Mothers and Fathers - Monica and Elizabeth and Victor and Geoffrey

[sscrph]

Gideon does not hug his mother at the garden party for Vidal Records but she is the only "person" who has been to his home other then Eva.

 

He is angry that she did not believe him when he told her about Hugh's abuse but he has not sought any revenge.  In fact, he helped Chris Vidal save his record company to provide support for her.

 

This indicates a man in conflict.   He does not at this time know his mother has threatened Eva so I foresee more personal conflict for Gideon.

 

I do not think Elizabeth believes her eldest son was sexually abused by his therapist as a child.  She has not seen any evidence.  Eva, however, saw the love she has for him.

 

Elizabeth must learn to accept her son and his wife.

I also think Gideon has tried to rationalize his mothers disbelief with the comment he made to Eva that of course she believes him because she had to sleep in a bed with him. He definitely has conflicted feelings regarding his mother's betrayal...

[sscrph]

Has anybody noticed all the significant women in Gideon's life before Eva resemble his mother?

You need to read all the older posts of EWY. That topic was discussed quite often and also the detail of hair color.

[BettyY37]

You need to read all the older posts of EWY. That topic was discussed quite often and also the detail of hair color.

I have not read all of the topics or all of the older posts.  I do still feel it is worth visiting in the context of this topic (Mothers and Fathers).  If you recall any posts that are noteworthy please pass them along.

 

I would have been surprised if this observation was original.

 

Do you think his mother noticed?

 

Has anybody noticed all the significant women in Gideon's life before Eva resemble his mother?

[sscrph]

Gideon does not hug his mother at the garden party for Vidal Records but she is the only "person" who has been to his home other then Eva.

 

He is angry that she did not believe him when he told her about Hugh's abuse but he has not sought any revenge.  In fact, he helped Chris Vidal save his record company to provide support for her.

 

This indicates a man in conflict.   He does not at this time know his mother has threatened Eva so I foresee more personal conflict for Gideon.

 

I do not think Elizabeth believes her eldest son was sexually abused by his therapist as a child.  She has not seen any evidence.  Eva, however, saw the love she has for him.

 

Elizabeth must learn to accept her son and his wife.

Lizzy does not know how to act in this situation because Gideon has never divulged his past to any other woman he has been involved with-ah- that would mean Corinne. When Eva confronted her at dinner with her allegations in RIY she should have realized at that point how serious the relationship between GidEva was. Lizzy is in uncharted waters with her son right now and she better tread carefully...

[tbidwell]

In the first three books of the Crossfire series we have been introduced to the mothers of the main characters.  Both women had to deal with the sexual abuse of their children.  How they dealt with that abuse has helped to shape the adults at the center of this series.

 

Neither Eva nor Gideon had their biological fathers with them during their ordeal.  The absence of each man probably had an impact on what happened to their children and events in their lives afterwards.

 

Sylvia told us today old wounds, insecurities, and enemies are going to significantly effect the relationship between Eva and Gideon in the fourth book "Captivated by You".

 

Now would be a good time to discuss the parents.  We can talk about what they did or did not do, should or should not have done and in the case of the fathers could or could not do.

 

 

PS.

Opinions about stepfathers are also welcome.

Hi can you tell me where you see the post sylvia said old wounds, insecurities , and enemies ,are going to significantly affect the relationship between Eva and Gideon in the fourth book captivated by you .i have not seen this anywhere

[BettyY37]

Hi can you tell me where you see the post sylvia said old wounds, insecurities , and enemies ,are going to significantly affect the relationship between Eva and Gideon in the fourth book captivated by you .i have not seen this anywhere.

 

 

The quotes were posted by Sylvia Day in two places.  It is the lead for the topic titled "Captivated by You" that appears in this forum and she has posted it on sylviaday.com under "Coming Soon" subject "Captivated by You"

[GiGi]

I know this isn't directed to me but I'd like to say some thing because I do feel sorry for Monica and I feel the need to be "rational" in a way.

I'm pretty sure my "answers" are weak but I tried lol.

Hi Megan,

Thanks for the posting.  You made a very good point that the abuse may have been occuring at night.  I never considered that.  I somehow thought that the majority of the abuse may have been occuring after school; a time when Nathan's father would have been working and Monica would have been outside of the home for whatever reasons (socializing, shopping etc.).  So it is possible that at least some of the abuse occurred at night.

 

Now we wait until we hear Monica's story. 

[GiGi]

Hi Everyone,

Could someone please refresh my memory; where exactly did Sylvia Day say that Monica is a good mother?  If someone could post that information here, it would be greatly appreciated.  Thanks in advance.

 

GiGi 

[GiGi]

GiGi

You make a good case for why no parent should ever miss the abuse of their child especially when it occurs over such a long period of time. But Sylvia has chosen to present us in the character of Monica a women who failed to see the signs for whatever reason. She told us

Eva hide what was being done to her out of fear.

The servants (makers of beds and doers of laundry) did not tell.

Eva made her Monica promise to not tell Victor.

I have chosen to accept Sylvia's presentation of Monica's sacrifices and continuing pain regarding this failure to know sooner about the abuse of her only child. I try very hard when I read to not add things that are not there if they change the story. As you know I searched the books for attacks on Monica.

I can not use Victor's parental role except as described when she moved to SoCal and he did good because he found Dr Travis. He came when he heard about Nathan. Monica got Eva out of harms way as soon as the danger was known. Home security, tracking devices, armed chauffeur, remodeling Parker's gym...to the point of alienating her daughter trying to make-up and prevent problems in the future. That is what I have to work with so Monica comes out good but not perfect,

Things may change in books four and five but for now Monica is good.

Hi Betty,

Thank you for your posting.  You mentioned in another post that you are analytical.  I am from a science background so I can see where you are coming from.  Each perspective would look at the facts as presented and analyze said evidence until either a hypothesis or conclusion could be reached.

 

Thus far, since we are only into book three and waiting for book four, the are still in the hypothesis stage.  Fact:

 

1.  The case is made why Monica's parenting skills are being questioned with a strict eye.  For four out of fourteen years, Monica dropped the ball.  This does not take into consideration the other marriages and what the living conditions were like for Eva.  That means, for at least close to one third of her of her life; Eva was severely neglected and abused.  That is stated fact, and not open to interpretation.  Being a parent means more than providing a roof over a child's head and food on the table.

 

2.  Eva got closer to her father during her University days and he was instrumental in getting her into treatment, but nothing is mentioned about him during her early years.  I cannot come to the conclusion that Victor is an explemplary parent based on those facts alone.   

 

3.  Monica keeping Eva's secret of the abuse was wrong.  Victor is Eva's dad and would have every legal right to know what had happened to his daughter.  Fact:  If any information of this nature was revealed during a custody battle; Monica would have lost custodial rights of her child.  Monica had no legal right to keep this from Victor.

 

4.  Monica is Eva's mother; not her friend.  Thus far, Monica has acted more like a friend and not a mother. 

 

5.  When Eva confessed her abuse to Gideon and Gideon contacted Stanton about what was being done as far as keeping the situation private, when Eva saw her mother for her counselling session, the first thing that Monica did was ask Eva why she told Gideon?  In her completely histrionic state, Monica could only think about herself and not Eva..."how could you do this to me...?"

 

6.  Monica sent Eva a completely inapropriate red dress during the first book for the charity gala.  What mother would send her daughter such an incredibly revealing outfit to be worn?  What does Monica hope to accomplish by "gifting" her daughter with that kind of dress.

