Ruth Graham: Violent Porn; Abusive, Degrading Sex Promotes a Violent Fascist World

The following post may disturb some individuals, since it describes and depicts male violent sado-masochistic sex. Do not read if that topic may traumatize you.

By Ruth Graham

The cleverest move of predatory men of the 21st century was to convince people that if it gets your cock hard, there’s nothing immoral to it! What a loophole!

With the caveat that a light spanking and/or some dungeon role-play can indeed be fully consensual (we all know it can be), I’m reposting a comment from an anonymous woman.

Here is the comment:
I was really into being the subject of that violent stuff at the lowest moments of my life (I was a teenager). I had literally no self respect and felt lower than dirt.
I only felt value from doing things for others.
It was somehow a turn on to have a sex act reflect how I felt about myself, and to degrade myself in a way I thought I deserved.
Trauma & abuse really screws with your head.
I know on some level I am just projecting.
There are stable women who like this stuff. But anytime I’ve seen this type of act in porn, I see my younger self in a lot of those young women.
I still remember the feeling of seeing it on a porn website and being transported back to images when I had that same look in my eyes. Weirdly enough, despite being sort of hypersexual in my youth, I realized I was asexual in my older twenties, which I am almost grateful for because I am so tired of the trauma that comes with sex.

I reposted this so people can understand this in the context of abuse cycles, particularly those tied to histories of brutality, epigenic memories of genocide, abduction, fascism, trafficking, war, and all forms of generationally passed down trauma, addiction and domestic violence.

She wrote, “tired of the trauma that comes with sex.”

 Many women face it

Women are normalized to abuse, pain and degradation in sex, because it’s modeled to us. Trauma is an experience of sex. It’s part of our cycle of trauma.

To say that consenting removes the problem is disrespectful to millions who face this abuse daily or grew up with it, so they internalize it (self hate), like the woman above.

This is an old, old pattern accelerated by hyper consumerism and social media/porn addiction. It’s neither humane nor progressive.

We will live in a kinder world only when our sex is kinder. This is true despite rampant abuse justified by the idea that whatever a man wants to do to a woman is fine, as long as he obtains consent for it from some poor self-hating soul.

Making sex violent and violence sexy is, in fact, the conservative, shitty rape culture currently plaguing our entire world. It is the driver of brutalization, dehumanization and disassociation. It’s what we find in most fascist societies.

Abusers sure did a fancy trick saying it’s not abusive as long as someone’s cock get’s hard.

You’re going to tell me it’s progressive?

Male sexual violence? Sexual violence in general?  It’s peddled to tweens and teenagers as the new best thing. It isn’t and never should have been.

Teenage girls are getting anal fissures, because anal is “a given.”

College girls expect to be choked by the average hookup, because it’s become ubiquitous in porn.

Hair pulling in sex during doggy style snaps the vertebrae of some 20 year olds, giving them paralysis.

If you train young men to find this arousing, you incite and normalize degrading and abusive violence against women.

More and more men argue in court that the violence they subjected women to was “consensual violence.” Men have gotten off from murder charges with this defense.

By age 7, the average boy is exposed to increasingly violent porn.

 

This is good? Really?

I can talk at length about how tying violence to sex leads to polarized gender roles and abuse towards LGBT and anyone gender non-conforming. It gives people complexes and makes the expected communication between genders more extreme.

This is arousing?

It also leads to people replaying violent roles outside the bedroom – in the government for example – through strongmen politicians who repeat the master-slave relationship….that has been fetishized into the brains of the populace and is expected of our leaders subconsciously.

Do what you want in your bedroom, but don’t argue it’s okay as long as you claim consent.

And don’t say someone not into dangerous ASPHYXIATION is a prude, just because you like to call it some kind of kink/fetish and think that’s some loophole or sex positivity thing.

I reserve the right to kink shame anyone aroused by violence, pain, and restricting people’s airways.

It reminds me of someone who claimed it’s wrong to be shamed for eating feces because it’s their fetish.

