Moderator: Moderators
Really Jim, you are going to bring up the argument that Peterson is a victim of his environment theory?Mothman wrote: So, is Peterson a monster or a damaged individual continuing a cycle of punishment he learned when he himself was struck with a switch as a child?
Please don't go there.I don't think it's considered hearsay when the source of a statement confirms that he made the statement.Purple Reign wrote:Unless anything was put in writing it is just all hearsay anyway.
He also said that time served would only be 'considered' and only if Peterson showed up for the Friday meeting, which he didn't. Maybe hearsay wasn't the correct term, I should have said unless it's in writing it doesn't mean anything anyway.Mothman wrote: I don't think it's considered hearsay when the source of a statement confirms that he made the statement.
Unfortunately a person can be both. I don't know if Peterson is a 'monster' or not but I don't think people would have any problem applying that label to him if he were just some 'Joe Six-Pack' and we were hearing about it on the local news.Mothman wrote: So, is Peterson a monster or a damaged individual continuing a cycle of punishment he learned when he himself was struck with a switch as a child? I don't want to steer this too far afield from football-related matters, and you don't even have to answer the question, but I think that's an aspect of this case people should at least think about. While we decry the damage inflicted on a child and the psychological harm it could cause, we should at least consider the psychological harm that may have been caused to Peterson when he was a child and how that may have led to the situation we're discussing now.
I think we're all but obligated to go there.Purple Reign wrote: Really Jim, you are going to bring up the argument that Peterson is a victim of his environment theory?
I didn't suggest his childhood experiences should have any influence on how he is punished, only that they're something to be considered when viewing him as a person. I just think it's too easy to apply a pejorative term that dehumanizes him and act as if this one action utterly defines him as a person, when that's likely not the case.Cliff wrote:Unfortunately a person can be both. I don't know if Peterson is a 'monster' or not but I don't think people would have any problem applying that label to him if he were just some 'Joe Six-Pack' and we were hearing about it on the local news.
Considering how a person was treated themselves as a child isn't really the standard for how that person is punished (or even viewed, most of the time) as an adult. A child molester is likely to have been molested themselves as a child, but they don't get off lite for repeating the actions as an adult.
Michael Josephson wrote:We judge our own character by our best intentions and most noble acts, but we will be judged by our last worst act.
Whatever anyone thinks about Peterson, I wish the best for him, for his career going forward and for his family. Personally, I'm going to pray for healing and hope it can happen. He can't undo what he did -- although I'm sure he wishes he could. I can't imagine it will be a good thing when his son becomes aware -- years from now -- that pictures still exist on the internet of his naked body showing marks from a beating his father gave him that eventually ruined his father's career and reputation. That's gong to suck. And, yeah, it won't be the son's fault. Meanwhile, most of us will forget about it, until we are reminded when Peterson becomes Hall of Fame eligible. What's done is done, and what most of us overlook is that it will never be done for Peterson or for his son or family. Someday this story will show up in Peterson's obituary. Enough already. Let's move on. There's nothing more to see.Mothman wrote: I think we're all but obligated to go there.
Isn't one of the main reasons we consider physical abuse of a child wrong because it damages the child, not just physically but pyschologically and developmentally? One of the reasons corporal punishment as a form of discipline for children is controversial is because, again, research suggests it can damage a child's development. If I'm not mistaken, it's fairly well-established that the kind of behavior at issue here tends to be cyclical in nature so we can hardly view it as coincidental that Peterson, who was reportedly "raised with the switch" is repeating behavior he apparently learned through his own childhood experiences.
What's the alternative view? Are we supposed to believe Peterson's background had no influence on his behavior? I'm not suggesting he's blameless (or innocent) but it seems likely that he was part of a cycle that needed to be broken. Personally, I think it makes more sense to see him as a misguided individual who unintentionally crossed a line that shouldn't be crossed than as a brutal "monster".
"If one does not understand a person, one tends to regard him as a fool." — Carl JungCliff wrote:
I certainly hope so.chicagopurple wrote:abuse is really a very tragic cycle. Virtually every abuse case I have been involved in included an abuser who had a history of being abused or witnessing abuse. It is the gift that keeps on giving. Unfortunately, abusive people dont respond well to treatment. They overwhelmingly relapase back into abusiveness. Much like alcoholism where the BEST (sorry caps) success rates are 1 in 12, abusive parents/spouses dont succede in chaging their stripes.....hopefully AP is an exception, he certainly was exceptional in recovering from torn ACLs to quickly.
I don't know why anyone would wish him to fail. Right? For his sake and for his kids' sake.chicagopurple wrote:abuse is really a very tragic cycle. Virtually every abuse case I have been involved in included an abuser who had a history of being abused or witnessing abuse. It is the gift that keeps on giving. Unfortunately, abusive people dont respond well to treatment. They overwhelmingly relapase back into abusiveness. Much like alcoholism where the BEST (sorry caps) success rates are 1 in 12, abusive parents/spouses dont succede in chaging their stripes.....hopefully AP is an exception, he certainly was exceptional in recovering from torn ACLs to quickly.
Well said, Lars.Lars wrote:Whatever anyone thinks about Peterson, I wish the best for him, for his career going forward and for his family. Personally, I'm going to pray for healing and hope it can happen. He can't undo what he did -- although I'm sure he wishes he could. I can't imagine it will be a good thing when his son becomes aware -- years from now -- that pictures still exist on the internet of his naked body showing marks from a beating his father gave him that eventually ruined his father's career and reputation. That's gong to suck. And, yeah, it won't be the son's fault. Meanwhile, most of us will forget about it, until we are reminded when Peterson becomes Hall of Fame eligible. What's done is done, and what most of us overlook is that it will never be done for Peterson or for his son or family. Someday this story will show up in Peterson's obituary. Enough already. Let's move on. There's nothing more to see.
Is there really? Like what? We have our opinions/judgements of a person like Adrian Peterson and that's really all we have. I don't know him and I'm assuming nobody here does either. I can't really be 'compassionate' about his past because I honestly don't know how he was *actually* treated as a child. I don't know if he actually regrets what he did (rather than just regretting being caught). I don't know if he intends to change or just be more careful.Mothman wrote: My point is that we can do more than just judge.
And you will have them forever.Cliff wrote: All I really have in regards to this incident, that actually proves anything beyond doubt, are pictures of an abused child.