 

7.  Monica placed several tracking devices in Eva's personal belongings without her consent; her legal Adult Consent. 

 

8.  When Nathan was back in New York and had attempted to blackmail Stanton and Monica, Monica never mentioned this to Eva.  Was she misguided in her attempt to protect Eva or was she arrogant enough to believe that she could violate her daughter's legal right to know about what was going on? 

 

9.  Monica saw the "evidence" of Nathan's brutilization, torture and rape(s) of Eva with her own eyes.  Could Monica then turn around and feign "ignorance" about what Nathan was capable of? 

 

10.  When the police were investigating Nathan's murder, Monica never once volunteered that the police had come to see her.  It was only after questioned and kept questioning her mother, the Monica finally and begrudgingly spoke with Eva about the Nathan murder investigation.

 

Could you please clarify what you mean by "attacks on Monica"?  It would help greatly.  Thanks in advane. 

 

As a scientific person, I look at the evidence that has been presented thus far and the evidence points to the fact that Monica has been a lousy mother. 

 

I don't know if Syliva could expect any of her viewers to accept a polyanna view of Monica's actions or gross misactions and expect a person to believe that she is a good mother.   I would never profess to speak for Sylvia, I can only speak for myself and thus far, with the evidence presented, Monica's mothering skills have not been good.

[BettyY37]

Hi Betty,

Thank you for your posting.  You mentioned in another post that you are analytical.  I am from a science background so I can see where you are coming from.  Each perspective would look at the facts as presented and analyze said evidence until either a hypothesis or conclusion could be reached.

 

Thus far, since we are only into book three and waiting for book four, the are still in the hypothesis stage.  Fact:

 

1.  The case is made why Monica's parenting skills are being questioned with a strict eye.  For four out of fourteen years, Monica dropped the ball.  This does not take into consideration the other marriages and what the living conditions were like for Eva.  That means, for at least close to one third of her of her life; Eva was severely neglected and abused.  That is stated fact, and not open to interpretation.  Being a parent means more than providing a roof over a child's head and food on the table.

 

2.  Eva got closer to her father during her University days and he was instrumental in getting her into treatment, but nothing is mentioned about him during her early years.  I cannot come to the conclusion that Victor is an explemplary parent based on those facts alone.   

 

3.  Monica keeping Eva's secret of the abuse was wrong.  Victor is Eva's dad and would have every legal right to know what had happened to his daughter.  Fact:  If any information of this nature was revealed during a custody battle; Monica would have lost custodial rights of her child.  Monica had no legal right to keep this from Victor.

 

4.  Monica is Eva's mother; not her friend.  Thus far, Monica has acted more like a friend and not a mother. 

 

5.  When Eva confessed her abuse to Gideon and Gideon contacted Stanton about what was being done as far as keeping the situation private, when Eva saw her mother for her counselling session, the first thing that Monica did was ask Eva why she told Gideon?  In her completely histrionic state, Monica could only think about herself and not Eva..."how could you do this to me...?"

 

6.  Monica sent Eva a completely inapropriate red dress during the first book for the charity gala.  What mother would send her daughter such an incredibly revealing outfit to be worn?  What does Monica hope to accomplish by "gifting" her daughter with that kind of dress.

 

7.  Monica placed several tracking devices in Eva's personal belongings without her consent; her legal Adult Consent. 

 

8.  When Nathan was back in New York and had attempted to blackmail Stanton and Monica, Monica never mentioned this to Eva.  Was she misguided in her attempt to protect Eva or was she arrogant enough to believe that she could violate her daughter's legal right to know about what was going on? 

 

9.  Monica saw the "evidence" of Nathan's brutilization, torture and rape(s) of Eva with her own eyes.  Could Monica then turn around and feign "ignorance" about what Nathan was capable of? 

 

10.  When the police were investigating Nathan's murder, Monica never once volunteered that the police had come to see her.  It was only after questioned and kept questioning her mother, the Monica finally and begrudgingly spoke with Eva about the Nathan murder investigation.

 

Could you please clarify what you mean by "attacks on Monica"?  It would help greatly.  Thanks in advane. 

 

As a scientific person, I look at the evidence that has been presented thus far and the evidence points to the fact that Monica has been a lousy mother. 

 

I don't know if Syliva could expect any of her viewers to accept a polyanna view of Monica's actions or gross misactions and expect a person to believe that she is a good mother.   I would never profess to speak for Sylvia, I can only speak for myself and thus far, with the evidence presented, Monica's mothering skills have not been good.

 

I am still up so here goes

 

1.  The case is made why Monica's parenting skills are being questioned with a strict eye.  For four out of fourteen years, Monica dropped the ball.  This does not take into consideration the other marriages and what the living conditions were like for Eva.  That means, for at least close to one third of her of her life; Eva was severely neglected and abused.  That is stated fact, and not open to interpretation.  Being a parent means more than providing a roof over a child's head and food on the table.

 

The occasions when childhood sexual abuse goes undetacted by parents for long periods of time are not uncommon.  Eva has said she hide the abuse from her mother.  Someone mentioned laundry, bathing and doctors as sources for information that Monica should have had.  Servants do laundry, children especially ten years old bath themselves and healthy children do not go to the doctor every year and if they pediatrician do not automatically examine the genital area.  Being a good parent is dealing with any problem your child has that you know about inaddition to basic needs.

 

As soon as Monica thought there was a problem she sought treatment and removed Eva from harm immediately.  No one can do more.  She acted.  She did not wait for verification or the money.  (Eva did not get her settlement until she was 16.)

 

2.  Eva got closer to her father during her University days and he was instrumental in getting her into treatment, but nothing is mentioned about him during her early years.  I cannot come to the conclusion that Victor is an explemplary parent based on those facts alone.

 

You can conclude he was good for just the reason you say you cannot.  You make decesions on what is known not unknown.  Eva says she did not spend much time with her dad when she was young.  She never says that fact was a bad thing.  It is very common for young girls to stay with their mothers.  Eva says in "Reflected in You" her dad's unshakeable love changed her life.  A father who was rejected by the mother of his child who steps in when that daughter is in crisis years later without hesitation is exemplary in real life or a book.

 

3.  Monica keeping Eva's secret of the abuse was wrong.  Victor is Eva's dad and would have every legal right to know what had happened to his daughter.  Fact:  If any information of this nature was revealed during a custody battle; Monica would have lost custodial rights of her child.  Monica had no legal right to keep this from Victor.

 

Eva does not have Victor's name.  He may not have any legal rights.  You make this arguement based on an unknown, no facts, when you state in #2 you cannot reach a conclusion on 

limited facts.  As a mother dealing with an emotionally damaged child, you try to make things as easy for her as possible.  Eva requested (maybe demanded) Monica not tell Victor so a good mother protects her childs mentally as well as physically at the risk of legal consequences.

 

4.  Monica is Eva's mother; not her friend.  Thus far, Monica has acted more like a friend and not a mother.

 

I do not know the basis for that conclusion.  When women are close in age they have common interests.  They do things together...of course they would but first and foremost Monica protects, supports and provides for her daughter.  She smothers her.  That is not a friend.  That is what I think mothers do.

 

5.  When Eva confessed her abuse to Gideon and Gideon contacted Stanton about what was being done as far as keeping the situation private, when Eva saw her mother for her counselling session, the first thing that Monica did was ask Eva why she told Gideon?  In her completely histrionic state, Monica could only think about herself and not Eva..."how could you do this to me...?"

 

Monica was not selfish.  She feels guilty about what happened and she does not want people to think badly of her.  I did not find your quote.  I found "How could you, Eva?" in chapter 14 of "Bared to You".  Leaving out the "you do this to me..." makes a big difference.