About the author

Guest View

185 Comments

Click here to post a comment

Please leave a comment: Your opinion is important to us! (Email & username are optional)

  • ok I have a question. When Swami Chet would hang women upsidedown by the big hooks on the wall for his sexual pleasure…was there a group of people watching and helping? How could he do that by himself? I keep picturing the coven like in Rosemary’s baby all gathered around and chanting om. Did people WATCH while he performed disgusting acts on the hanging (unconscious) prey? Did Sharon have her dogs present while she watched?

    • @anonymous regarding hooks and hanging

      What I was told, so this is second hand, J. Michael Shoemaker, the evil traumatizing narcissist, hunted at night. He would bring his victims to his rooms in the wee hours. They were indoctrinated to obey and “do what he tells you”, so no problem in getting his prey. Not to mention the whole cult supported the delusion that he was an incarnation of a deity, and he had the run of the place with no locks on the bedroom or bathroom doors.

      We have all seen the scarves used in the rituals at the Movement Center. White scarves on the necks of the “loved ones” of Lama Wangdu, the rapist. Colorful scarves on the necks of the “loved ones” attending classes at the Movement Center. Even a tribute to Liz mentions how Liz would hold impromptu “fashion shows” with scarves in the hall in front of her room.

      I was told that Shoemaker liked to tie up his prey with scarves. He could strangle them with the scarf and then he could then hang them from the tied-up scarves on the hooks. Feet first, hands first, who knows. The victims I know are small women, 100-120 pounds. What does Shoemaker brag about being able to lift on his “workout days” posts. He could easily lift a small, unconscious woman and put her on a hook, plus she is tied up. Ruth described the type of architectural hook used to hold large pieces of art. Maybe Shoemaker had specially placed hooks in his apartment in the Movement Center or in his new rooms in Gold Beach that he uses to hang his prey.

      I don’t know if he had an audience at all his abuse sessions. I was told that he liked to watch and he liked to do. Maybe someone else knows more.

      • “Even a tribute to Liz mentions how Liz would hold impromptu “fashion shows” with scarves in the hall in front of her room.”
        What are you even talking about? Liz knitted. One has nothing to do with the other. Seriously, when you dump a whole lot of bullshit into these sweeping statements as though you know something, it makes you sound so ridiculously in-credible that no one who actually was his victim wants to participate in the misinformation. Stick to the facts, if you even know them.

      • I’ve never heard of this impromptu fashion show and even if it did happen how in the heck would it be related to the sexual abuse? Liz was a very kind woman who not only knitted and gave her knits to people, she would give some very expensive pashmina (wool) scarves to people for free, that I’m assuming she got for a bargain while in Nepal or from her sister Theresa while she was in Nepal. I still have one or two left in my possession I think. I wish I knew your name so I could know if you were a valid source on this claim. I never heard of this before.

        • @Ruth, Dec. 2
          Scarves, Ruth and Abuse

          The comment about Liz and scarves was taken from this post on the Frank Report

          https://frankreport.com/2022/10/23/two-missing-witnesses-wards-utmost-interference-investigate-liz-bazzanis-death/

          Lois Marie Tallon wrote:
          I loved working in the kitchen, sharing each others stories, laughing and tasting the most delicious pastries I’ve ever experienced. Sharing the third floor space, scarf fashion shows in your room and in the hall, laughing till we cried.

          In this post there is a picture of Liz is wearing a scarf. Many photos of “loved ones” at the Movement Center show scarves. Scarves were available for Shoemaker to use to tie up his victims, to strangle his victims, to put around the necks of his “loved ones” for anything he wanted to do to them.

          My comment about the use of scarves came from second hand information. I was not a victim nor was I harmed physically. I was lied to, gaslighted and exploited by the cult. I have spoken to four people who were physically assalted and harmed while residents at the Movement Center. One of the victims told me about the use of scarves. I was told by all the victims that bedroom doors and bathroom doors were not locked. That was my experience when I was staying at the Center. All the victims told me that Shoemaker does his abusing in the late night/early morning. I was told he goes to their rooms looking to harm them.

          I noted in my cmment that scarves are available to Shoemaker. Scarves are in people’s rooms. Scarves are used in rituals. Shoemaker used them to tie up and strangle his victims. I did not mean to imply that LIz gave him scarves or that she was anyway involved. Liz is a victim of Shoemaker and his cult. I don’t know everything that was done to her. I do know that the cultic practices of indoctrination, grooming, gaslighting and exploitation harmed her and her family.

