Who's the worse abusive father?

[Kuroneko]

Umm, logically fallacious. You assumed the Psychological Damage on both sides to have similar values.

It seems very reasonable to suppose this, since the OP described their psychological trauma in identical terms, and since the violence is much more frequent, the fact that generally rape victims suffer more is rendered irrelevant: a relatively frequent but lesser psychological damage could certainly add up or even overtake an infrequent but large one.

[Tiger Ace]

I don't really have a logical explanation, but to me, the violent abuser is worse, he leaves permenant marks that no matter how much therapy the victim goes through, all she has to do is look at herself and be reminded of everything.

[wautd]

Kill 'em both. Let Satan sort it out

[The Nomad]

To those who claim that the rapist will cause less severe/lasting physical trauma : what if the daughter gets pregnant ? How traumatizing would it be for her to abort, or worse ( say, if she's religious ) carry it to term ?

[Rye]

-BTW, who the fuck are you to say a victim of prolonged and severe physical violence is worse off than someone who suffered prolonged sexual abuse without associted physical violence?!? I suspect your opinions add up to precisely jack shit so why don't you dig up some evidence to support such a claim or is that just to difficult for you?

Well, the trauma caused by abuse is obviously going to be attuned to the victim's subjective perspective. Perhaps I'm simply projecting, however, rape's the leading cause of PTSD, and I strongly doubt more people are being raped than being beaten up. To me, that would imply that people cannot deal with being raped as much as they can deal with violence (though perhaps some desensitivity occurs at some point, and remaining physical scars tip the balance towards the physical abuser, i don't know).

I certainly would take being beaten by someone I love over being raped by them. Maybe I just have a larger phobia of rape than being beaten up. Maybe you're the opposite, in which case, the violent dad would be worse for you.

[Kuroneko]

I certainly would take being beaten by someone I love over being raped by them. Maybe I just have a larger phobia of rape than being beaten up. Maybe you're the opposite, in which case, the violent dad would be worse for you.

For a lone incident, I would agree with you completely. However, that is simply not the scenario. What if you have to choose between a single incident of rape and frequent brutal, disfiguring beatings over a period of several months? It is quite reasonable to suppose that at some point, if the frequency and extremity of such indicents is great enough, the amount of psychological trauma becomes comparable (which is also the most straightforward interpretation of the OP), particularly in the case of relatively malleable mind of a child, who would not be as mentally hardened against personal violence as an adult.

[Pick]

Also, I should have noted in addition to my last post, the ramifications would also be different depending on the culture in which this was taking place. Not because it's more or less reprehensible, but depending on the nature of the abuse it might have more or less significance as far as nature and extent of trauma depending on outside cultural factors (such as whether that kind of abuse was more or less mainstream which might contribute to more or less of a sense of how-it-goes.)

[Jay]

I would rather be beaten than raped. Kill the rapist and hang his body for the crows. The violent father can live provided he is suitably ... corrected.

of course this is entirely subjective.

[Rye]

I certainly would take being beaten by someone I love over being raped by them. Maybe I just have a larger phobia of rape than being beaten up. Maybe you're the opposite, in which case, the violent dad would be worse for you.

For a lone incident, I would agree with you completely. However, that is simply not the scenario. What if you have to choose between a single incident of rape and frequent brutal, disfiguring beatings over a period of several months? It is quite reasonable to suppose that at some point, if the frequency and extremity of such indicents is great enough, the amount of psychological trauma becomes comparable (which is also the most straightforward interpretation of the OP), particularly in the case of relatively malleable mind of a child, who would not be as mentally hardened against personal violence as an adult.

Well, assuming that the psychological damage inflicted is equal in the two subjects, i guess the physical pain and damage recieved by one would make "overall damage inflicted" worse in the physically beaten one.

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

Father #1: once every few months, he sexually abuses his daughter. He has been doing this since she was 8 years old. She has severe psychological problems as a result. He does not beat her.