 

6.  Monica sent Eva a completely inapropriate red dress during the first book for the charity gala.  What mother would send her daughter such an incredibly revealing outfit to be worn?  What does Monica hope to accomplish by "gifting" her daughter with that kind of dress.

 

Everyone in the book thought Eva looked great.  Eva is not just a daughter, she is a women.  Perhaps pictures in "Town and Country" or "Vogue" would show what young women wear to these functions.  Did you watch Miss America this year?

 

7.  Monica placed several tracking devices in Eva's personal belongings without her consent; her legal Adult Consent.

 

Concern for her daughters safety does not make her a bad mother. 

 

8.  When Nathan was back in New York and had attempted to blackmail Stanton and Monica, Monica never mentioned this to Eva.  Was she misguided in her attempt to protect Eva or was she arrogant enough to believe that she could violate her daughter's legal right to know about what was going on?

 

Eva had no legal right to know.

 

9.  Monica saw the "evidence" of Nathan's brutilization, torture and rape(s) of Eva with her own eyes.  Could Monica then turn around and feign "ignorance" about what Nathan was capable of? 

 

When did she feign ignorance?  She did the opposite.  She left the home she shared with Nathan and his father, got a divorce, arranged a settlement for Eva that would allow her to take care of herself, arranged proctection and tracking as well as hide the facts about Nathan being in New York for Eva's mental health.  I think she should have told Cary too.

 

10.  When the police were investigating Nathan's murder, Monica never once volunteered that the police had come to see her.  It was only after questioned and kept questioning her mother, the Monica finally and begrudgingly spoke with Eva about the Nathan murder investigation.

 

My memory is different.  I will search for the facts later.

 

Finally when I mentioned "attacks on Monica" I meant did anyone or anything specifically say or infer she was a bad person or had bad intentions.

 

I am never been perceived of as a pollyanna but all romance novels are written from a pollyanna perspective because they always give us an optimistic view on life that mutual love survives and fixes all of lifes ills or at least makes them tolerable

[GiGi]

I am still up so here goes

 

1.  The case is made why Monica's parenting skills are being questioned with a strict eye.  For four out of fourteen years, Monica dropped the ball.  This does not take into consideration the other marriages and what the living conditions were like for Eva.  That means, for at least close to one third of her of her life; Eva was severely neglected and abused.  That is stated fact, and not open to interpretation.  Being a parent means more than providing a roof over a child's head and food on the table.

 

The occasions when childhood sexual abuse goes undetacted by parents for long periods of time are not uncommon.  Eva has said she hide the abuse from her mother.  Someone mentioned laundry, bathing and doctors as sources for information that Monica should have had.  Servants do laundry, children especially ten years old bath themselves and healthy children do not go to the doctor every year and if they pediatrician do not automatically examine the genital area.  Being a good parent is dealing with any problem your child has that you know about inaddition to basic needs.

 

As soon as Monica thought there was a problem she sought treatment and removed Eva from harm immediately.  No one can do more.  She acted.  She did not wait for verification or the money.  (Eva did not get her settlement until she was 16.)

 

2.  Eva got closer to her father during her University days and he was instrumental in getting her into treatment, but nothing is mentioned about him during her early years.  I cannot come to the conclusion that Victor is an explemplary parent based on those facts alone.

 

You can conclude he was good for just the reason you say you cannot.  You make decesions on what is known not unknown.  Eva says she did not spend much time with her dad when she was young.  She never says that fact was a bad thing.  It is very common for young girls to stay with their mothers.  Eva says in "Reflected in You" her dad's unshakeable love changed her life.  A father who was rejected by the mother of his child who steps in when that daughter is in crisis years later without hesitation is exemplary in real life or a book.

 

3.  Monica keeping Eva's secret of the abuse was wrong.  Victor is Eva's dad and would have every legal right to know what had happened to his daughter.  Fact:  If any information of this nature was revealed during a custody battle; Monica would have lost custodial rights of her child.  Monica had no legal right to keep this from Victor.

 

Eva does not have Victor's name.  He may not have any legal rights.  You make this arguement based on an unknown, no facts, when you state in #2 you cannot reach a conclusion on 

limited facts.  As a mother dealing with an emotionally damaged child, you try to make things as easy for her as possible.  Eva requested (maybe demanded) Monica not tell Victor so a good mother protects her childs mentally as well as physically at the risk of legal consequences.

 

4.  Monica is Eva's mother; not her friend.  Thus far, Monica has acted more like a friend and not a mother.

 

I do not know the basis for that conclusion.  When women are close in age they have common interests.  They do things together...of course they would but first and foremost Monica protects, supports and provides for her daughter.  She smothers her.  That is not a friend.  That is what I think mothers do.

 

5.  When Eva confessed her abuse to Gideon and Gideon contacted Stanton about what was being done as far as keeping the situation private, when Eva saw her mother for her counselling session, the first thing that Monica did was ask Eva why she told Gideon?  In her completely histrionic state, Monica could only think about herself and not Eva..."how could you do this to me...?"

 

Monica was not selfish.  She feels guilty about what happened and she does not want people to think badly of her.  I did not find your quote.  I found "How could you, Eva?" in chapter 14 of "Bared to You".  Leaving out the "you do this to me..." makes a big difference.

 

6.  Monica sent Eva a completely inapropriate red dress during the first book for the charity gala.  What mother would send her daughter such an incredibly revealing outfit to be worn?  What does Monica hope to accomplish by "gifting" her daughter with that kind of dress.

 

Everyone in the book thought Eva looked great.  Eva is not just a daughter, she is a women.  Perhaps pictures in "Town and Country" or "Vogue" would show what young women wear to these functions.  Did you watch Miss America this year?

 

7.  Monica placed several tracking devices in Eva's personal belongings without her consent; her legal Adult Consent.

 

Concern for her daughters safety does not make her a bad mother. 

 

8.  When Nathan was back in New York and had attempted to blackmail Stanton and Monica, Monica never mentioned this to Eva.  Was she misguided in her attempt to protect Eva or was she arrogant enough to believe that she could violate her daughter's legal right to know about what was going on?

 

Eva had no legal right to know.

 

9.  Monica saw the "evidence" of Nathan's brutilization, torture and rape(s) of Eva with her own eyes.  Could Monica then turn around and feign "ignorance" about what Nathan was capable of? 

 

When did she feign ignorance?  She did the opposite.  She left the home she shared with Nathan and his father, got a divorce, arranged a settlement for Eva that would allow her to take care of herself, arranged proctection and tracking as well as hide the facts about Nathan being in New York for Eva's mental health.  I think she should have told Cary too.

 

10.  When the police were investigating Nathan's murder, Monica never once volunteered that the police had come to see her.  It was only after questioned and kept questioning her mother, the Monica finally and begrudgingly spoke with Eva about the Nathan murder investigation.

 

My memory is different.  I will search for the facts later.

 

Finally when I mentioned "attacks on Monica" I meant did anyone or anything specifically say or infer she was a bad person or had bad intentions.

 

I am never been perceived of as a pollyanna but all romance novels are written from a pollyanna perspective because they always give us an optimistic view on life that mutual love survives and fixes all of lifes ills or at least makes them tolerable

 

I am still up so here goes

 

1.  The case is made why Monica's parenting skills are being questioned with a strict eye.  For four out of fourteen years, Monica dropped the ball.  This does not take into consideration the other marriages and what the living conditions were like for Eva.  That means, for at least close to one third of her of her life; Eva was severely neglected and abused.  That is stated fact, and not open to interpretation.  Being a parent means more than providing a roof over a child's head and food on the table.