          I do know that Shoemaker strangled his victims and raped them. I know Shoemaker is a deranged, controling, evil man and he should be stopped from harming more people. I know he leads a criminal orgainzation that for 50 years has recruited, groomed, indoctrinated, harmed and exploited his “loved ones”.

  • There are thousands of Photoshopped fake porn of Mack and Kruek (and almost all female celebs) which also contributes to this issue. There’s nothing they can do to stop it. The price of fame, for women.

  • what happened to JON SHANKER?????
    He was groomed for years, given a special deal, and then KA BLOOEY. He was gone.
    Swami thought he was going to get a payoff if Shanker’s social media company took off. This is a good example of disingenuous motives. Swami does a lot for people, but has an ulterior motive. Then, the “black widow spider” comes in for the venomous kill. Egotism.
    This pattern goes on and on and on and on. And, the inner circle ALWAYS blames the victim. Because this place is a CULT.
    Got it Sadhvi? You are a cult facilitator. Any other idea about yourself is a LIE.

    • @Horsetail

      Jon Shanker is not hard to find. He is right there on Facebook. He lists his home as Portland. If you go through his list of friends, it reads like a who’s who of J. Michael Shoemaker’s cultic group. If anyone has a contact with one of these “loved ones”, they can ask what happened to Jon Sanker. I don’t know all the “loved ones” but here is a list of “friends” of Jon Shanker, who have shown up in the Frank Report as being associated with J. Michael Shoemaker and his cult:

      Connie and Tara Dyer
      Chris Jackson, living at Gold Beach
      Thomas Fabrizio, living at Gold Beach
      Kelly Ponzi, visitor at Gold Beach
      Andrew Bonner, “doctor” and family member of Ayaz who died while a resident at the Movement Center
      Chris Cartwright
      Pia, Vanessa and Michael Bazzani, family members of Liz whose death has been written about in the Frank Report
      Cassia Herman, visitor to Gold Beach
      Susan Marshall, living at Gold Beach
      Drew Carlson
      Nick Coyle, family member of Lieko Coyle
      Margo Marver, informed about abuse
      Kari Gronningsater, at Gold Beach
      Molly Merideth
      Karla Refoxo
      Jamie Lindsay Currin, she wrote about her association with Shoemaker and said she was not abused (therefore no one was abused)
      Eddie Rosen, visitor to Gold Beach
      Paul Rosen
      Breda Siragusa, visitor to Gold Beach
      Christopher O’Brien, seen in a photo of “loved ones” in Boston
      Anna Brook, visitor to Gold Beach
      Scott Hanley
      Lisa Hoberg
      Vanessa and Nicolaas-John van Nieuwenhuysen
      Jessica Butler, second generation member
      Vikto Usov

      If you work through the “friends” of Jon Shanker, each person is connected to even more people who have passed through the Movement Center and may know about some of the harms that have taken place there.

      Secrets don’t have to be kept anymore. You can add your voice to the Frank Report. We are aware of the abuse, harm, exploitation. There is more to learn, call Frank, write a comment, each piece of the puzzle completes the picture of what J. Michael Shoemaker has done to build his big, beautiful life in Gold Beach on the backs of those he has abused.

  • Moni: You are not a teacher of nuttin’. And, sorry, you never were. Never ever. Cut the crazy wisdom crap. It’s dysfunctional bullshit. And, grow up already. You are NOT special. So, quit acting like it. The “special” ballerina act was stale from day one. People hated it.

  • Ruth, do you even understand what words like fascism, epigenetics, and gaslighting mean? It seems you have a really loose grasp if not a straight up misunderstanding of their meanings.

    • Epigenetics:

      https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/understanding/howgeneswork/epigenome/

      https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fearful-memories-passed-down/

      Fascism:

      https://www.openculture.com/2016/11/umberto-eco-makes-a-list-of-the-14-common-features-of-fascism.html

      (see point 12, btw, for relation to what I’m saying)

      And here’s a long video by worldwide expert on domestic violence, Lundy Bancroft, on the ties between DV and authoritarianism at a larger scale:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmbrAWDft0s

      Read also:

      Strongmen: Mussolini to the Present by Ruth Ben-Ghiat. You will see the pattern of sexual violence and fascism.

