Most Women In Porn Are Trafficked

We already know research shows that most women in prostitution are trafficked, but how many women in pornography are trafficked? Based on these statistics it looks to be roughly at least 54-68%. Hopefully these statistics can shed more light. Sadly, many women don't know they are trafficked, and some are even groomed and brainwashed into believing they chose it, so it's incredibly hard to find statistics on something you can't always directly ask the victim about. There's no way to know if every woman in porn is consenting or forced to say they consented. Even IF it were something smaller, like say 10% of the women in porn who are trafficked, since the average amount of clicks per person on just a single porn site is 11 clicks, then that would mean every person would be viewing at least 1 woman's rape. That's still way too many. But 54-68%? 😭 WATCHING FUELS THE DEMAND OF THEIR ABUSE. 

First, in order to understand how the statistics apply we must first understand the definition of trafficking and all it entails :

Is Being Pressured Into Sex Considered Rape?

What is Rape & Sexual Assault? 

Everyone PLEASE read this. You may think you know what rape and sexual assault means, but the reality is the majority of people in this world don't fully understand what it is. Sex is only supposed to be between any consenting adults who WANT to have sex, and feel SAFE enough to have sex. That's it. If either of those aren't on the table, then sex shouldn't happen. 

First let's have a refresher on what consent is in order to understand what sexual violence entails. The definition of consent often gets misunderstood because people assume that if you go along with something without a fight, or don't say the word "no", then it's consent, which isn't true. I used to think rape was a person forcing themselves on another person while they were kicking and screaming and saying no, but it's much more than that. 

Victim Blaming Post #8: Ignoring Red Flags

I can't count the many times I've heard women say "I ignored the red flags", or "I painted the red flags green", or have heard the question "Why do abused women ignore the red flags in the beginning?". Maybe some women really do ignore red flags, I'm not implying it's not possible. But do the majority of us actually ignore red flags? Is that why a woman ended up with an abuser!?

I don't believe so, because many times there really AREN'T red flags. We may look back and think they look like red flags, but were they actual red flags at the time? Let's take a look at what it means to "ignore a red flag" :

Ignore - 

"to intentionally not listen or give attention to; refuse to take notice of or acknowledge; disregard intentionallyn; pretend not to notice someone or something; refrain from noticing or recognizing" 

Pretend - 

to claim, represent, or assert falsely; to make believe

Red Flag - 

Warning of danger; warning or indicator, suggesting that there is a potential problem or threat; something that indicates or draws attention to a problem, danger, or irregularity

Victim Blaming Post #7 : Prodependency

 Who here wants a new name for codependency? Oh right, no one. "Prodependency" is another victim blaming term, made up by sex addiction therapist Dr. Robert Weiss. Besides all the other issues I have with Rob Weiss (like the fact he believes porn is healthy for some people and publicly locked Gail Dines and anti porn activists for being TOO anti porn🙄), the problem with Prodependency is that it's basically the same as codependency, minus a few beliefs, and then stealthily rebranded in a shiny new package. Let's break down 1 book, 8 videos, more articles and research papers than I could count, all in just one post. 

What does Rob Weiss say that prodependency IS? :

Victim Blaming Post #6 Trauma Bonded

 The term "Trauma Bond" is just as victim blaming as codependency, reactive abuse, stockholm syndrome, learned helplessness, Drama Triangle, etc, and just as dangerous for abuse victims. To be clear, I'm not referring to the bond that happens between two victims sharing their trauma together, ex. bonding after natural disasters, victims in support groups, etc. That definitely happens and is a good thing. I've met the best of friends through the journey of healing trauma from abuse. 

I'm officially referring to the term "Trauma Bond" developed by Patrick Carnes (he was influenced by earlier works from Dutton & Painter, 1970 & 1981, and Bruno Bettelheim, 1940). The foundation behind the "trauma bonding" theory states that victims don't leave abusive relationships because victims are compulsively SEEKING to be abused, addicted to trauma, addicted to being abused, addicted to the abuser, acting out past childhood trauma, codependent, and in the drama triangle (Drama Triangle means someone isn't really a victim and is only pretending to be a victim), etc. Basically trauma bonding believes victims have underlying issues that "led" them to be in abusive relationships and become trauma bonded. This not only patholagizes the victim, but it also places responsibility on the victim, which is why it's victim blaming. 

Sadly the label "Trauma bond" has become extremely popular, yet most people and professionals don't understand the patriarchal/misogynistic victim blaming foundation it was created in. Even therapist Bessel Van Der Kolk helped popularize the label in his book The Body Keeps The Score. Many of the earlier theories that led up to the creation of trauma bonding were based off of the works by a man called Bruno Bettleheim. Bettleheim wrote papers in 1943 about being in nazi camps, and how nazi prisoners tried to mimic the gestapo (almost like they were addicted and wanted to be just like them), etc. He later wrote tons of psychology papers about human bonding, and (autistic) children, etc. 

Turns out Bettleheim was a big fraud and liar. Nothing he wrote about the concentration camps actually happened. He was there, yes, but what he claims happened didn't happen. They interviewed tons of other people in the same camp. Bettleheim also was never a psychologist like he claimed, he was a history major. He only took 2 psychology classes, yet lied about his credentials and treated thousands of children and experimented on them, and wrote tons of psychology papers /studies (many of which later became the inspiration of "trauma bonding"). But since Bettleheim was a fraud, so are the foundations and theories fueling "trauma bonding". (To read more about Bettelheim, go HERE) 

So why are we still using a label that's very existence was never based on facts? 