 

The occasions when childhood sexual abuse goes undetacted by parents for long periods of time are not uncommon.  Eva has said she hide the abuse from her mother.  Someone mentioned laundry, bathing and doctors as sources for information that Monica should have had.  Servants do laundry, children especially ten years old bath themselves and healthy children do not go to the doctor every year and if they pediatrician do not automatically examine the genital area.  Being a good parent is dealing with any problem your child has that you know about inaddition to basic needs.

 

As soon as Monica thought there was a problem she sought treatment and removed Eva from harm immediately.  No one can do more.  She acted.  She did not wait for verification or the money.  (Eva did not get her settlement until she was 16.)

 

2.  Eva got closer to her father during her University days and he was instrumental in getting her into treatment, but nothing is mentioned about him during her early years.  I cannot come to the conclusion that Victor is an explemplary parent based on those facts alone.

 

You can conclude he was good for just the reason you say you cannot.  You make decesions on what is known not unknown.  Eva says she did not spend much time with her dad when she was young.  She never says that fact was a bad thing.  It is very common for young girls to stay with their mothers.  Eva says in "Reflected in You" her dad's unshakeable love changed her life.  A father who was rejected by the mother of his child who steps in when that daughter is in crisis years later without hesitation is exemplary in real life or a book.

 

3.  Monica keeping Eva's secret of the abuse was wrong.  Victor is Eva's dad and would have every legal right to know what had happened to his daughter.  Fact:  If any information of this nature was revealed during a custody battle; Monica would have lost custodial rights of her child.  Monica had no legal right to keep this from Victor.

 

Eva does not have Victor's name.  He may not have any legal rights.  You make this arguement based on an unknown, no facts, when you state in #2 you cannot reach a conclusion on 

limited facts.  As a mother dealing with an emotionally damaged child, you try to make things as easy for her as possible.  Eva requested (maybe demanded) Monica not tell Victor so a good mother protects her childs mentally as well as physically at the risk of legal consequences.

 

4.  Monica is Eva's mother; not her friend.  Thus far, Monica has acted more like a friend and not a mother.

 

I do not know the basis for that conclusion.  When women are close in age they have common interests.  They do things together...of course they would but first and foremost Monica protects, supports and provides for her daughter.  She smothers her.  That is not a friend.  That is what I think mothers do.

 

5.  When Eva confessed her abuse to Gideon and Gideon contacted Stanton about what was being done as far as keeping the situation private, when Eva saw her mother for her counselling session, the first thing that Monica did was ask Eva why she told Gideon?  In her completely histrionic state, Monica could only think about herself and not Eva..."how could you do this to me...?"

 

Monica was not selfish.  She feels guilty about what happened and she does not want people to think badly of her.  I did not find your quote.  I found "How could you, Eva?" in chapter 14 of "Bared to You".  Leaving out the "you do this to me..." makes a big difference.

 

6.  Monica sent Eva a completely inapropriate red dress during the first book for the charity gala.  What mother would send her daughter such an incredibly revealing outfit to be worn?  What does Monica hope to accomplish by "gifting" her daughter with that kind of dress.

 

Everyone in the book thought Eva looked great.  Eva is not just a daughter, she is a women.  Perhaps pictures in "Town and Country" or "Vogue" would show what young women wear to these functions.  Did you watch Miss America this year?

 

7.  Monica placed several tracking devices in Eva's personal belongings without her consent; her legal Adult Consent.

 

Concern for her daughters safety does not make her a bad mother. 

 

8.  When Nathan was back in New York and had attempted to blackmail Stanton and Monica, Monica never mentioned this to Eva.  Was she misguided in her attempt to protect Eva or was she arrogant enough to believe that she could violate her daughter's legal right to know about what was going on?

 

Eva had no legal right to know.

 

9.  Monica saw the "evidence" of Nathan's brutilization, torture and rape(s) of Eva with her own eyes.  Could Monica then turn around and feign "ignorance" about what Nathan was capable of? 

 

When did she feign ignorance?  She did the opposite.  She left the home she shared with Nathan and his father, got a divorce, arranged a settlement for Eva that would allow her to take care of herself, arranged proctection and tracking as well as hide the facts about Nathan being in New York for Eva's mental health.  I think she should have told Cary too.

 

10.  When the police were investigating Nathan's murder, Monica never once volunteered that the police had come to see her.  It was only after questioned and kept questioning her mother, the Monica finally and begrudgingly spoke with Eva about the Nathan murder investigation.

 

My memory is different.  I will search for the facts later.

 

Finally when I mentioned "attacks on Monica" I meant did anyone or anything specifically say or infer she was a bad person or had bad intentions.

 

I am never been preceived of as a pollyanna but all romance novels are written from a pollyanna perspective because they always give us an optimistic

Hi Betty,

I have been thinking about this issue so much; mainly because it was such a hot topic of debate the first time around.  I have to go back and look at all of my postings to perhaps compile a far more detailed answer which is what I was trying to avoid in the first place.  Let me make just a few clarifications about my previous posting:

 

1.  Whether childhood abuse goes undetected for long periods of time or not does not negate Monica's responsibility and her dropping the ball on recognizing the symptoms of childhood sexual abuse.  I covered that topic extensively in several previous posts (including signs and symptoms...dozens and dozens and dozens of symptoms which Monica never took head of).

 

2.  what I meant by the second point is that only for  5-7 years did Victor have any influence over his daughter.  The influence was good (I have never disputed that), but one cannot discount his sporadic involvement during the first 18 years of Eva's life.

 

3.  EVa's not having Victor's name has nothing to do with whether he is a good or bad parent.  That is an issue between Monica and Vitor.  To the best of my knowledge, I am not aware of any state in The US or in Canada that legally requires that a child that is born out of wedlock, is required to carry the father's last name.  That is a priviledge granted to a married couple by law.  The rest is an option that can be utilized by the mother if she wishes.

 

4.  My point about Monica being Eva's friend and not her mother is simply that instead of making hard decisions that were in Eva's best interests, Eva acted more like the mother than Monica did.  That kind of relationship between a mother and daughter when someone is young and has been emotionally damaged, is wrong.  Monica needed to suck it up, shed her tears in the privacy of her own room and not burden her daughter.  Have you noticed just how much Eva always tried to placate her mother, because of her guilt?  Of all the people in this book; Eva should have zero guilt!  It wasn't her fault.  Eva didn't do anything wrong.

 

5.  As far as Monica's guilt is concerned, I stated it before; she needs to suck it up and shut up!  Her constant hystrionics are making Eva feel even more guilty about what happened to her.  Monica needs to put on her big girl "Mommy Pants" and start telling her daughter that it isn't her fault, she did nothing wrong, and that she as a mother will work out her guilt issues and not put more pressure on her already fragile daughter.

 

6.  It is so funny that you mention Vogue Magazine, because I have a subscription to several magazines for several years, and I have to been to a few European high society gala events in my 42 years of life.   I never saw anyone dressed like the way that dress was described; with a slit up the side of the thigh up to where...and a plunging backline to just above her tushie.  I have my latest copies of Vogue, Instyle, and Vanity Fair, and I haven't seen anything like that either.  As far as the Miss America pagent is concerned, I have never seen a slit up the side of the dress going up nearly to her private regions and I have never seen a backless dress that stopped just above her tushie, but perhaps I missed something.

 

7.  As far as Monica's placement of legal tracking devices in Eva's compact and her watch; it is against the law.  Monica was breaking the law and violating her very grown daughter's privacy.  She didn't even have the courtesy to share her concerns with Eva and to offer Eva the option of accepting or not accepting protection.  Let's remember that Eva isa grown woman who has the right to say no.  Monica took away Eva's right to say no.  That's not right.

