I sat in my therapy session and one of the first things I was told was “We no longer call people who have been through rape, ‘victims’ but instead call them ‘survivors’ as this helps empower them.”
The first thing I noticed about this statement was that the intention was to use words to manipulate the mind of the victim. Not only that, but psychologists were bragging about it. I am a believer that victim mentality is toxic to society.
However, I also recognised early on the manipulation within mental health for genuine victims. I am not talking about victims of feelings from hurtful words. I am talking about victims of crimes. I now consider the use of this manipulation of rephrasing victims of rape as “survivors” to be a pre-empt for something.
In hindsight it likely was. Hollywood, CIA Victims of Satanic Ritual Abuse (SRA), child sex slaves, Muslim grooming gang victims and migrant rape victims were getting their voice heard through the internet. Not only were measures needed to suppress our voices over the internet with the use of censorship, but measures were needed to pacify the public who would be exposed to their voices.
These changes were timed at this moment of exposure and I believe would be to keep the public pacified. It was obviously in the interest of those responsible for creating and enabling such victims, to relabel the victims. Using language to suggest “Hey, it’s okay, they are empowered, they are “survivors””, would help the public look up long enough to give an encouraging nod then return to their slumber.
As I heard the therapists statement I remember being very confused by it. “Oh, I see. Do you tell everyone this?”
“Oh yes. I..is that okay?” She looked very confused.
“I’m just wondering where that idea came from.” I replied.
“It is the advice of the experts. We go through regular training so as to make sure we are helping people, and many want to be empowered.”
“I see.” My lips tightening, dissatisfied with her response.
“I can refer to you however you prefer.”
Here’s the problem with ‘experts’ making these generalised slogans which this was. Firstly, they package every patient up in the same wrapping paper and send them on their way. In the techniques they use and apply within therapy, they actually object to this kind of generalised thinking as being negative. Yet they apply it on the patient?
In Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) one of the negative thoughts they try to prevent is called ‘overgeneralisation’. And yet here I was, sitting in a therapy session as a victim of a serious crime having, what I can only call ‘expert empowerment slogans’ thrown at me. Obviously the non-thinking therapist had not considered the contradiction in this behaviour or the undermining use of slogans. We see the use a great deal today though.
When therapists follow these instructions without thinking, calling a victim of crime a survivor rather than a victim, it might make sense from an empowerment perspective. However, what if there are numerous traumas surrounding that event, which have not yet been ‘survived’, and they are still victim of.
An example, in mine and a Muslim grooming gang victims case, the discussion of this is apparently still very controversial. Some people who raise awareness of these matters as called racists and xenophobes amongst many other insults. As are the victims themselves.
It is my belief that if discussion of such horrendous crimes is so ‘controversial’ that pre-empts and trigger warnings are required prior to the discussion, then these victims have not survived anything. This is because they are silenced or shamed with the trigger warnings and pre-empts as to how awful it will be for another to just sit and listen.
Thus in many ways they are still victims of the rapist. We are told rape is a crime of control. Yet society and it’s needs for trigger warnings, exclamors and pre-empts have the effect of shaming or silencing the victim. Trigger warnings imply this is a bad subject to talk about, to the audience. Consequently, society and its own fears of hurting feelings, allows for the perpetrator to still hold power over their victim. Therefore, there is no survivor in this instance.
This is also the case for SRA and victims of celebrities. However, ‘equality’, ‘tolerance’ and ‘inclusivity’ slogans do not surround these two other groups quite like they do around illegal immigrants and Muslims. And yes, equality, tolerance and inclusivity are simply slogans, the use of psychological manipulation in directing society. Our society is led by slogans after all.
Now the use of the slogan survivor has been applied to a victim, there really is no backtracking from that if they disagree. It will be humiliating to now say you wish to be called a victim. There might be a sense of pressure to accept it, especially when a person is so vulnerable emotionally. It might be considered weak to ask to be referred to as a victim after experts created this special slogan.
When I reported the crime to the police, I was directed to victim support. Victim support warned that they did not recommend victims of crime attend therapy. The reason for this was because therapists can plant false memories by using leading questions and language.
I had initially found this to be appalling. Denying therapy was absurd. How could a therapist change a memory like that? Having attended therapy and observing their use of slogans so as to manoeuvre people back into society, it began to make sense.
Moreover, using these slogans as mentioned before is a form of programming. Not only on the patient but the wider public. And it is my belief that the use of such slogans or programming has erased a human empathy for certain types of criminal victims, particularly those who raise warning alarms on policy and certain cultures.
In turn, the wider public tut, huff or simply ignore such victims. In many cases those victims are insulted by those who are programmed. And now that all the other rape victims are referred unilaterally as survivors as commanded by some random expert, then the public may simply shrug, “Oh well, they did survive. So what of it?”.
Observing scientists but in particular the use of psychology through the COVID era, I do not believe I am wrong in what I am understanding now. The Guardian and Independent complain rightly so that few rape convictions are happening in the UK by comparison to the number of rapes. This is true. But could that be down to psychological therapy that victims may take despite the warning from victim support? And are they receiving it because it is placed as the answer to everything?
If the therapy is provoking an empowerment ideal in the victims, how can a criminal court assume that the victim was affected by the rape and in turn that it was a rape? It will always be argued by the defendant that the rape was consensual. Can a newly empowered survivor convince a criminal court and a jury that it wasn’t? I don’t know as I never continued with the therapy.
For myself that was okay. I didn’t trust therapy and I saw psychology as a mind manipulation. I deliberately did not want my mind manipulated on such a personal event. That is just how I see psychology and psychologists.
Returning to the COVID era. It is interesting that psychologists played a leading role in applying psychology, so as to ensure the public took an injection they would normally never have taken. It has always been surprising to me also that the public took to psychology as an acceptable therapy and treatment after the use of them in Nazi Germany along with many communist societies too.
Especially with the manipulation surrounding the psychology on behalf of the regimes. In my own court case I mockingly referred to psychologists as ‘The consistently incorrect mind reading doctors’ after observing their manipulation against myself and twisting my words to outright lies, then passing it off as truth.
It was western men who were very sceptical of them initially. Propaganda such as TV series Frasier helped normalise its use and eventually with plenty of bitchy articles about men refusing to use them and their mental health declining, it paved way for men attending appointments too.
But were men really having mental instability because they weren’t seeing psychologists? Because they weren’t speaking about their problems? Were their wives and friends really not listening? Or were they having mental instability because their environment, their society was changing and so rapidly? Their jobs taken from them, those in leadership roles refused to listen and they had no control?
Well we only have the expert psychologists opinion on that I am afraid and the findings are that they, psychologists were the source of all remedy. In reality they are just yet another service provider to consume. And yet despite this incredible therapy they offer suicides are still climbing. How could this be?
Love and peace to you all