Torture Vs Abuse

[joeylittle]

It's people using torture as a catch-all phrase instead of using it where it belongs, in a very specific context.

Yes - this is exactly what this thread is really chipping away at.

I've known for a long time that the "good times"/quiet times are increasing anxiety periods for abuse. The longer the no-abuse, the higher the anxiety. Waiting for the shoe to drop. That's pretty well known / talked about / understood in DV & abuse circles...But T isn't like that. At least, not my experience. It's that switch from whatever it is while you're not, to while you are...IDK if that rings true for anyone else who's done the torture thing. Or if it's just a me thing.

Not just a you thing. This post was really illuminating for me - and also hits on that difference that comes with captivity - at least, for me. I don't think I was tortured, in the truest sense of the word - I think what I experienced imitated torture in a very close way - but, there was something around day 3 that changed for me, in what I experienced. Something where there wasn't a waiting, or even an outside world. And psychology didn't matter anymore. Sigh, can't really get it into words. But what you wrote about this made sense to me. Off/on.

I think with enough pressure (peer?) people can tap into some very dark sides.

I would go further to suggest that this was the crux of the SPE in the first place. It's due to roles. The roles we take on, the way our environment influences us.

What I find compelling - frightening - about these experiments was that it was about giving permission. All you have to do is give people permission, and they will quite quickly escalate to a level of authority/abuse/control that anyone from the outside would call, psychopathic or sadistic. Assigned roles, permission to perform those roles, and some kind of overarching authority granting them the right.

That overarching authority can also be seen in some religion settings, where god is interpreted as having given the devout the right to inflict massive pain and punishment on the sinners. I'm not sure what's so different about the SPE and the Inquisition, really.

 

[Friday]

I don't believe everyone could torture someone else. Do you?

Under the right pressure, I have come to believe anyone is capable of anything.

A parent of a kidnapped child, for example, is usually ready to skin someone -not figuratively- if it would get them information as to where their child is located. Same goes for soldiers trying to find captured troops, or bombs; trying to save their own lives or the lives of everyone they care about.

I've got a lot more examples of first & second hand stuff, if needed, but Id prefer not to think about it right now. My experience, however, tells me that with the right lever? Yes. Anyone is capable of anything.

 

[Ronin]

Anyone is capable of anything.

And here I was, thinking of after effects / falling apart, or, capable, yes, choosing, no.

Which is also very good news. I mean, I honestly admire those people that stand by what they believe in & refuse to do, even with pressure. Not useful it may be, admirable.

 

[shimmerz]

Under the right pressure, I have come to believe anyone is capable of anything.

Yes, and this is hard to wrap my head around. I believe I was tortured by a man that I didn't think was capable of such, (he used other people to do the dirty deed) but myself, I have been given many opportunities to reciprocate and have been unable to do so. That may well have something to do with the age of my trauma and it affecting me in such a way that I truly believe I cannot fight back. This is why I asked the question. I really don't trust that I am a good gauge of what is 'normal' or 'human'. So this I cannot debate with any accuracy I am afraid.

but Id prefer not to think about it right now.

Of course. I trust that what you are saying is true from your own experiences. No need to further the discussion or details of it.

 

[Nyssa]

This thread is hard to read, but very instructive. Thank you all.

I don't have any contribution to make on the definition of torture or his difference to abuse.

Just a few words on how I can sometimes be tempted to misuse the word "torture".

I was not tortured, not by any definition. I don't think any of my experience qualify as extreme abuse either -- although I'm unclear on what that term covers. Yet, sometimes, I'm thinking : "Some of it was beyond abuse... ", and in the absence of word to describe this, torture comes to my lazy mind. I disregard it. I won't say I was tortured, because I know I wasn't. But it leaves this "beyondness" of mine unqualified, which leaves me alone with it.

Why my personal worst can not just be worse than the rest of my experience? Why do I feel the need to put it in a different category? What was so different about it?

The fear, I think. The literally unbearable fear of the unescapable coming at me. A fear so intense that it felt I was going to die from it. And so painful that all I wanted was to jump out of the window to make it stop.

This is unrivaled in my experience of abuse. So I sometimes feel like it requires a different designation. Not finding it is frustrating.

The problem is, words tend to go meaningless in the face of horror.

 

[Sideways]

@Nyssa - totally get it. What my dad did when I was tiny was abuse. But it paled in comparison with what I was in for when I was 12. Calling them the same thing seems wrong. Feels wrong. Frailty of language.

When it comes to suffering, I can easily recognise that all abuse is pretty damn awful. Abuse is abuse. But for me, it's not. But I know in my head that my 2 seperate experiences were different. I try and be honest with myself about what really happened and the damage that each experience did. And I think that's as good as it gets. I understand, and my T understands, and that's enough. Whatever word I use to describe it, as long as I'm being honest with myself, it's okay.

