There was an article on an Australian website recently on "mild paedophilia" mainly about Richard Dawkins' justification for a bit of sexual groping not having a lasting impact on someone. Most comments under the article disagree with such an irresponsible statement, yet there are those who feel he "has a point".
A well-known physicist, Professor Brian Cox, in one of his talks on quantum physics says that "...subatomic building blocks of our bodies are constantly shifting in response to events that happened at the edge of the known universe a billion light years somewhere over there...(pointing towards the sky)." Even for the biggest of science sceptics, if we stop but for a moment and truly deeply feel into this statement would we not be far more responsible for absolutely everything that we say and indeed how we say it?
And if this profound piece of science has even the tiniest grain of truth in it, how shut down do we need to be to deny any responsibility that an ill physical, let alone energetic act - the one the eyes do not necessarily see as in, our words and our thoughts, the ones Brian Cox is referring to in his statement - may have on not just ourselves but on others too?
I recently spoke to someone who had experienced abuse from the age of 3 for a number of years. Interestingly, they only fully recalled what had gone on some 30 years later!
I was taken aback - Why so late?!
"Probably because it seemed an 'easier' choice" - was the response. They went on to say that at the time they were working for the National Health Service, involved in running a course on drug misuse and childhood abuse. On the way to the course event whilst driving on dual carriageway, the terrible pictures started to come back so vividly that they were nearly involved in an accident. The next few months were spent in recovery.
Since my conversation with this person and a few others who were either abused or close to somebody who had experienced abuse, I often find in cases such as theirs there seems to be a pattern where the parents had been abused too, so when a young child tells the parents about the 'naughty uncle' from across the road it gets completely dismissed.
Not a single person in their family wanted to acknowledge and accept it either at the time of the abuse or decades later. This particular person was told by their mother that they had gone mad from reading too many books and that they should be locked away - this to her own child for telling her about the abuse that indeed did take place! And their sister dismissed it as a bad dream!
Now, hang on a second, my one eyebrow raised - a dream that lasted a few years?!
But why I ask, Why would those close and dear to us not accept the truth?
Is it possible that so many have experienced abuse that when they hear someone else talk about it they then feel their own pain, something they would rather not go back to.
If we consider that the Taboo of Paedophilia is a powerful configuration of a consciousness that is the complete opposite to Love, it is important that we also examine what or rather WHO feeds this consciousness to stay in control and have power over us.
Responsibility can be a hard pill to swallow. But what if statements such as the one from Dawkins (whether they are verbalised or not) and all the gentle (or not so) nodding of our heads, the agreeing, the not speaking up, the hush hushing (like in the case of the Catholic Church) the remaining silent even when we know that something is rotten and does not feel right, are the very things that fortify this consciousness of abuse?
Do we not become the very people who feed these subatomic building blocks of ours and all the other bodies so that the power of taboo is configured in a way that it can get cemented?
Without sounding doom and gloom (just realistic), it is hard to deny that we live in a world that is littered with illness and disease, horrors and abuse. But is it not time that we reflect on our own acts and thoughts and how we individually may be contributing to this mayhem - child sexual abuse included?
Is it possible that we do not see the issue of yielding the energy that is not love as an individual responsibility not because we cannot but because we are choosing not to?