 

8.  When Nathan showed up with photos and video(s) of the rape and torture of Eva, Eva had every legal right to know.  Eva was the childhood victim of violent crimes and Monica by proxy was were advocate.  When Eva became an adult and Nathan showed up with all of the vile photos and video(s), Monica would have been considered to be in possession of childhood which is a criminal offense punishable by lengthy prison sentences.  If Nathan crossed state lines,  Monica could be held accountable as a accessory for distributing child p*** of her daughter.

 

The big thing is Monica would have seen what Nathan was capable of with her own two eyes.  Why wouldn't she want to want her daughter that she may be in danger?  Did Monica really believe that she could protect Eva from Nathan?  Her track record suggests otherwise.

 

What does it say about said mother-daughter relationship when the mother cannot trust her already grown daughter to be able to make decisions about matters that affect her safety and welfare?  How is Monica a good mother when she is keeping her daughter in the dark about the man who raped and tortured her for four years?  What if Monica ran across Nathan on the street?  Whom ever was supposed to be protecting Eva (and by proxy Cary because they were roommates), failed.  Cary got attacked and whom ever was supposed to be following Nathan lost track of him.  So how could Monica/Stanton/Clancy/etc.  think that they could competently hide the fact that Nathan had come back into town?  Did none of them think that Nathan wouldn't make a play for Eva? 

 

9.  Monica feigned ingornance at every single turn of the way.  She knew that Nathan was back in town and said nothing to her daughter.  Monica knew just how violent Nathan had been toward Eva as evidenced by the photos and vidoe(s) of Nathan's brutal tortures and rapes of Eva.  Yet she never said anything to her adult daughter to warn her or protect or even bring her into the loop of what everyone was planning for her protection.  No person in a position of power, that is required to have bodyguards, are ever kept out of the loop when it comes to their safety or protection. 

 

When Nathan was murdered, Eva was left floating in the wind an had to find out from the  police that Nathan was in town.  She basically got ambushed.  She questioned her mother about the whole Nathan thing and not once was her mother forthcoming about what had been going on.  Only after a few conversations and direct questioning by Eva, did Monica divulge any information (scant information, I might add).  Eva had every right to know.  She was the victim, she was the adult, she was in danger.  Yet everyone else decided that they knew better and didn't even given Eva the courtesy or the option to accept or decline help. 

 

10.  As far as the comment about doctor visits.  Children have to been seen on an annual basis for a regular check-up and that would include the child being in their underware; in the presence of the nurse and the doctor.  The child would also be just in their underware.  The undershirt would be off, unless the female child would develop .  Children need to be vaccinated and receive booster shots as well.  If Eva had been examined, surely the pediatrician and nurse would have seen the marks on Eva' body.

 

If Eva had a urinary tract infection, then her genitals would have been examined.  No there wouldn't been a full gynecological examination performed, but yes absolutely the doctor, with his nurse present would have seen the genital scarring.  I spoke with a pediatrician and that is standard protocol in Canada.  Doctors need to rule out any type of sexual abuse and as such a visual examination would have been required.

 

You mentioned that Monica had staff to her help her maintain her household and her child.  That is not an excuse.  If Monica chose to delegate said responsibilities then she is still responsible at the end of the day.  She hired the staff; to cook, clean, do laundry, take Eva to the doctor's, watch over Eva, and if they said nothing that completely falls on Monica's shoulders.  Monica is Eva's mother, not her staff.

 

The reference about the visit hospital wasn't a case of Monica noticing something was wrong, this was an emergency and as such was legally required to seek medical treatment.  Monica would not have been allowed to return home with her daughter if she was going to continue to be in this marriage.  She would have lost custody of her child.  There is no interpretation on that point.  I contacted CPS/Children's Aid Society in Canada, and given those circumstances, Monica was very lucky to not be criminally charged for her gross neglect of Eva.  The courts couldn't care less whether a person; has a nanny, a maid, a babysitter, a chauffeur, etc.  the responsibililty of the child rests soley on the parent(s). 

 

I do not give Monica credit for something that was always supposed to be her responsibility.  I have always been pro-victims rights and at the end of the day, I get very upset because of Monica's lack-a-dazical attitude towards her parenting of Eva.  I really what Sylvia says will help me to understand this character and her actions better. 

 

Thanks for taking the time to respond Betty.  It is greatly appreciated, and it gives me the opportunity to understand your position better.  Thanks for a lively debate over a disheartening topic. 

[BettyY37]

You mention Seven Years to Sin when talking about Bared to You. How are the two connected?

They’re not connected anywhere but in my head. Seven Years to Sin is the story of two abuse survivors as well, but of a different nature. Jessica is the survivor of child abuse so vicious she bears physical scars and is deaf in one ear. Alistair was emotionally abused and turned to prostitution as a way to survive and establish value for himself. For numerous reasons, I wasn’t able to delve into the aftereffects of abuse as deeply as I would have liked, so I continued to think about Alistair and Jessica’s story after I finished it. That continuing thought process germinated into Gideon and Eva’s story.

 

 

Above is the answer to a FAQ  from sylviaday.com.

 

I think Sylvia wanted to write about childhood sexual abuse in the 21st century. I think she presented different ways the problem can be handled in the Crossfire series.  Eva's mother believed her but Gideon's mother did not believe him while Cary's mother did not care.

 

When I read a book or a series, I accept the world the author has created and that is my frame of reference for viewing the characters.  I do not use other worlds to interupt their behavior.

 

Many of the points you want to use to substantiate your position are not in the Crossfire series as of yet.

 

I tried to stay in Sylvia's box for this particular discussion because it is about the characters as they are presented.  For other topics like "Music" and anything about the unpublished books as well as the work to be done by Lionsgate, outside material is important and essential.

 

If I used real world references neither Monica nor Elizabeth would have their children.  In the Crossfire series, however, when Eva's abuse is reported to the authorities, Monica was not considered negligent.   As I stated in a different post, she was good not perfect.

[sscrph]

You mention Seven Years to Sin when talking about Bared to You. How are the two connected?

They’re not connected anywhere but in my head. Seven Years to Sin is the story of two abuse survivors as well, but of a different nature. Jessica is the survivor of child abuse so vicious she bears physical scars and is deaf in one ear. Alistair was emotionally abused and turned to prostitution as a way to survive and establish value for himself. For numerous reasons, I wasn’t able to delve into the aftereffects of abuse as deeply as I would have liked, so I continued to think about Alistair and Jessica’s story after I finished it. That continuing thought process germinated into Gideon and Eva’s story.

 

 

Above is the answer to a FAQ  from sylviaday.com.

 

I think Sylvia wanted to write about childhood sexual abuse in the 21st century. I think she presented different ways the problem can be handled in the Crossfire series.  Eva's mother believed her but Gideon's mother did not believe him while Cary's mother did not care.

 

When I read a book or a series, I accept the world the author has created and that is my frame of reference for viewing the characters.  I do not use other worlds to interupt their behavior.

 

Many of the points you want to use to substantiate your position are not in the Crossfire series as of yet.

 

I tried to stay in Sylvia's box for this particular discussion because it is about the characters as they are presented.  For other topics like "Music" and anything about the unpublished books as well as the work to be done by Lionsgate, outside material is important and essential.

 

If I used real world references neither Monica nor Elizabeth would have their children.  In the Crossfire series, however, when Eva's abuse is reported to the authorities, Monica was not considered negligent.   As I stated in a different post, she was good not perfect.