      Gaslighting:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighting

      In conclusion:

      Abusers use violence to normalize control. And what comes next is the gaslighting. Combining affection (including sex) with violence normalizes a person to give up their comfort for their abuser and to perceive that as “love”. They then conflate harm with care, abuse with affection, slavery with support, etc.

      The very first step of brainwashing a person is in fact disruption. Though physical or mental means you first disorient and dislocate them, thereby weakening their mind, sense of reality, sense of self, sense of belonging, and in general their defenses. You can do so via shock, pain, food or sleep deprivation, sensory deprivation (mind numbing chanting for example) or other forms of force or deception. Violence; be it just via shocking image or actual act, is often used as a tool to weaken people’s wills, and the gaslighting comes afterwards. The gaslighting works to convince a person what is healthy is in fact sick, and what is sick is in fact healthy.

      The target of gaslighting is then convinced that the one dominating them is the one who is right and they are wrong. They then release their own agency to the abuser. It is easier to do to a person when they are in a prolonged stress response.

      Rape and abuse (pain) in sex, is one of the most powerful tools of destroying the self of a person. If you shatter their self, they can become utterly compliant to your will, rather than having any of their own.

      I can use the term brainwashing interchangeably with gaslighting imho. Although brainwashing is more broad actually.

      On a final note, the term “brainwashing” in fact originates from communist China, the term hsi nao literally is a pun on the term “cleanse the mind.” However the Chinese themselves are not the original experts on gaslighting entire peoples. They learned from the Russians, from techniques they developed in the 1920s, which the Nazi Germans also cribbed from in their own way on into the 30s.

      I hope I’ve clarified my position for you.

      • Thank you for your thoughts, Ruth – interesting, solid and informative as usual.
        Btw, Have you ever read W. Reich’s The Mass Psychology Of Fascism? – its definitely worth a read.

        Also incase anyone hasn’t seen the primary source for the term gaslighting…

      • I actually don’t need a lecture on gaslighting and it’s history; I‘m already familiar with all the info you’ve shared. It had seemed to me previously that you seemed to think that anyone on an Internet forum who has a different opinion than you is gaslighting. thankfully, it seems like you now understand the term better. I also know what fascism and an epigenetics mean.

        Personally, I don’t understand what you mean about BDSM in the context of “epigenetic memories of genocide, war, abduction, etc.” So if trauma is indeed passed down generationally in humans and my great grandfather fought in World War II, I am now at heightened risk of being coercively controlled into thinking it’s ok to try out BDSM? When actually, BDSM is NOT ok because some people who engage in it have low self-esteem. ? So I need to be protected? What if it’s my own wish as a woman to try it? Should I be locked up in an institution to save me from myself?

        • I notice you say “it seems” a lot in a passive aggressive, plausibly deniable manner. If I were to use your rhetorical techniques on you. I would say “It seems like you’re not asking in good faith, and in fact to me it does seem like you don’t know what you’re talking about at all but are just here to argue. Moreover it seems like when you say you don’t understand, you in fact aren’t interested in respectful debate at all, but seem to use this as an illusion of good debate; to illicit a response from me, then mock, straw man, and character slander; as in the condescending statement “now you understand the term better.”

          Are you confusing me with someone else from the cult perhaps?

          I’ve always known what gaslighting is and how it works.

          And your last paragraph is just pure ridicule. Your great great grandfather spent a few years fighting in ww2 now I want to lock you up? Lol, did you write this while sober?

          Given by the low quality of your responses here (especially in their poorly hidden venom), perhaps you have been affected more than you want to admit?

          Did he have PTSD before you were born or while you were raised? Did he suffer alcoholism? Did it affect you? More importantly, was he a transman? Did he carry you in his womb? The bond with the mother and her levels of stress has more impact on a child than a father does. However, let’s take it further. Was your grandfather subject to years of child abuse at the hands of his father or mother? Or was he adopted/abandoned? Was he a native american child abducted from his home and raised in a white family? As a child did he witness the death of a sibling or parent? Did he nearly die at any point of his own childhood? Did he suffer 40 years in a dictators regime where he watched friends and family disappear? Was he a POW and tortured? Did he survive a famine like the Holodomor in Ukraine?