Here are a few quotes that further show why it's victim blaming :

Victim Blaming Post #5 "Learned Helplessness"

 I'm not against everything regarding learned helplessness. Martin Seligman's study is fascinating (disgusting), though I don't feel it is entirely accurate. I'm also not against the idea of victims feeling helpless; this is a normal human emotion. I am against the term "Learned Helplessness" being applied to abused/betrayed victims. That is victim-blaming. Let me explain the history: 

Learned Helplessness is a term coined by psychologist Martin Seligman in 1967. He wanted to understand depression. In his study, he took dogs, put them in Pavlov slings, and attached electrodes to their hind legs (see pictures below). The electrodes delivered an inescapable and uncontrollable shock to half of the dogs he referred to as the "yoked group". He then took the yoked group of dogs and put them in a shuttle box with an electrified floor and a half wall in the middle and continued shocking them in hopes that the yoked group would jump over the half wall to escape, which would end the shock. Instead, 60% of the yoked dogs whimpered and yelped and eventually just laid down during the remaining 60 seconds of the shock. He concluded that the reason the yoked dogs didn't jump over the half wall to escape was because they had literally learned helplessness. (Though, Seligman did mention that at the end of a shock session, if the door to the opposite shuttle box was opened, the dog "will often come bounding across to escape from the box altogether", Seligman 1967. 

Why Seligman didn't consider that as evidence yoked dogs DO escape, I do not know. That sounds like an escape to me. 🤷

Victim Blaming Post #4 Stockholm Syndrome

The term "Stockholm Syndrome" is ALL CRAP. Hogwash. Nonsense. Absurd. Rubbish. Malarky. Hooey. Doo doo. Lies.

Yet there are hundreds of cited research studies, articles, movies, and theories about abuse victims founded from it, and they are all based on something that isn't even real. 😲

Victim Blaming Post #3 The Drama Triangle (Karpman Triangle)

 The Drama Triangle is another victim blaming term when applied to trauma victims. 

According to the creator, Dr. Stephen Karpman, the Drama Triangle is basically when two unhealthy people come together and take turns playing the roles of the Victim "woe is me", Persecutor "the bully", & Rescuer "Let me fix you", because they have psychological unmet needs, often developed in childhood. The Victim in this model is thought to be the start or catalyst of the Drama Triangle by seeking out a Persecutor who will keep them playing the Victim, and also a Rescuer who will "save" them. All three roles thrive off the drama and can get a sense of excitement from control and having felt they "won". 

However, involvement in a drama triangle isn't something someone is doing to you. It's something you are equally doing WITH another unhealthy person. If you are currently the victim in a abusive/betrayed relationship you cannot be in the Drama Triangle, because the "Victim" role in the Drama Triangle isn't actually a real victim, it's someone ACTING like a victim, ie "playing the victim," as Dr. Stephan Karpman stated:

Victim Blaming Post #2: Reactive Abuse or Mutual Abuse

"Reactive Abuse" or "Mutual Abuse" isnt a real thing. Someone always has more power and control. The reason victims do things is completely different than why perpetrators do things. By saying the victim and the perpetrator are BOTH abusers, it's not only inaccurate, it's incredibly victim blaming and not helpful for the victim OR the perpetrator. Plus, we already have a correct name for this situation, it's called self defense. Why would we ever call something abuse when it isn't abuse? 

Think of it this way, if someone broke into your house and held you down and tried to kill you with a knife, and in your terrified state you managed to break free enough to grab a bat from under your bed and hit the attacker in the head, and that blow to the head lead to the attacker dying....... would we call YOU a murderer? 

Victim Blaming Post #1 Codependency

I will be doing a series of posts about some victim blaming terms that many people may not be aware of that are harming victims of abuse, like Codependency, Prodependency, Trauma Bonded, Stockholm Syndrome, Reactive/Mutual Abuse, Drama Triangle, Learned Helplessness, etc <-- all terms made up by men and applied to women they thought were crazy, much like Hysteria (Which sadly still exists in the DSM, they just call it Histrionic now 😳). This post will be about Codependency. 

Codependency was a word made up by abusive cheating addicts from Alcoholics Anonymous, founded in 1935, and was then used by Al-Anon (Sister of AA) when it was formed in 1951. The word later became widely popular by therapists and also authors like Melody Beattie in the 1980's. Addicts basically believed their loved ones were acting just as crazy as an addict by displaying similar behaviors (what THEY considered to be neurosis, controlling, neediness, paranoia, ritualizing etc.) and so they assumed their loved ones must be "addicted" to the addict/addicts addiction, therefore needing the exact same 12 steps as the addict (same wording and everything). This is why Al-Anon and S-anon and COSA etc. were created, to help treat all the obsessed dysfunctional family members of addicts --- also so they'd no longer hinder the addicts recovery which was the main goal (Read Al-Anons "To Wives" below🙄). These 12 step manuals subtly teach family members the belief that they have just as many issues and are as diseased as the addict. 

Sadly, there's a huge movement out there where therapists and organizations (many of the top sex addiction organizations in the world) will remove the WORD "Codependency" and instead slap the word trauma over it, without ever getting rid of the codependency treatment or victim blaming content. So it's still victim blaming, except it's masked in the word "trauma", thus making it more confusing and harder to spot, and in my mind more dangerous. An example of this is how it was publicly stated by Stefanie Carnes that only 1-2% of CSATS still use the codependency model. Yet an ongoing poll showed 74% of betrayed wives experienced a CSAT covertly using the codependency model. There's a huge difference in what is SAID, and what actually happens. 

Victims deserve better than to be continually blamed.