Betty I think that Monica and Elizabeth having custody of their children in the real world has more to do with their wealth and social standing. Especially in Monica's case because someone of lesser means would have had said child removed from the home. The super rich really do live differently than the rest of us ...

[BettyY37]

Good morning GiGi

in reply to your last rebutal

 

 

Hi Betty,

I have been thinking about this issue so much; mainly because it was such a hot topic of debate the first time around.  I have to go back and look at all of my postings to perhaps compile a far more detailed answer which is what I was trying to avoid in the first place.  Let me make just a few clarifications about my previous posting:

 

1.  Whether childhood abuse goes undetected for long periods of time or not does not negate Monica's responsibility and her dropping the ball on recognizing the symptoms of childhood sexual abuse.  I covered that topic extensively in several previous posts (including signs and symptoms...dozens and dozens and dozens of symptoms which Monica never took head of).

 

What symptoms did you find in the books that Monica ignored?

 

2.  what I meant by the second point is that only for  5-7 years did Victor have any influence over his daughter.  The influence was good (I have never disputed that), but one cannot discount his sporadic involvement during the first 18 years of Eva's life.

 

I understood your point but there is no explanation only a simple statement by Eva.  I do not remember an description of Eva's first 10 years.  When did Monica marry Barker?

 

3.  EVa's not having Victor's name has nothing to do with whether he is a good or bad parent.  That is an issue between Monica and Vitor.  To the best of my knowledge, I am not aware of any state in The US or in Canada that legally requires that a child that is born out of wedlock, is required to carry the father's last name.  That is a priviledge granted to a married couple by law.  The rest is an option that can be utilized by the mother if she wishes.

 

I said Eva does not have Victor's name without any refernce to good or bad parenting.  He may not have any legal rights because we do not know if he is listed as father on the birth certicate.  I would think if he had legal rights, the courts would not proceed without him.

 

4.  My point about Monica being Eva's friend and not her mother is simply that instead of making hard decisions that were in Eva's best interests, Eva acted more like the mother than Monica did.  That kind of relationship between a mother and daughter when someone is young and has been emotionally damaged, is wrong.  Monica needed to suck it up, shed her tears in the privacy of her own room and not burden her daughter.  Have you noticed just how much Eva always tried to placate her mother, because of her guilt?  Of all the people in this book; Eva should have zero guilt!  It wasn't her fault.  Eva didn't do anything wrong.

What hard decisions?  Monica said Eva was stronger.  Eva is a grown women when she decides to placate her mother and I think her motivation is her mother's guilt not Eva's.

5.  As far as Monica's guilt is concerned, I stated it before; she needs to suck it up and shut up!  Her constant hystrionics are making Eva feel even more guilty about what happened to her.  Monica needs to put on her big girl "Mommy Pants" and start telling her daughter that it isn't her fault, she did nothing wrong, and that she as a mother will work out her guilt issues and not put more pressure on her already fragile daughter.

Do not remember Monica blaming Eva.  Where was that?

6.  It is so funny that you mention Vogue Magazine, because I have a subscription to several magazines for several years, and I have to been to a few European high society gala events in my 42 years of life.   I never saw anyone dressed like the way that dress was described; with a slit up the side of the thigh up to where...and a plunging backline to just above her tushie.  I have my latest copies of Vogue, Instyle, and Vanity Fair, and I haven't seen anything like that either.  As far as the Miss America pagent is concerned, I have never seen a slit up the side of the dress going up nearly to her private regions and I have never seen a backless dress that stopped just above her tushie, but perhaps I missed something.

I think you should look again.  Even the Academy Awards and women at the Emmys had high slits.  You can google Miss America Evening Gowans...all of them have slits?...No but some of them

7.  As far as Monica's placement of legal tracking devices in Eva's compact and her watch; it is against the law.  Monica was breaking the law and violating her very grown daughter's privacy.  She didn't even have the courtesy to share her concerns with Eva and to offer Eva the option of accepting or not accepting protection.  Let's remember that Eva isa grown woman who has the right to say no.  Monica took away Eva's right to say no.  That's not right.

The compact we do not know who bought it.  I would guess Monica so she could have it wired.  What I read is if you own it you can put a tracker in it.  I am sure if they had to defend themselves Stanton could.  Let's remember her mother is trying to protect her.  Her motives are good.

8.  When Nathan showed up with photos and video(s) of the rape and torture of Eva, Eva had every legal right to know.  Eva was the childhood victim of violent crimes and Monica by proxy was were advocate.  When Eva became an adult and Nathan showed up with all of the vile photos and video(s), Monica would have been considered to be in possession of childhood ###### which is a criminal offense punishable by lengthy prison sentences.  If Nathan crossed state lines,  Monica could be held accountable as a accessory for distributing child p*** of her daughter.

I am not sure what law says Eva is entitled know?  I understand how possession and distribution crimes could be committed

 

The big thing is Monica would have seen what Nathan was capable of with her own two eyes.  Why wouldn't she want to want her daughter that she may be in danger?  Did Monica really believe that she could protect Eva from Nathan?  Her track record suggests otherwise.

She did not see because Sylvia wrote the story that way.

 

What does it say about said mother-daughter relationship when the mother cannot trust her already grown daughter to be able to make decisions about matters that affect her safety and welfare?  How is Monica a good mother when she is keeping her daughter in the dark about the man who raped and tortured her for four years?  What if Monica ran across Nathan on the street?  Whom ever was supposed to be protecting Eva (and by proxy Cary because they were roommates), failed.  Cary got attacked and whom ever was supposed to be following Nathan lost track of him.  So how could Monica/Stanton/Clancy/etc.  think that they could competently hide the fact that Nathan had come back into town?  Did none of them think that Nathan wouldn't make a play for Eva? 

Monica does not say she does not trust her daught to make decisions , she just wants to add extra help.

Clancy admitted he mess-up in not thinking about Cary.

Gideon knew Nathan would make a play for Eva.

9.  Monica feigned ingornance at every single turn of the way.  She knew that Nathan was back in town and said nothing to her daughter.  Monica knew just how violent Nathan had been toward Eva as evidenced by the photos and vidoe(s) of Nathan's brutal tortures and rapes of Eva.  Yet she never said anything to her adult daughter to warn her or protect or even bring her into the loop of what everyone was planning for her protection.  No person in a position of power, that is required to have bodyguards, are ever kept out of the loop when it comes to their safety or protection. 

As a rule I think Monica should have told Eva Nathan was in town but everyon seemed to have thought it would be too upseting for Eva.

When Nathan was murdered, Eva was left floating in the wind an had to find out from the  police that Nathan was in town.  She basically got ambushed.  She questioned her mother about the whole Nathan thing and not once was her mother forthcoming about what had been going on.  Only after a few conversations and direct questioning by Eva, did Monica divulge any information (scant information, I might add).  Eva had every right to know.  She was the victim, she was the adult, she was in danger.  Yet everyone else decided that they knew better and didn't even given Eva the courtesy or the option to accept or decline help. 

That is how it was written.

10.  As far as the comment about doctor visits.  Children have to been seen on an annual basis for a regular check-up and that would include the child being in their underware; in the presence of the nurse and the doctor.  The child would also be just in their underware.  The undershirt would be off, unless the female child would develop ######.  Children need to be vaccinated and receive booster shots as well.  If Eva had been examined, surely the pediatrician and nurse would have seen the marks on Eva' body.

Children are not required to see a doctor every year for a check-up.  Underwear can and does cover-up a lot.  I only remember Eva have scars in places covered by her underwear.  Most vaccinations and boosters are required before age 5 and around 13.