          Google the ACE score and get back to me. Although you probably won’t. Given by what you wrote, you’re not hear to learn anything but to attack me personally.

          Again, you can do whatever you want in your bedroom. As I’ve said repeatedly. Just stop making BDSM a commercially demanded product that is being sold to the world as a norm. Stop arguing that men who get their cocks hard by beating women “consentually” moral, normal, healthy or safe. Stop selling it to young girls AND boys. Why is this so hard for you to understand exactly?

          • “I notice you say “it seems” a lot in a passive aggressive, plausibly deniable manner.”

            Ruth. You are crazy.

          • So what if my grandfather was orphaned, so what if his siblings died? So what if that did somehow alter my genetics which, by the way, has not been proven in humans, although to me, it seems likely it would have an effect.

            however, how the hell does that mean I now cannot consent to BDSM???

          • “ in a passive aggressive, plausibly deniable manner.”

            Ok, I’m sorry. Maybe it’s not crazy. maybe this is just another example of you using words that you don’t fully understand. Like passive aggressive and plausibly deniable.

            There is nothing passive aggressive about me saying that it “seemed to me” that you did not fully understand the meaning of gaslighting based on your use of it. I mean my God it really seems like you don’t even understand what passive aggressive means! Why do you insist on constantly packing all of these terms that you don’t understand into everything you write? It’s a really bad habit.

          • I agree BDSM should not be sold to children.

            I disagree with this, “Stop arguing that men who get their cocks hard by beating women “consentually” moral, normal, healthy or safe.”

            I think it can be perfectly moral, normal, healthy and safe. I’m talking about with mutually agreed-upon grounds within pre-established and respected limits and respecting sanity, meaning not doing anything that would damage a person’s health. I see nothing wrong with that.

      • 🎨 interesting subjects. I’m just thinking…human monsters breaking and raping the mind down, to rebuild the victims into pure obedient slaves.

  • Mention sex and women’s rights on the internet. Cue Whataboutery 101. People (I hate to say, but usually men) have such a hard time in simply recognizing that, yes, young people often come from trauma and abuse then go on to play out that trauma and abuse in highly damaging ways to their own mental and physical health, often replaying their trauma over and over in extreme ways. In the case of sexual exploitation, predatory people (usually men) will target and exploit such individuals (usually young women) in dangerous and sadistic ways. Consent for such isn’t straight forward, though “consent” is a codified part of the law and by its definition indicates free will. (And must continue to do so).

    Of course, it’s a grey area, hence the debate. That’s why most of these predatory beasts can run cults. It’s the reason Frank Report exists, and the hundreds of other Guru-wannabes out there, and why they can’t be prosecuted for acts that clearly cross the boundaries of ethical character and skip back and forth along the line of abuse/exploitation. The women “consented” so anything goes.

    There’s interesting research about women in porn and the sex industry that concluded women (while in the industry) will claim it’s their free will and an expression of their sexual freedom. Yet, once these same people mature and leave the industry, many speak out against the exploitation and damage it caused them, and that it was an expression of their trauma and self-hatred. Jenna Jameson and Mia Khalifa come to mind. That they deeply regret their involvement. Are they not responsible for their choice? No. But it doesn’t stop us from accepting that this is a common archetype playing out for young women and that the men who exploit these women are scumbag predators. Mainstreaming bdsm and gang bangs normalizes such culture for young people who have access to it often before they hit puberty. It changes their brains and what they consider “normal” sexual behavior. Anyone who grew up last century can’t deny how this exposure has changed sexual culture. This isn’t good for women. These industries are made by and for men.

    The suicide rate for female porn stars is incredibly high but no one wants to talk about it. I would go as far as to argue that all (or close to all) *young* female participating in violence, bdsm, asphyxiation has been coerced and/or is playing out trauma and completely dissociated. And that is how (too) many men want them to be, and are ready and willing to take advantage. Saying a small percentage of women actively like it (and no doubt they do) does not relinquish the responsibility of us all to see that the most vulnerable people in society are all too often exploited for the perversions of powerful men (and sometimes women). I know men don’t like hearing that, but it’s true nonetheless.

