As part of my research for an upcoming blog post, I’d like to talk to (C)SA survivors who don’t conform to society’s standards of what a survivor should be. I’m particularly interested in hearing from survivors who have been denied access to support, harassed or attacked online, or silenced in conversations about prevention as a result.
This includes survivors who:
didn’t report their abuse (especially to protect their abuser)
are sex workers
have taboo coping strategies (such as lolicon/shotacon)
have taboo kinks, fetishes, or paraphilias (especially if trauma-related)
are hypersexual
got aroused during their abuse
went on to abuse others or view CSAM
oppose “anti-abuse” policies and legislation (EARNIT, FOSTA, KOSA, etc.)
fit the description above in any other way or consider themselves a bad survivor
If any of these sound like they describe you (even partially) and you’re open to talking about your experiences, please DM me, email [email protected], or reach out using the contact info on my website. Nothing you tell me will be published without your permission.
Would it kill you guys to at least all use the same contact method? Had to make a friggin spreadsheet because people reached out on 5 separate platforms lol. (This is a joke, reach out however you’re most comfortable doing so)
They’re at least taboo among the general public, which can impact people’s mental health and access to support, so for the purposes of looking at survivors being underserved I’d count them
when used in that context, it makes sense. there’s no shortage of people who were victims themselves who benefit from the therapeutic use of fantasy and fictional outlets.
I don’t doubt that they’re taboo relative to other more conventional interests, but I’ve been doing some of my own research into it and…well… if numbers on booru sites and traffic analytics data are anything to do by when grading interest, loli tends to get more clicks on hentai sites than traditional ‘gay’ porn on some porn sites.
I mean you will still get invalidated for it / get hate for it. So I guess it fits especially if your art does not depict the abuse as bad / the most horrible thing ever …
The case that I linked in the other thread was actually about a CSA survivor trying to cope via fictional pornography depicting incestuous sexual activities between adults and children. He was convicted for possession of child pornography in front of a court and made to pay a fine – and he got lucky, a few months later he would have faced a mandatory minimum sentence of one year in jail.
Sure, that was Germany and not the US, but I think it highlights how quickly CSA survivors who don’t conform to a very specific image quickly lose any kind of sympathy and even get stigmatized by the very same people claiming to protect and help them.
Anyone who supports this or favors this type of treatment should be disqualified from being regarded as ‘reasonable’. I can understand wanting to be cautious about things, but people need to realize that exposure and engagement with fictional/fantasy outlets DOES NOT INCREASE RISK of subsequent abuses, even in those predisposed. There is NO EVIDENCE supporting a causal or exacerbatory effect, and any suggestions supporting the contrary are inconclusive.
Dr. William Thompson’s report on the matter is probably the most valid take on the issue, and we need scientists to step forward and correct the record and reign in the zealous instincts of government officials.
Call me crazy, but by acting this way, the Germans are literally repeating history. The Nazis took drastic measures to address “harmful information” because they genuinely believed that what they viewed as immoral/degenerate was damaging society, that their view of society was what was ultimately for the best.
Even the late (and controversial) John Paul Fedoroff MD agreed that such content wouldn’t increase risk of subsequent abuses by observing clear differences with regard to risk assessment in cross-over risk.
Just like with child sex dolls, policymakers should do right to wait until a scientific consensus can be reached before taking drastic steps which will cause undeniable amounts of harm to both people and society, especially when the harms are alleged and not clearly evident.
The rule of law is a mindless and blunt tool. Lady Justice may wield a sword and a scale, but she’s still blind. That visual metaphor has always been intended to imply that “Justice does not discriminate”, to appeal to the idealistic purity of the fairness of the rule of law, but to others, it is interpreted as a warning to policymakers and the electorate in charge of appointing those who write their governing laws.
That doesn’t mean they’re right to behave in such a way, nor does it discount those who support it openly. There will always be people intelligent enough to point out that reality is not fiction.
no where did I argue against that. Yes absolutely. But fiction in this region is stigmatized. That was the question at hand. And that is what I answered.
especially if your art does not depict the abuse as bad / the most horrible thing ever …