If Eva had a urinary tract infection, then her genitals would have been examined.  No there wouldn't been a full gynecological examination performed, but yes absolutely the doctor, with his nurse present would have seen the genital scarring.  I spoke with a pediatrician and that is standard protocol in Canada.  Doctors need to rule out any type of sexual abuse and as such a visual examination would have been required.

We did not read that she did.

You mentioned that Monica had staff to her help her maintain her household and her child.  That is not an excuse.  If Monica chose to delegate said responsibilities then she is still responsible at the end of the day.  She hired the staff; to cook, clean, do laundry, take Eva to the doctor's, watch over Eva, and if they said nothing that completely falls on Monica's shoulders.  Monica is Eva's mother, not her staff.

The comment is not an excuse.  People continue to say Monica should have known but she did not know and there were reasons presented in the books as to why she did not know.  Eva said she thought the staff knew but said nothing because they feared Nathan.  She talks about how that made her feel since they were adults.

 

I think Sylvia when to a great deal of trouble show how difficult it is to uncover abues when the victim does not cooperate in Eva's case.

 

 

If I see it, I will always respond to a direct post.  Most days I have plenty of time.  Exchanges like this keep me on my toes.  Always a pleasure!

[BettyY37]

Betty I think that Monica and Elizabeth having custody of their children in the real world has more to do with their wealth and social standing. Especially in Monica's case because someone of lesser means would have had said child removed from the home. The super rich really do live differently than the rest of us ...

 

Gideon's story is very much about how money can affect things.  Two therapist at your house regularly and often when you live in Duchess County and they practice in New York City screams money

 

Eva's settlement and no jail time for Nathan is another example.

[sscrph]

Gideon's story is very much about how money can affect things.  Two therapist at your house regularly and often when you live in Duchess County and they practice in New York City screams money

 

Eva's settlement and no jail time for Nathan is another example.

Even Gideon thought that Nathan 's so called punishment was too lenient and this was basically to as per usual protect Monica from the scandal ...

[tbidwell]

The quotes were posted by Sylvia Day in two places.  It is the lead for the topic titled "Captivated by You" that appears in this forum and she has posted it on sylviaday.com under "Coming Soon" subject "Captivated by You"

Hi bettyY37 thank you for getting back to me I have found it on Sylvia .com I did not like what I read it made me feel ill .i think a lot of women will be coming after Gideon and I think Christopher is going to be a little sh...t and so this mother I do not like deanna she is up to something if this is going to be a bad story I will be crying my hart out

[agoodbook]

Has anybody noticed all the significant women in Gideon's life before Eva resemble his mother?

Ive said all along it was mommy issues. He had said she didn't love him enough. so Im thinking he was seeking women that looked like her that didn't love him enough so he crapped on them as she did to him

[dgcaffeine]

Hi Agoodbook, I'm 100% in agreement with you there. Since book 2 I have thought that the dark-haired women with green-blue eyes were all too similar in appearance to Gideon's mother. I hope this is brought up in therapy somehow with Dr. Petersen. If this is brought to light, I hope that Gideon tells Eva...knowing this might ease her jealosy & improve her self-esteem a bit.

[BettyY37]

Eva and Gideon talking about Elizabeth

“She also seems to love you a lot. It was in her eyes when she looked at you.â€

He kept looking straight ahead. “She didn’t love me enough.â€

My breath left me in a rush. Because I didn’t know what had given him such tormenting nightmares, I’d wondered if maybe she’d loved him too much. It was a relief to know that wasn’t the case. It was awful enough that his father committed suicide. To be betrayed by his mother, too, might be more than he could ever recover from.

“How much is enough, Gideon?â€

His jaw tightened. His chest expanded on a deep breath. “She didn’t believe me.â€

I came to a dead stop and pivoted to face him. “You told her what happened to you? You told her and she didn’t believe you?â€

His gaze was trained over my head. “It doesn’t matter now. It’s long done.â€

Excerpt From: Day, Sylvia. “Reflected in You.â€

We know the women he chose looked like his mother and he said none of them really saw him. Did he hide from them because his mother "didn't love him enough"?

[GiGi]

Good morning GiGi

in reply to your last rebutal

Hi Betty,

I have gone over all of your postings about this topic and I have to say that I am confused.  The arguements presented only ask readers to presuppose and accept one interpretation of the facts.  The arguements also require the average reader to suspend disbelief or any kind of common sense. 

 

From my perspective, and healthcare background, that is not possible nor is it logical.  There are several members in this forum from all different backgrounds; doctors, lawyers, psychologists, nurses, etc. and each and every single one of them approaches this book from different perspectives.  Your logic dictates that they should put their life experiences and educational background aside and completely accept what has been written without question.  That position does not allow for a balanced or logical arguement. 

 

When an author writes about a subject as polarizing as sexual abuse and childhood neglect; it will always spark controversy.  You mentioned in your arguement that we as readers have not been provided with facts and if it is not written in the pages of the book, that we cannot take that into consideration (my paraphrasing, not your exact words).  Eva states she she was brutally raped and tortured too many times to count (again my paraphrasing not the exact words from the book, but I can find the exact page and reference if readers require this). 

 

What was not mentioned were the actual physical symptoms and signs of; physical, sexual and emotional abuse.  Your arguement would have us as the reader discount what would be common sense.  Eva would have had bleeding  and tearing of tissue (vaginal and rectal-as evidenced by vaginal and anal scarring).  She would have had trouble sitting down, she would have had pain, discomfort, low grade fevers, difficulty urinating, having bowel movements, had social behaviour problems (which she did in her promiscuous actions, etc. as Eva mentioned herself in the books), could have had nightmares about sleeping alone, become needy, clingy etc. (if for no other reason than to try and avoid Nathan's attacks, etc.).  If you go back and read the posts, you will see everything listed.

 

The exact signs and symptoms of physical, emotional, and sexual abuse were listed several times, for the forum members, but because it wasn't recorded in the book, that evidence cannot be considered.  That is a fundamental flaw in a debate.  Many of the points that have been presented are not up for debate.

 

We as the "old time" forum members have dedicated hundreds/thousands of hours to these exact topics, as has been evidenced by the thousands of posts and research that went along with them. Every "old time" member has their ideas about the book; and they are based on reading the material, discussing it amongst the members and by emailing/tweeting/attending Author conventions.  Some members were lucky enough to discuss these issues with the author and received a first-hand account of what the author was thinking and why the wrote the material the way the did.

 

We as the readers will not have the opportunity to know everything until the last book is published.  Until then, we will have to read the materials presented, use our common sense and apply our life skills and educational background to try and decifer the material in the meantime.

 

GiGi 

[BettyY37]

Hi Betty,

I have gone over all of your postings about this topic and I have to say that I am confused.  The arguements presented only ask readers to presuppose and accept one interpretation of the facts.  The arguements also require the average reader to suspend disbelief or any kind of common sense. 

 

From my perspective, and healthcare background, that is not possible nor is it logical.  There are several members in this forum from all different backgrounds; doctors, lawyers, psychologists, nurses, etc. and each and every single one of them approaches this book from different perspectives.  Your logic dictates that they should put their life experiences and educational background aside and completely accept what has been written without question.  That position does not allow for a balanced or logical arguement. 

 

When an author writes about a subject as polarizing as sexual abuse and childhood neglect; it will always spark controversy.  You mentioned in your arguement that we as readers have not been provided with facts and if it is not written in the pages of the book, that we cannot take that into consideration (my paraphrasing, not your exact words).  Eva states she she was brutally raped and tortured too many times to count (again my paraphrasing not the exact words from the book, but I can find the exact page and reference if readers require this). 

