same mentality that made mobs cheer at guillotines and lynchings. Recognizing abuse in other situations, even those you consider not bad enough to qualify as abuse, is nothing more than recognizing that situation is abusive. It's unfair, and hypocritical to say the suffering of children in situations like Annie's just isn't enough to count as abuse. You are doing to others exactly what you don't want anyone to do to you. I'm not going to claim I know everything. I'm only human and we can all make mistakes or express ourselves imperfectly. I do know that it hurts to read when people are using the word "abuse" so easily. It hurts beyond just being frustrated at reading something I didn't like. One time, I asked my mother if she'd help me learn to play something on the piano. She's a music teacher. She said, oh, no, that is far beyond your level, you can't learn that. I was outraged, I found the score and a CD with a recording, I practiced and learned it on my own. This was very dumb of my mother, and something I resent her for, but it was not abuse. When she was sitting by my side as I practiced piano for music school, berating me verbally, that was abuse. I was crying, repeating one little part ad nauseam through tears while she gouged a crescendo sign into my notes. When I had to explain to my music professor why I had the grooved-in pencil mark in my score, that was abuse. He had asked about it and I wanted to sink into the piano chair out of utter shame. On the scale of abuse, it's relatively mild and one might even call it a first world problem - after all, I was enrolled in music school. Clearly my parents wanted the best for me. Still that example is undeniable abuse. When I got an eye tic in first grade and developed a habit of forgetting about anything that was uncomfortable to me, that was a sign of abuse. I started forgetting things, even things I liked. My memory stopped being reliable. I did to myself what Coyote's done to Ysengrin. "Let's just get rid of this little unpleasantness. You won't miss a thing." When my father told me I could never become a writer in English, because I wasn't a native speaker, that was certainly something I resent him for. It still wasn't abuse. When my mother beat me up savagely with her heavy shoe and threw it at me while I cowered in a corner, that was definitely abuse. You can see that this example of abuse isn't debatable, the things I consider abuse are unquestionably so. Not every unpleasant and dumb thing qualifies as abuse. On the other hand, it is a good sign that our standards for parenthood have increased over generations. Things that weren't considered so bad in the past are looked at more strictly today. The caveat is going too far in the other direction and abandoning actual parenting because it might be uncomfortable to children. Annie being pushed back a year because of cheating is not abuse. Annie having to cut off a part of herself in order to survive her father's return... On that one, even I am willing to concede. I would be willing to admit it's abuse, if it had been due to continuous mistreatment over a longer period of time. But this has all been a tragic mistake, an ugly misunderstanding. Annie is still surrounded with people who care about her, and even her father cares in his dumb way. He doesn't want to continue doing her harm, and I suspect once he realizes the impact he has on his daughter, he will change his approach drastically. When I confronted my mother, she tried gaslighting tactics first ("You're misremembering that"), then she said "You had bad grades and after I beat you up, they got better." She gloated over it. Even though we've reconciled since, it is with a deep sense of wariness from my side, because she has not changed her dysfunctional patterns. I always wait for the scorpion's tail. These factors all make a huge difference in how willing I am to consider something abuse. The motive of the abuser, how consistent it is, and how unchangeable and desperate the situation might seem. All these factors are important. If Annie was truly being abused, she could run away to be with the Donlans. That's what abused kids do, they run away or they self-harm, up to trying suicide. Which, Annie is harming herself, but she does have other options. It seems the situation is not bad enough to pursue them. So yeah, in some ways the situation she's in is abusive. But the origin of the abuse is a huge misunderstanding with a high chance of a positive resolution, not the result of a consistent pattern of mistreatment. I dunno. I apologize for long-windedness and dragging on on such an unpleasant and difficult subject. I just really wish there'd be more understanding and less stone-throwing around. Yet, despite all that, this forum is really great at managing to discuss even these subjects with some semblance of civility. Considering the internet, that's a pretty amazing thing. |
|
|
|
Post by antiyonder on Aug 6, 2015 22:23:52 GMT
Reposting this here as people don't care to go back a page, and am awaiting direct proof that I'm wrong. I have no intention of playing the game of "who's had it worse." If you think Anthony is an abuser, I don't know what to tell you. Bad parent, yeah, clumsy and inconsiderate adult, yeah for sure. A person acting out of malice towards his own child, he isn't. He's a deeply caring, tragically misguided, misled and misunderstood man. For example, my father has done things similar to what Annie's gone through, but I never saw him as the abuser - my mother was the one. The things my father's done I may resent, but it's my mother who still gives me nightmares, to this day. It's a huge difference in degree, it almost can't be compared. Ok, I'm still not ready to declare it abuse myself, but isn't it inaccurate to insist that abusive parents are basically like mustache stroking supervillains? mean as deplorable as they are, said parents don't necessarily take pleasure in their behavior and might even try to convince themselves they are in the right. edit: This same argument has been ongoing since March. Other than Refugee it's unlikely most will change their minds, so maybe I should've just left this alone. I don't understand the desire of some to bend over backwards to justify Tony's behavior