Board Thread:Writer's Workshop/@comment-26444017-20190103071325/@comment-35711173-20190104185943

BloodySpghetti wrote:

Eh... in this case less is not more, it's just less. I know a few people who had been through hell and back, and telling me in a story "X was abused" doesn't do it for me. I need the details to feel for them. It's no longer shameful to admit your own suffering as it used to be two, or three decades ago. Back then the admittion of abuse was enough to shock people, today, I think it has a less of a punch without the full story.

We all know? Do we now? I mean the possiblities are many yet still.

The possibilities are endless, but the probabilities aren't. We know the general item - sexual abuse of a child. There are a few specific methods possible. They can be described from the after effects if desired, leaving out the description of the event itself. (anal damage and bleeding, disgusting taste in mouth, sticky mess on his body, etc.)

A description of the event in details is child pornography. Even if you describe it from the child's point of view and as a horror, it's still going to be something I wouldn't ever publish and I am sure would be against the TOS for wikia.com.

As for it not being shameful, maybe in your neck of the woods it isn't but around here the people feel continual shame and guilt. My wife was sexually abused as a child. I didn't learn the details until we'd been married for about fifteen years. I have had to live with the damage and the side effects of stuff that happened pushing now half a century ago. That denial and guilt is ... quite something. The lost years because she keeps it bottled up inside and it only leaks out ...

I do think that more can be added to show those emotions without going into any of the clinical "how to" details.