rape

[OTMA]

where the grand duchesses and the tsarina raped while they were prisoners in "the house of special purpose" (ipatiev house)?

[Robert_Hall]

Have you read ANYTHING about this before  your post ? Have you even tried to search the subject or look into the books that talk about it?

[lexi4]

You might want to read Fate of the Rmanovs by Greg King and Penny Wilson. Also search the threads. I do believe that topic has been discussed here several times

[Belochka]

Despite the fact that this issue was discussed elsewhere, I would like to conclude this thread by stating that there was never any evidence that the Grand Duchesses's were intefered with.

To suggest that such an event had occurred is repulsive and inappropriate.

[clockworkgirl21]

Just what is with you guys?! You sure don't bother to make people feel welcome or be polite. And asking if they were raped isn't inappropriate. I'm glad they weren't, but I am surprised they weren't, too. The guards were always drunk, and they were very close to four young women. Some people on these boards really irritate me. A lot of people who come here don't have a lot of knowledge about the Romanovs, and they want to learn. What's wrong with not replying to threads? You don't have to reply, you know. But I do agree, newbies should check the boards before asking questions. But you don't have to scream at them.

[Sarushka]

Both sides have valid points here.

Yes, the topic has been discussed, a lot. It's caused a lot of hullabaloo and controversy on this board, which is why some folks get frustrated when the topic comes up afresh. However, the initial response to OTMA's questions was rather snappish, in my opinion, and I think newbies deserve to be addressed with more tact. Also, I don't think it was an inappropriate question to ask. People are understandably squeamish about this subject, but I don't believe it does any good to supress questions on an uncomfortable topic -- that's how rumors perpetuate themselves.

OTMA -- do look at Fate of the Romanovs, by King & Wilson. It may well challenge a lot of your preconceptions about the Romanovs' captivity, and it does address the issue of inappropriate contact between the family and the guards.

[Ortino]

Yes, the topic has been discussed, a lot. It's caused a lot of hullabaloo and controversy on this board, which is why some folks get frustrated when the topic comes up afresh. However, the initial response to OTMA's questions was rather snappish, in my opinion, and I think newbies deserve to be addressed with more tact. Also, I don't think it was an inappropriate question to ask. People are understandably squeamish about this subject, but I don't believe it does any good to supress questions on an uncomfortable topic -- that's how rumors perpetuate themselves.

I agree. New member or not, people deserve respect and fair treatment. I understand that it can be frustrating when people post topics on things previously discussed or mentioned, but there's no need to jump all over them. The best thing would be to point them in the right direction, not attack them for their curiosity. Please do take the time to search next time for previous threads though OTMA. And check out FoTR, It's an excellent book.

[AGRBear]

Let me first apologize for those who have displayed impatience and hostility toward posters who would like to discuss this subject.

Like the others,  I do recall talking about the possible rape/rapes on the Russ, the boat that carried them to Ekaterinburg,  but I don't recall the thread.  Does anyone remember where this was discussed and I'll be glad to post the URL so the "newbies" can find it and read it.

Since there are so many threads, now, and some of these subjects are not the main topic,  if is impossible for "newbies" to know these discussion have occured.  Therefore,  older posters should not be so impatience and never should they be critical.

King and Wilson's book FATE OF THE ROMANOVS   pps. 140-41:

>>The women, as Buxhoeveden recalled, had been ordered "to leave our cabin doors open all night.  No one undressesd.  Through the open doors, the soldiiers leered at the grand duchesses..."

"The abuse reached a cresendo as the night wore on.  Gibbes, locked away in his cabin, listened helplessly, as he later told his son George, as the drunken guards harassesd the grand duchesses, "It was dreadful, what they did,"  the former tutor recalled.  The "terrifed screams" of the girls, Gibbes said, haunted him, "to the end of his life."

"Almost certainly, the grand duchesses were subjected to taunts, and, perhaps lewd advances at the hands of the drunken Latvian guards, how far this progresses as the evening wore on is impossible to determine." <<

Although this is a senitive subject for some posters,  it is not a fobidden subject, and, it should not be.  For me,  it is just another display of the mood and the attitude of the Reds who held the Imperial Famly as prisioners from March of 1917 to July of 1918.