Father #2: he regularly beats his daughter, and often burns her with cigarettes in order to teach her a lesson. He has been doing this since she was 8 years old. She has scars all over her body and severe psychological problems as a result. He does not sexually abuse her.

Which guy is worse? Or do they both equally deserve to be tortured to death?

I voted to kill both of them. Both will irrevocably fuck up their children for life. The daughter of father #1 will never be able to fully trust someone, and is liable to marry an abuser, or abuse her own children (if she somehow gets over the psychological trauma that would come with sex.) Failing that, she'll become a sex addict, catch something fatal or do something stupid and be dead by thirty.

The daughter of father #2 will have the same sort of trust issues that daughter #1 does. Worse, she will likely abuse her spouse and abuse her children in the same way her father did, ensuring the cycle will continue. Failing that, she'll seek out the most abusive asshole of a man that she can, having grown up with the idea that a man should be an abusive prick. She will get sucked further and further in, and will eventually be featured in a newspaper article about how her boyfriend killed her, cut her into pieces and buried each piece in its own garbage bag across five miles of remote forest hiking trail.

[Netko]

Wow, someone has a bright outlook on things

Especialy liked the "each piece in its own garbage bag across five miles of remote forest hiking trail" part.

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

Wow, someone has a bright outlook on things

Especialy liked the "each piece in its own garbage bag across five miles of remote forest hiking trail" part.

Did you have anything meaningful to contribute, or were you just moving along?

[Netko]

Actualy I was just saying that I found your post humorous in a dark way. Maybe that wasn't obvious despite the usage of . My mistake.

As far as contributing goes, I did that back on page 2, don't really have much to add to that opinion except maybe noting that unfortunatly your described outcome is far more likely than the one I optimisticly posted in my earlier post.

[General Brock]

I voted kill them both; life imprisonment in gen pop or therapy wasn't an option. Although, if the father is also playing head games, killing might be more effective than a court injunction restricting any further contact with the child.

The desire or compulsion to abuse has to be addressed. In both cases, the father could have the delusion that he was doing the daughter some kind of favour, or be acting out of a compulsion to inflict harm.

The actual expression of abuse results in the same past-threshold level of psychological damage to the victim. Physical harm, although more visible in the physical abuser's case, is no less traumatic for the rape victim.

This is kind of like asking if a strychnine poisoned apple was better than a strychnine poisoned orange.

[Glimmervoid]

I voted kill them both because I view them as equally wrong but I am against the killing them part. Lock them up for the rest of their life its much worse IMO.

[Mobiboros]

I voted kill both because, while I haven't evaluated which I feel is really 'worse', both have passed the threshhold where the crime warrants the punishment in my opinion.

[Sriad]

I think beater Dad is worse than Rapist dad.

Father POV: Rapist Dad may love his daughter, in a profoundly twisted way. Beater thinks there's something wrong with his daughter, and it's up to him to smash her into shape.

Daughter POV: Once they enter counseling, Raped Daughter may have an easier time mitigating some of the damage than Beaten Daughter. RD's abuse, she might be convinced, happened because she has good and desirable qualities. (of course psych damage is a lot deeper than assigning motive, but...)

I conceed (before the rest of you point it out) that a similar opposite situation is entirely possible, but that's my gut opinion on the matter.

[Ford Prefect]

Naturally, given the oppurtunity, I would have them both killed. No need for torture, I'm sure our old friend Lucy can handle that. No abuser can be allowed to breath the same air as good people.

However, which is worse is somewhat subjective. The psychological trauma of being sexually violated by one's father is different to the psychological trauma caused by physical abuse. Viewing it from the child's point of view is not a smart move for a psychologist (I'm not, by the way, but I am considering it and thuse have rudimentary knowledge).

You must rather take it from the father's point of view. Sick the sexual abuser may be, if it is a long term thing there is often some twisted form of affection. The violent abuser, if abusing for the reason of 'fixing' his daughter, is to be considered crazed, but not sadistic. If he's doing it for his own sick pleasure he's to far gone to even be considered deranged.