 

What was not mentioned were the actual physical symptoms and signs of; physical, sexual and emotional abuse.  Your arguement would have us as the reader discount what would be common sense.  Eva would have had bleeding  and tearing of tissue (vaginal and rectal-as evidenced by vaginal and anal scarring).  She would have had trouble sitting down, she would have had pain, discomfort, low grade fevers, difficulty urinating, having bowel movements, had social behaviour problems (which she did in her promiscuous actions, etc. as Eva mentioned herself in the books), could have had nightmares about sleeping alone, become needy, clingy etc. (if for no other reason than to try and avoid Nathan's attacks, etc.).  If you go back and read the posts, you will see everything listed.

 

The exact signs and symptoms of physical, emotional, and sexual abuse were listed several times, for the forum members, but because it wasn't recorded in the book, that evidence cannot be considered.  That is a fundamental flaw in a debate.  Many of the points that have been presented are not up for debate.

 

We as the "old time" forum members have dedicated hundreds/thousands of hours to these exact topics, as has been evidenced by the thousands of posts and research that went along with them. Every "old time" member has their ideas about the book; and they are based on reading the material, discussing it amongst the members and by emailing/tweeting/attending Author conventions.  Some members were lucky enough to discuss these issues with the author and received a first-hand account of what the author was thinking and why the wrote the material the way the did.

 

We as the readers will not have the opportunity to know everything until the last book is published.  Until then, we will have to read the materials presented, use our common sense and apply our life skills and educational background to try and decifer the material in the meantime.

 

GiGi 

 

 

Good evening GiGi

 

It is my turn to be confused although I thought as soon as I read from you yesterday, "and it gives me the opportunity to understand your position better." this post might be coming. 

 

First, as anyone who knows me will tell you, I do not ask anyone to "presuppose and accept one interpretation" of anything and definitely never ask them to give up their common sense.

 

Second I am not a follower.  From my perspective your logic dictates that when reading a well-thought and well-written piece of fiction I can not suspend my reality for a while to take the journey the author has chosen. You demand I bring in my life experience because you and others have chosen that option.  If you truly read what I wrote you would see that I can and do make use of personal knowledge and experience under circumstances that I pick and tell you when I do.

  

My logic by its very nature only dictates what I do.  You may do as you please and I do not recall ever asking you or anyone to do otherwise.  My continued willingness to respond to your post should tell you I respect that.

 

Third I do not consider arguments, first defined as an exchange of diverging or opposite views, typically a heated or angry one, as inherently balanced or logical.  I personally prefer conversation, discussion or dialogue.    It is precisely because I am open to new ideas and information that I joined this forum.

 

 

Fourth, what does this mean?

 

"We as the "old time" forum members have dedicated hundreds/thousands of hours to these exact topics, as has been evidenced by the thousands of posts and research that went along with them. Every "old time" member has their ideas about the book; and they are based on reading the material, discussing it amongst the members and by emailing/tweeting/attending Author conventions.  Some members were lucky enough to discuss these issues with the author and received a first-hand account of what the author was thinking and why the wrote the material the way the did."

 

As a new forum memeber you cannot disagree with an "old time" forum member.  I have personally received nothing but positive interest, support, and consideration from old time members.  They have never ask that I only follow their line of thinking.

 

Last, your final paragraph reads like a paraphrase of what I have written on this forum...

 

"We as the readers will not have the opportunity to know everything until the last book is published.  Until then, we will have to read the materials presented, use our common sense and apply our life skills and educational background to try and decifer the material in the meantime.

We as the readers will not have the opportunity to know everything until the last book is published.  Until then, we will have to read the materials presented, use our common sense and apply our life skills and educational background to try and decifer the material in the meantime."

 

which is read the material and lets discuss.

 

Betty 

[GiGi]

 

Good evening GiGi

 

It is my turn to be confused although I thought as soon as I read from you yesterday, "and it gives me the opportunity to understand your position better." this post might be coming. 

 

First, as anyone who knows me will tell you, I do not ask anyone to "presuppose and accept one interpretation" of anything and definitely never ask them to give up their common sense.

 

Second I am not a follower.  From my perspective your logic dictates that when reading a well-thought and well-written piece of fiction I can not suspend my reality for a while to take the journey the author has chosen. You demand I bring in my life experience because you and others have chosen that option.  If you truly read what I wrote you would see that I can and do make use of personal knowledge and experience under circumstances that I pick and tell you when I do.

  

My logic by its very nature only dictates what I do.  You may do as you please and I do not recall ever asking you or anyone to do otherwise.  My continued willingness to respond to your post should tell you I respect that.

 

Third I do not consider arguments, first defined as an exchange of diverging or opposite views, typically a heated or angry one, as inherently balanced or logical.  I personally prefer conversation, discussion or dialogue.    It is precisely because I am open to new ideas and information that I joined this forum.

 

 

Fourth, what does this mean?

 

"We as the "old time" forum members have dedicated hundreds/thousands of hours to these exact topics, as has been evidenced by the thousands of posts and research that went along with them. Every "old time" member has their ideas about the book; and they are based on reading the material, discussing it amongst the members and by emailing/tweeting/attending Author conventions.  Some members were lucky enough to discuss these issues with the author and received a first-hand account of what the author was thinking and why the wrote the material the way the did."

 

As a new forum memeber you cannot disagree with an "old time" forum member.  I have personally received nothing but positive interest, support, and consideration from old time members.  They have never ask that I only follow their line of thinking.

 

Last, your final paragraph reads like a paraphrase of what I have written on this forum...

 

"We as the readers will not have the opportunity to know everything until the last book is published.  Until then, we will have to read the materials presented, use our common sense and apply our life skills and educational background to try and decifer the material in the meantime.

We as the readers will not have the opportunity to know everything until the last book is published.  Until then, we will have to read the materials presented, use our common sense and apply our life skills and educational background to try and decifer the material in the meantime."

 

which is read the material and lets discuss.

 

Betty 

 

Hi Betty,

I think that we are at an impass.  When I mentioned old time forum members what I meant was that we have approached several topics from so many angles that we have literally talked ourselves in circles.  What you are saying has been stated, phrased or paraphrased in sentiment in one way or another over these past months (that is why I suggested that you might want to go back and take a look at the other postings). 

 

When I mentioned the word "argument" I did not mean a heated exchange, but merely a discussion or a debate between two people (there is more than one definition of the word).  I do not, or have not subscribed any emotion to you or your postings in any way.  I do not know you, so there is no way that I would take something that you have written as a slight, or such.  It is all good.

 

You are welcome to disagree with me any time you like and far be it from me, to make you change your mind.  You are more than entitled to your opinion and I respect that.  I did my best to try and keep my posts short (for you and the others) and I think that it may have caused some confusion inadvertently.  We have spent many months on this topic and I didn't want t bombard you with a huge, honking long posts, but it seems that has not worked out for the best because you were not privy to the previous discussions and how I reached my conclusions about Monica, that I did.

 

So with that said, I am taking myself out of this discussion.  I respect your right to your opinion.  I have talked this issue to death and now will wait to hear what Monica's backstory is in books four and five. 

 

GiGi

[Avid_reader]

I am rather new to these forums and I respect everyones right to an opinion.  All these late night posts....  Oh my... 

[BettyY37]

FYI

I know two young women who were abused as children.  One is now close to Eva's age.  The other is older.  I know more than I want about their lives before, during and after.  I will write no details because it is their experience.  I am not aware that I know any boys or men.

 

PS

Thank God I do not know more.