    By the way, I don’t hate men! At all. I know these conversations often shift in a gender combative direction. But acknowledging there is a serious problem here is the only way to stop predators living and feeding in the shadows of this.

    I would just also like to leave this here. https://wecantconsenttothis.uk/
    It’s a UK website accumulating all the (known) asphyxiation sex crimes and the sentences for the men involved. You’ll see far too many get lenient sentences, and worse still, walk free after killing. This isn’t a fun and edgy sex game. This is life and death. And anyone who’s been strangled to unconscious knows this can happen all too quickly.

    • “young people often come from trauma and abuse then go on to play out that trauma and abuse in highly damaging ways to their own mental and physical health, often replaying their trauma over and over in extreme ways.”

      Couldn’t one argue it is a way of working through that trauma and abuse? people who are abused might go onto abuse drugs and alcohol too. They might cover their bodies in tattoos that, by the way, were very painful to get. How dare a tattoo artist profit from their trauma!

      Is a little kinky sex really so bad? I don’t see it.

      • It’s bad if you’re drugged and didn’t consent or if if you fall on your head from the hook you’ve been hung upside down on and have to go to the hospital.
        yeah it’s bad

      • The problem is that people think kinky is expressing and releasing crap, but it’s actually feeding it.
        It’s boring and unoriginal.

        • “The problem is that people think kinky is expressing and releasing crap, but it’s actually feeding it.”

          THAT is the TRUTH. The only way the self destructive behaviors could be a way to work through trauma is if the person ends up at rock bottom, near death, has a spontaneous healing or someone intervenes and takes over. Self destructive acting is NOT a method of working though trauma.

          • Guess what? You could be subconsciously trying to work through trauma in a BDSM session and when it becomes too much for you, guess what happens? you say your safeword, and it stops. Then you get up, put on your clothes, and go home. And say “well, I won’t be doing that anymore.”

  • what happened to Jon Shanker? groomed to be a teacher for years, then he was OUT over the course of a weekend.
    I remember one of the idiot Manson sisters sucking up to him, and acting like I am a teacher too. I am a special assistant to Swami. I am cool. No, you aren’t. You are a disastrous human being. And, no you aren’t a teacher of nuttin. Learn that.

    • Yes, I’d also like to know what happened to Jon. He was put on a pedestal for years and then poof! More sick bullshit concerning Suzie that made them both leave suddenly and cut ties.

      • Jon confronted Swami about his grotesque treatment of women. He had witnessed the lewd interactions and spoke to him multiple times. Well one day Jon took a firm stance against Swami and Swami physically threatened Jon and Jon said: pucker up Old Man because I’m gonna knock your ass out.
        Swami turned and walked away shitting his pants and they never spoke again.

        • That makes me very happy to hear Jon stood up to him and called him out on his abuse of women. I always liked him. Just another person who devoted their life and got nothing in return.

          • Who did Jon Shanker stand up for? Would Jon or those he protected be willing to talk to Detective Wollstein? If so, give the Detective a call. 503 545 3482

        • Keeping silent…..when you side with Shoemaker, you are agreeing with the facts that Shoemaker was harming people, you are agreeing with the harm. You are not a bystander, you are making the survivor pay for the harm, you are causiing the survivor to suffer even more. Denying the harm is gaslighting the survivor. Be like Jon, call out the abuse. It may take a survivor time, but the more they heal, the more aware they are of all who played a part in their abuse. Shoemaker did not abuse alone. His willing helpers are always there for him. Gretchen, Sharon, Moni, Jen, Ruth, Govind, Scott, Steve, Fatih, Jim and on and on. Each one of you who supports Shoemaker has helped create the hellish abuse we have been told about in the Frank Report. If you are a survivor you can tell your story to the lawyer who is working on a civil case, to Frank if you want the world to know what was done to you, to law enforcement if you want to enter into the world of seeking legal justice. You can tell your friends and family what was done to you. The hero of a survial story is you and the villain and monsters in the story are Shoemaker and his flying monkeys.

