Should we apologise?

[orsinian]

When I left school, in the early 1980s, I worked for a while in West Germany, right at the height of the Cold War. At the time there were Europe-wide demos against Cruise and Pershing missiles. Whilst I worked in the country I came into contact with plenty of activists, and in due course (well actually quite a few years later) I started calling myself a feminist.

And in the course of the intervening years I've been pretty proud of the movement, with just a few exceptions (the SCUM manifesto for instance).

In the last few months though, particularly when talking to some new female students in Bradford, I'm finding the subject of one of the more embarrassing moments in history is coming up, more and more regularly, and it isn't referencing feminism in a positive fashion.

I'm writing about SRA - Satanic Ritual Abuse, from the late 1980s and 90s. It pretty much passed me by all that time ago, really 'cos I wasn't back in England until the mid-nineties.

But the subject won't go away, and I'm sick to death of hearing the accusation that feminism colluded with christian fundamentalism during the 'witch-hunt' years, and I'm really sick of hearing that idea from student historians and social scientists who are studying the subject in scary detail.

I don't want to start a thread about the existence or not of SRA-there's more than enough on the subject on the Web (try for instance 'feminists satanic ritual abuse' in Google).

No, what I want to ask is, how do we, a generation or two after the events of the 80s and 90s, get a line drawn under all of it? It had nothing to do with feminists of my age and those who followed.

In Germany, I remember that young Germans hated being associated with a generation who had made their mistakes 30-odd years ago previously. If mistakes were made during the SRA years, why should later feminists be expected to be associated with those errors?

I know its a distasteful subject, and I know it stirs emotions. If you think though it will remain just a background hum, then you will be sadly mistaken. The subject, judging by the stuff on the Web, isn't going to go away anytime soon.

lol at mullet. It was a very bad mullet. Someone should apologise for V Wood's mullet. Perhaps Bruce Forsyth?

Helen, if you've got too much time on your hands how about this:

Should the Americans apologize to Japan for dropping two atomic bombs on their heads, wiping out two cities? Because they haven't.

And lol @ ColdComfortFarm!

Yes sakura they should but only after Japan can give a written apology and that their political parties stop denying the occurrence of the Nanking Massacre where hundreds of thousands of Chinese civilians and disarmed soldiers were murdered and 20,000?80,000 women were raped by soldiers of the Imperial Japanese Army

Ah but was that true? What is true?

Good point, though. Get Helen on the case.

i wonder if helensharp is really helen sharp's great academic enemy, trying to make her look like a bit of a sneery nobbo on the internet?

cos no-one really puts their real name up as a forum nickname, do they? not unless they don't have a blithering clue about the world.

Florence Rush. Is that what you're on about orsinian?
In 1971 she spoke at the New York Radical Feminists (NYRF) Rape Conference and said "The family itself is an instrument of sexual and other forms of child abuse......... this abuse is permitted because it is an unspoken but prominent factor in socializing and preparing the female to accept a subordinate role.... In short the sexual abuse of female children is a process of education that prepares them to become the wives and mothers of America."
(Not colluding with Christians though).

If you look around the web (I have been - it is quite interesting) there are a few articles to be found. But it's only because I've been seeking them out. Society isn't generally criticizing feminism for the panic. And as I said there are equally articles about feminists such as Debbie Nathan who debunked the panic.

Mostly American stuff though. Not really here. I don't think it passed you by because you were out of the country at the time OP, I just think that feminism wasn't that associated with it.

or unless they really want to prove they're a woman.

So wait...the OP thinks feminism was associated with Satanic Rituals? Have I got that right? ANd that because of that there must be a deep-seated flaw in feminism?

I though feminism was about sexism and patriarchy and shit.

she still hasn't explained what her problem is with the SCUM manifesto.
I think it's v funny.

I don't get this thread at all.

As far as I understand it, the OP wants feminists to apologise for either:

1. not speaking out about the non-existence of satanic ritual abuse.

1. in the 1990s supporting the idea that satanic ritual abuse existed.

But none of us know anything about SRA and why on earth should we? It is not up to me to decide whether or not SRA exists or has ever existed. It is clearly something that needs to be decided at by specialists in the field.

FWIW, I do think SRA exists. Children are highly susceptible to believing in fantastical things, and bringing the idea of the devil and evil spirits into it is an effective way for a paedophile ring to frighten a child into silence. It also means that if a child does speak out and describe what has happened to them, it is very hard for anyone to take action against the perpetrator because the child mentioned the devil, and as everyone has now decided that SRA is a myth, the child's testimony becomes weak evidence. So of course child abusers will use SRA - it is an excellent way of controlling and discrediting victims at the same time.

I suppose it must be difficult if you want to build a career as an academic but you are working in a field that has little public exposure, but if you are researching processes involved in the investigation of child abuse, it is absolutely right that the public has little knowledge of the topic. I think it is absurd that the OP thinks that feminists as member of the general public should be involving themselves in such a sensitive and highly specialised area.

Of course the existence of child abuse in general is a matter of feminist and public concern, and we all want it to be dealt with seriously and correct judgements to be arrived at by the professionals involved, but when it comes to the details of how abusers do or do not operate, it isn't really up to people outside of the professions to take any kind of responsibility for that.

I can't get my head around the argument here. Is it part of this trend away from individual responsibility for ethical conduct in academia? It is up to the social workers involved, social services and the Government to apologise to the people of Orkney and Rochdale.

Milly, I think what's happening is that someone, somewhere is somehow trying to associate feminism with SRA in a pathetic attempt to "tar feminism with the smelly brush".
As if we're all going to start going,
"Hmmm, should we apologize for Satanic rituals?"
"Well I don't know, maybe we should."
"Let's discuss it a bit first, before we decide"

yes I think that's it Sakura, except it's not SRA itself we're meant to be apologising for, but the SRA scare, ie the appalling way it was 'investigated' and the fact that children were taken away from their parents on the flimsiest of evidence.

I see...
I can't say that's any of that is a central tenet of feminism though, can you?

Oooh were we responsible for that too? I get that my son thinks most of his issues (ie can't find hw, can't find shoes, he's eaten all the cornflakes) are my fault but I'd never realised that I was in any way responsible for statanic child abuse. Doh! What an old silly I am

BTW who exactly is 'we'?

Pfft, Orm, you're so out of touch.
We refers to
"People who did nothing to stop satanic abuse allegations: miners, horse-whisperers, strippers, banana-growers, professional tap-dancers, members of White's club, Billy Dainty, my mother-in-law, the late Morcambe and Wise, Victoria Wood, pigeon-fanciers, supermarket check-out workers, ship-builders." (copyright CCC)

Ohhhhh! Is that list extendable at will or do you have to apply for permission to the We-directorate?

Ask Helen the OP

She hasn't been back to the thread for ages because she's busy on the Cats Protection League forum trying to find out why they haven't apologised yet.

PMSL!

^Milly, I think what's happening is that someone, somewhere is somehow trying to associate feminism with SRA in a pathetic attempt to "tar feminism with the smelly brush".
As if we're all going to start going,
"Hmmm, should we apologize for Satanic rituals?"
"Well I don't know, maybe we should."
"Let's discuss it a bit first, before we decide"^

I call Overton Window!

Abso-bloody-lutely tortoise.

What's the best way to draw a line under it?

How about by not stirring up a discussion about it?

ha ha, Tortoise wins!