and mindset. But maybe I don't need to. Given some people being a strong advocate of the tough love approach, I imagine relatibility is a factor. Thus by extension we're critiquing the posters who might share traits with Tony. Tough love mind you might be necessary on a case by case basis, but even if it doesn't lead to abuse, tough love can easily be overdone to an unhealthy and unproductive degree. Now for those who are still in Camp Tony, you are entitled to your stance, but at least have the courtesy not to dodge arguments and actually try harder to rebuke comments against him. Otherwise if you can't rebuke an argument, then you need to reconsider your stance or at least not be claiming we're wrong. -No he did not abandon her. He made it so the court would look after her until he was ready. -He provided for her even in his absence, she had a clean safe place to live and those who would look after her. -He provided for her access to education and even Freedom to leave the campus if the campus allowed it, since GKC was watching out for her. Well, we're living beings, not machines. Knowledge, skills and the like are important, but emotional needs also need to be considered when evaluating a parent's capability. Leaving her without anyone she can turn to for emotional support or companionship is a serious act of stupidity. And you can't even say that Anthony doesn't understand the need for such as Surma's death affected him greatly, plus the fact that he can express emotions. Now up until recently it could be assumed that he set things up so that the Donlans would discover Annie was attending, thus giving her people who could lend her support, but the mention of him avoiding contact after Surma's death leads me to thinking that Anja getting a notice of Annie's attendance was fate working in Annie's favor. But yeah, companionship is just as important as skills, morality and health. Heck, some anti-social folks may have the luxury of a high paying job that lets them work in an isolated cubicle, but a good plenty of folks have to work in an atmosphere which requires interaction with, well other people. And if the job requires understanding how to deal with people, lack of social skills can be a legit reason for firing or denying employment to the social outcast. Bottomline, emotional stability and companionship for the most part can be arguably just as important as academic skills and health, something Tony neglected. I'll give you this to a point, but there is also the unneeded coldness to her such as Anthony rudely dismissing Annie's concern for his hand rather than saying "I care not to discuss my well being for the moment. Near isolation is still not the answer. Not to mention that even with his disappointment in her, their meeting in the classroom is the first time they've been together for quite a while. He doesn't need to praise her unconditionally, but at least show her that he cares for her. And while discipline is something that many parents need to be willing to do and is a sign that some care about their children, sometimes it's done simply because the parents are more concerned about saving face. After all, if you are well regarded for being an intellectual and your offspring is average or cheating. Why do I emphasis average? Well given Tony's egotism, plus Annie thinking that asking for legitimate help on understanding subjects, I'm wondering specifically what Tony thinks of her work. I mean lets say that she performed well on an assignment without cheating, but doesn't get 100%. I wouldn't be surprised if Tony frowns on that kind of work. Basically like those parents who expect complete As from their kids and will piss and moan if there's even a single B or mostly As with an -A. Now for those who find Tony to be a good parent, fine. Then it should be easy to rebuke my points directly. Annie being pushed back a year because of cheating is not abuse. So, any quotes suggesting that holding her back and only holding her back is abuse? True, but aren't some victims of legit abuse known to sometimes think they deserve it, especially if it's from a family member with authority? Discussions can greatly benefit if people choose not to be so evasive and respond to a particular point the first time. As I told Refugee before in a PM, it's like you have to post sometimes countless times before someone finally "notices" it. By which I mean hassling someone until they stop dodging a comment and respond. Afterall, the best way to shut someone up isn't to bully or belittle them (all critics of Anthony are wrong), but to do a thorough rebuttal to each particular argument. |
|
|
|
Post by Rasselas on Aug 6, 2015 22:45:50 GMT
I have no intention of playing the game of "who's had it worse." If you think Anthony is an abuser, I don't know what to tell you. Bad parent, yeah, clumsy and inconsiderate adult, yeah for sure. A person acting out of malice towards his own child, he isn't. He's a deeply caring, tragically misguided, misled and misunderstood man. For example, my father has done things similar to what Annie's gone through, but I never saw him as the abuser - my mother was the one. The things my father's done I may resent, but it's my mother who still gives me nightmares, to this day. It's a huge difference in degree, it almost can't be compared. Ok, I'm still not ready to declare it abuse myself, but isn't it inaccurate to insist that abusive parents are basically like mustache stroking supervillains? mean as deplorable as they are, said parents don't necessarily take pleasure in their behavior and might even try to convince themselves they are in the right. There is usually some degree of rationalization and a lack of self-awareness. I dunno, sometimes abusive parents truly do act like crude villains. Sometimes you could not invent them as bad as they are in reality, people would tell you you're writing a caricature. But... It's true that it's a matter of degrees, and it's more complicated than a race to the worst end of the spectrum. Like I said, I don't think Tony is a good parent. I may even concede that he is abusive in some ways, if not directly then indirectly. But it's a question of degrees and there are many factors to consider. It's not this monolithic undeniable truth. |
|
