On Jan 1, 8:44=A0am, ivmi...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>
-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D--=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=
=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-
> -=3D abuse in. set-up situations and in public -=3D
>
-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D--=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=
=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-
>
> Strangers in the street have recognized me on sight many times, and.
shown=
> awareness of the current thread of abuse. To give you one. example, in
199=
2
> I was. seriously ill, and a manager at work somewhat humorously said
that
> "it wasn't fair" that people were bullying me. A few days. later, I
attend=
ed
> for the first time a clinic in London as an. outpatient, and on my way
out=
> was accosted by. someone who asked if "they had paid my fare", with
emphas=
is
> on the word "fare". He repeated. the word several times in this
different
> context; that. they should have paid my "fare", each time emphasizing
the
> word.
>
> For two and a half years from the. time their harassment started until
> November. 1992 I refused to see a psychiatrist, because I reasoned that
I
> was not ill of my own action or fault, but through the stress caused. by
> harassment, and that a lessening of the illness would have to. be
conseque=
nt
> to a removal of its immediate cause, in. other words a cessation of
> harassment. I also reasoned that since they were. taunting me with jokes
> about mental illness, if I were. to seek treatment then the abusers
would
> think that they had. "won" and been proved "right". Remember, the
constant=
> theme of any persecution is, "we must destroy you because you're. X",
> whether X is a racial or other. attribute. In this case the X was "we
> persecute you because you. have brain disease". The similarity of this
log=
ic
> to Nazi attitudes to the mentally ill. is striking.
>
> The same manager who'd said "it wasn't fair" asked me in winter. 1992
why =
I
> didn't seek help from a psychiatrist; was it, he. asked, because "they
wou=
ld
> think they had won" if I. sought treatment? That was something I'd never
> said at work... again, taken separately it proves nothing, but many.
such
> things over a period of months proves conclusively that people in. the
> company knew what was going on, and in quite. a lot of detail.
>
> Usually harassment in public lacks. the level of finesse of "paying your
> fare". Most people's imagination does not go. beyond moronic parroting
of
> the current term of denigration. That is not surprising. given the
average=
> level. of the abusers; if they do not have the intelligence to
distinguish=
> wrong from right then neither will they have the. capacity for anything
> other than mindless repetition of a monosyllabic. term calculated to fit
> into their. minds.
>
> The. first incidents of verbal assault in public were in again in the
summ=
er
> of 1990, although they increased in. frequency and venom with time. In
Jul=
y
> 1990 the first. public incident occurred on a tube train on the Northern
> line. Two men and their girlfriends recognised me;. the women sprang to
my=
> defence, saying "He. looks perfectly normal, he doesn't look ill". Their
> boyfriends of course knew better, and followed the party line;. one of
the=
m
> made reference to an "operation", apparently to work. at the tube
station
> but implicitly to a visit that I had made to hospital a. couple of weeks
> previously.
>
> In August 1990 going home from college, soon after getting on a tube.
trai=
n
> at Gloucester Road I was followed. by a group of four youths, who
started =
a
> chant of abuse. That they were targeting me was confirmed by. other
people=
> in. the carriage, one of whom asked the other "who are they going on at,
i=
s
> it the bloke who just got on?" to which the second. replied "yes, I
think
> so". I was tempted. to reply, but as in every other instance the abusers
a=
re
> enabled in their cowardice by physically. outnumbering the abused; any
> confrontation would result in my. being beaten up, followed by a
complaint=
> to the police that "he attacked us",. and of course he's ill, so he must
> have been imagining that we were. getting at him. ****y, aren't they?
>
> But the. ****iness of the four youths on the tube train is as nothing
> compared to the episode on the National Express. coach to Dover in the
> summer of 1992. While going on holiday to the. Continent I was verbally
se=
t
> upon by. a couple travelling sitting a few rows behind. The boy did the
> talking, his female companion contributing. only a continuous empty
giggli=
ng
> noise. He spoke loudly. to ensure other people on the coach heard,
always
> about. "they" and "this bloke" but never naming either the abusers or
the
> person he was talking about. He. said "they" had "found somebody from
his
> school, and he was always really stressed at school". They must. have
dug
> deep to find enemies there; perhaps someone. who dropped out of school,
> someone who didn't do too well later, who was jealous and. keen to get
the=
ir
> own back? The boy also said. "he was in a bed and breakfast for only one
> night and they got him".. By a not unexpected coincidence I had been in
a
> B&B in Oxford a week previously, which had. been booked from work; other
> things. lead me to the conclusion that the company's offices were bugged
f=
or
> most of the 2 1/2 years that I was there,. so "they" would have known a
ro=
om
> in the B&B had been. booked. (But I'll bet "they" didn't tell the
company'=
s
> managers their offices were bugged, did. they?).
>
> After. a few minutes of this I went back to where they were sitting and
> asked where. they were travelling. The boy named a village in France,
and
> the girl's giggling suddenly ceased;. presumably it permeated to her
brain=
> cell what the purpose. of the boy's abuse was.
>
> This. and other set-up situations are obviously calculated to provoke a
> direct confrontation which would. bring in the police, with the abusers
> claiming that they were the ones attacked. Again in 1992,. outside the
> house where I was living in Oxford I was physically attacked by. someone
-=
> not punched, just grabbed by the. coat, with some verbals thrown in for
go=
od
> measure. That was something. the people at work shouldn't have known
> about... but soon after. a couple of people were talking right in front
of=
> me about, "I heard he was attacked". The. UK police have a
responsibility
> for preventing assault occurring, but they do not seem. to take any
intere=
st
> in meeting that responsibility.. I suppose their attitude is that
harassme=
nt
> does not come within their remit unless it involves physical. assault,
and=
> they will only become involved once that happens. That is of course.
quite=
> the wrong attitude for them to take,. but as I now understand, the
police
> investigate only the crime they wish. to investigate; if they do not
take
> your complaints seriously then there is nothing. you can do to make them
> take. action.
>
> 3303
tinfoil tin foil tinfoil
|