Life isn't always a sweet bed of roses and terrible things do happen, just as they may have happen to one or all the Grand Duchesses  who's sceams haunted Gibbes all the rest of his life.

AGRBear

[Forum Admin]

You can read Volkov's first hand account of the Rus trip on the AP main page.

[AGRBear]

Section of Volkov's about the trip on the Russ is on this URL:

http://www.alexanderpalace.org/volkov/19a.html

It appears only Gibbes discusses the events of that night and yet he tells us nothing.  Reminds me of the old movies when I was a kid.  No one mentioned rape or sex.  It was merely suggested in a way the adults understood but it left the inocent completely in the dark and unaware of what occured on the other side of the closed door up on the silver screen.  

AGRBear

[Sarushka]

Interesting point about Gibbes's silence on unpleasant topics -- at the time of the abdication, he also makes very little mention of any of the chaos in the palace. His diary (as quoted in House of Special Purpose) contains only the most banal observations about the Tsesarevich's condition & daily routine. There's nothing about the Grand Duchess's ilness, the power cut, the mutiny of the troops, the absence of the tsar...nothing!

I can understand a man of his time being reluctant to talk about sexual harrassment, but measles? C'mon!

[LisaDavidson]

It was a different time. And, there will always be those for whom discussion of sexual abuse of the Imperial prisoners is offensive, and their views deserve respect, too.

In defense of the guards, they certainly were not drunk all of the time. Penny Wilson took considerable pains in FOTR to point out how ordinary most of the Ipatiev House guard was. They were overwhelmingly Russian Orthodox and most were factory workers nearby looking to make extra money. Many grieved for the family after the Chekists murdered them. It is disrespectful to them to portray them as drunkards.

I do welcome the new poster and would be happy to answer her questions by private message if desired. I would also encourage the poster to read as much as possible if interested in the IF.

[stacey]

Okay, I can understand people who've seen a particular topic discussed ad nauseum being tired of hearing it brought up once again--but I don't think it's fair to jump on someone new here for asking a sincere question. As someone said, there are a huge number of threads in this site and to expect us newbies to be familiar with all of them is not terribly realistic--I myself am coming across new things all the time. Which is good, I'm certainly not complaining about having lots of interesting things to look at, but for someone fairly new it is a bit overwhelming at first--of course we're going to miss some things til we get it all sorted out! And as for the idea that perhaps the Grand Duchesses might have been sexually abused--yes, it's very disturbing to imagine any young girl suffering such an indignity, but really! We're not a lot of sheltered Victorian spinsters here--surely we can discuss (tastefully of course) the widely-reported rumors of such assaults without resorting to smelling salts and fits of the vapours!! (Or losses of our tempers for that matter!) And the fact that persons close to the IF didn't support such rumors is not automatic proof that SOMETHING unpleasant didn't happen--first, these people DID have Victorian sensibilites about discussing sexual matters and second, it would have probably seemed to them like a betrayal of these young girls to suggest that such a thing might have happened, considering that in those days for a girl to have been raped was considered an absolute shame and a personal disgrace, however innocent the victim might have been. Let's act like adults here please!!

[Robert_Hall]

A simple use of the SEARCH function was all I was trying to point out. If someone new to the site would check "read this first" ....as far the subject, you can see my post on the previous thread for my opinions on the subject.

[rskkiya]

Both sides have valid points here.

Yes, the topic has been discussed, a lot. It's caused a lot of hullabaloo and controversy on this board, which is why some folks get frustrated when the topic comes up afresh. However, the initial response to OTMA's questions was rather snappish, in my opinion, and I think newbies deserve to be addressed with more tact. Also, I don't think it was an inappropriate question to ask. People are understandably squeamish about this subject, but I don't believe it does any good to supress questions on an uncomfortable topic -- that's how rumors perpetuate themselves.

OTMA -- do look at Fate of the Romanovs, by King & Wilson. It may well challenge a lot of your preconceptions about the Romanovs' captivity, and it does address the issue of inappropriate contact between the family and the guards.

I second that.
 While I do think that FOTR is a very flawed book - nevertheless - it does have a good deal of pertinent  information on this situation. Some people in past topic discussions about this subject have had very purient and dubious interests in the notion... ... and thus, perhaps some of us may seem overly defensive.