And I kind of hope that this thread hasn't interfered with the way we use language. I'm still allowed to say that watching 3 straight hours of Dora The Explorer with my neice would be 'torturous' - I'm hoping that people get that it's just language sometimes. Nothing more.

 

[lostforgottensoul]

There is a US federal law defining torture and federal law is over any State law however per a Human Rights site, the US uses State law unless there isnt one then it uses federal law. Per my research that Ive done between calls at work but the UN law doesnt come in until it speaks about international. Again, not read up and not fully educated on the UN law yet so I dont want to speak directly to it yet. Just researching the US only on laws of torture it seems that we use State laws then federal if now state law is present or steps over the state law:

18 U.S. Code § 2340 - Definitions

(1)

“torture” means an act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control;
(2)“severe mental pain or suffering” means the prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting from—
(A)the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering;
(B)the administration or application, or threatened administration or application, of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality;
(C)the threat of imminent death; or
(D)the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, or the administration or application of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality; and
(3)“United States” means the several States of the United States, the District of Columbia, and the commonwealths, territories, and possessions of the United States.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2340

Thats a law school site so I found it on a goverment site (exact same wording):

http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?...elim&granuleId=USC-prelim-title18-section2340

What is torture?

The Convention against Torture defines torture as "any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession…." (Art. 1). It may be "inflicted by or at the instigation of or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity."

e.g.
beating on the soles of the feet; electric shock applied to genitals and nipples;
rape; near drowning through submersion in water; near suffocation by plastic
bags tied around the head; burning; whipping; needles inserted under fingernails;
mutilation; hanging by feet or hands for prolonged periods.

International law also prohibits mistreatment that does not meet the definition
of torture...

...Examples of such prohibited mistreatment include being forced to stand spread eagled against the wall; being subjected to bright lights or blindfolding; being subjected to continuous loud noise; being deprived of sleep, food or drink; being subjected to forced constant standing or crouching; or violent shaking. In essence, any form of physical treatment used to intimidate, coerce or "break" a person during an interrogation constitutes prohibited ill-treatment. If these practices are intense enough, prolonged in duration, or combined with other measures that result in severe pain or suffering, they can qualify as
torture.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2003/03/11/legal-prohibition-against-torture#What

This part of the site goes into the UN law:

https://www.hrw.org/news/2003/03/11/legal-prohibition-against-torture#laws

Thats as much research as I could do thus far at work. When googling "When does the UN law on torture apply inside of the US" im not getting much other than wikipedia which I dont find crediable in much. Im trying to find federal sites, international law sites, things rather credable. The site that speaks about the UN law seems to speak about "crimes against humanity" or thats how Im understanding it. It doesnt go deep into it other than we joined in 1992, it started in 1948 due to horrific torture during WW II and it goes into specific questions but what I can see, thus far, is intergations, military treatment etc. But Im not done researching, this is just what Ive found.

 

[joeylittle]

@lostforgottensoul - when you have a moment, please edit your post with some more formatting for clarity. When providing a link, there is no need to copy/paste the whole text of the link. Also, use [quote] and [/quote] or some other format to delineate what you are quoting vs what is your own comment. Thanks!

 

[Kintsugi]

im not getting much other than wikipedia which I dont find crediable in much.

Really? That article cites such sources as Yale, UN press releases, University of Chicago, and Amnesty International. Looks like a golden compilation of sources to me.

 

[lostforgottensoul]

Not sure why two quote codes for on there unless we were both doing it lol. Sorry.

 

[Weemie]

I think that you can have situations that resemble what people commonly assume to be torture. This in particular:

International law also prohibits mistreatment that does not meet the definition of torture, either because less severe physical or mental pain is inflicted, or because the necessary purpose of the ill-treatment is not present. It affirms the right of every person not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. In essence, any form of physical treatment used to intimidate, coerce or "break" a person during an interrogation constitutes prohibited ill-treatment.

That last bit is important. It constitutes prohibited ill-treatment but it is not necessarily torture. I have experienced many of those examples first-hand.

Spoiler

Sitting/standing (awkward positions) for long periods of time. Use of drugs. Restraints. Rape. Bright lights. Tasing. Suffocation. Drowning.

Some from people who did not know what they were doing. This is different because I experienced fear. I was sure that they would kill me. I could not trust them. I could not trust them? Perhaps that sounds odd. Some from people who did. Some from people who were playing. Some from people who were not. I have yet to understand what this really means, but for now, I will set this down.

 

[lostforgottensoul]

@Simply Simon doing as much research as I can on a phone at work between calls and the way i worded it, it didnt pull up much and i didnt have time to go through them all but will. Give me some time as Im now on a misson lol.

I have experienced many of those examples first-hand.

I have too!