  • Ruth who wrote this article was a resident in a Shoemaker run facility in Portland. You can read about her experience here: https://frankreport.com/2022/08/08/the-story-of-my-rape-by-lama-wangdu-his-accomplices-drugged-me-first/

    Natacha, also wrote publicaly about her abuse at the hands of J. Michael Shoemaker:
    https://frankreport.com/2022/07/08/swami-chetananadas-dark-passage-with-natacha/

    Pinky described her rape in the 1970’s at the vicious hands of J. Michael Shoemaker: https://frankreport.com/2022/06/16/five-decades-of-abuse-swami-chetanananda-raped-me-in-the-meditation-room-in-the-1970s/

    50 years of abuse and countless victims of Shoemaker’s deranged violence

    Shoemaker now lives in a compound in Gold Beach. He is associated with a number of businesses with addresses in Gold Beach. Rudra Press, Church of Diving Energy, Rudra Asian Art and a yoga center on the Rogue River run by Don Hays. Shoemaker has been the object of plenty of bad press from his time in Indiana through a 4 part series written by Richard Read and now all these articles on the Frank Report.

    https://frankreport.com/2022/10/08/swami-shock-2001-in-the-grip-of-the-guru-part-1/

    Survivors of Shoemaker’s abuse have put their experiences in the Read and Frank Report articles. To date law enforcement has not placed charges against Shoemaker and his cult. a few civil actions have been successful in securing funds for some of those who have been harmed.

    Let these elected officials,who represent Gold Beach, know about how you feel about having a cult in your midst. Tell them what you have seen, heard, and experienced with J. Michael Shoemaker.

    Senator Dallas Heard
    Party: Republican Party
    District: 01
    Phone: 503-986-1701
    Address: 900 Court St NE, S-316 Salem, OR, 97301
    Sen.DallasHeard@oregonlegislature.gov
    https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/heard

    Representative David Brock Smith
    Party: Republican Party
    District: 01
    Phone: 503-986-1401
    Address: 900 Court St NE, H-379 Salem, OR, 97301
    Rep.DavidBrockSmith@oregonlegislature.gov
    https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/smithd

    Peter DeFazio
    Party: Democratic Party
    District: Congressional District 4
    Phone: 541-465-6732
    Address: 405 East 8th Ave. #2030, Eugene, OR 97401
    Not Available
    https://defazio.house.gov/

  • https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11453859/Thousands-convicted-pedophiles-California-getting-year-prison-time.html

    CALIFORNIA AND WASHINGTON ARE IN BED WITH EACH OTHER.

    Thousands of pedophiles are getting out of prison because apparently the system says it is a “ non violent crime “ to rape a child.

    Is that “‘titillating”??? Absolutely not.

    None of this is. It is shocking, vile and people who think it is “ titillating” have a problem.

    Or at least I have a problem with this thinking. I’m sick of it and I think Frank is right to post in your face articles that wake people up.
    I understand why he posted this. Because it’s absolutely wrong and we need to talk about it and raise the roof .

  • Seriously, the headline picture for the story is grotesquely offensive, and pornographic. Frank I wish you would take it down. It is very very hurtful to see, for those of us who have experienced sexual abuse. Are you just trying to titillate people?

      • I agree with you, sickened. Personally, I don’t even think that porn is horrific, kinda yucky, as most porn is, but I really don’t wanna have it thrown in my face. All the icky porn heavily scattered through this article made it very hard for me to get through the text.

        • Man…who in the world would force someone to have sex with them and others and keep them in a room for two years. Man…who would ever think of that and let that happen? Right? No one would ever do that!

  • There is a new book forthcoming! It’s called Spiritual Disneyland: Anatomy of a Scammer named Swami Chetanananda.
    Cant wait to see it.

  • According to Jason Stanley in his book “Fascism: The Politics of Us and Them”, there are 10 principal elements to fascism. Pornography of any kind is not one of them, neither is the exploitation of women, sexual or otherwise.

    However, sexual anxiety is one of the elements. First and foremost fascists would seek to promote the sanctity of the family, the traditional family. That means husband and wife, and of course children; the duty of parents is to produce the next generation of fascists.

