Dude - er, Jude!
i read it too and i took it the same way. sounded to me not like he was saying that the abuse was the victim's fault (blaming the victim) - but like any response to the abuse that included denial, dissociation, repression of memories or anything other than total acceptance - was essentially untruthful = living a lie and therefore a sin that needed to be repented. i reacted very strongly and negatively to that assumption.
that being said - the book also had some very valuable insights - based on research and other documented sources as well as the author's own counselling experience - that i found helpful. i talked it over with my T and and he said - "no one is right all the time. take what you find useful and put the rest aside." he did not agree with the idea of repenting of dissociation as if it were a sin. it is a survival technique - and often the only option to a victim, not a conscious choice.
i'd be glad to discuss it more if you want - either here or by PM.
A man talking sense to himself is no madder than a man talking nonsense to not himself.
Or just as mad.
So there you are.
Stark raving sane.
- Tom Stoppard, Rosencrantz & Guildenstern are Dead