    What they don’t like is any kind of ‘sexual deviancy’. and by that they mean LGBTQ+, pornography, infidelity, hedonistic behaviour, or anything else that might threaten the institution of marriage. Being homosexual was enough to get you sent off to a concentration camp. There would certainly be no right to abortion unless it was to prevent the propagation of the so called ‘untermenschen’, in which case it was enforced.

    You can see a lot of that attitude and behaviour in countries like Russia, the Philippines, Iran, Saudi Arabia and China today, which of course have largely become fascist states. You can also see the importance of ‘traditional family values” as a hallmark of many extreme right leaning movements in the US and throughout the world, and the stigmatization of any aberrant sexual behaviour that might threaten that.

    It is notable that minority groups within LGBTQ+ are often featured in the right wing media as associated with paedophilia, or the promotion of it. Gays are attacking family values is another baseless slur. The overriding consideration for any sexual behaviour is that it is fully consensual. I’ve known a few people who really get off on BDSM, both men and women, though more women than men. It’s their thing, and they really enjoy it. A lot of women enjoy pornography too.

    Your insinuation that this type of pornography is mainly perpetrated by men is therefore, dare I say, a little sexist, and your headline contention that it promotes a violent fascist world underlines your limited understanding of fascism as an ideology. After all, it is fascists themselves who would see this as a major threat to society.

    • “According to Jason Stanley”. So according to one person. Candidly, this notion that traditional family values or anti-sexual deviancy is some sign of fascism is — to put it mildly — utter horseshit. The sexual deviancy of the “elites” of a society and its trickle down normalization to the general public is a glaring sign of its moral degradation and a precursor to its destruction.

        • https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/social_issues-july-dec13-sexualization_12-21

          It is real.

          It’s what the facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen went to the US Congress about recently.

          https://time.com/6121931/frances-haugen-facebook-whistleblower-profile/

          It honestly makes me sad that people are so blind to these issues, when I assume they have daughters, sisters, wives, female friends etc.

          But because it’s mostly affecting women, it’s buried under “more important” issues.

          • Actually, Ruth, Haugen’s gripe was with Facebook and social media generally – the lack of proper regulation by all governments, and particularly the US. Her main concern was unchecked misinformation and hate speech, and the use of algorithms that had the effect of radicalizing people. I 100% support that, but it’s not really what you’re talking about here.

            I don’t think sexualised advertising is anything new. Sex sells and it’s something advertisers have been using since the 60’s. The only difference now is online dissemination, which basically means tons more advertising. This is where stats can be misleading: sure, sexualized advertising has increased dramatically along with advertising in general. Pornography has exploded into all its little kinks to satisfy a plethora of specific markets and tastes. As long as it doesn’t involve children and is fully consensual, I can’t see too much wrong with it.

            Is there exploitation? I don’t doubt it – there’s exploitation in all industries. Should we ban it? Just like prostitution and drugs, the evidence is that banning it drives it underground where it is unregulated, and where exploitation and illegality thrive, leading to many more victims and overcrowded jails.

          • To the “Actually, Ruth” commentor below.

            No, you are incorrect. Haugen stated multiple times both internally (Before she spoke openly) and to the public that a major concern was the targeting of women and girls with advertisements, social media accounts and other media that was hyper sexualizing and showed distorted images of the body. She knew they (Facebook) knew that this material was harming young girls self perceptions (as well as children in general.)

            https://www.today.com/parents/teens/facebook-whistleblower-frances-haugen-rcna15256

            And:

            https://www.theverge.com/2021/10/6/22712927/facebook-instagram-teen-mental-health-research

            And:

            https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-knows-instagram-is-toxic-for-teen-girls-company-documents-show-11631620739

            She literally brought forward the documents proving that not only there was harm being caused because of this, but that facebook knew about it and was doing nothing.

            You’re right it’s not new. We can agree on that.

            The problem is the level of it now is unprecedented. And the problem with the dopamine loops that we are causing in people (not just children) is you need a more and more heavy dose to get the same effect.

    • You should learn more about how Brazil intentionally increased the open sexual deviancy of it’s populace during the 70s as a willing distraction from their military dictatorship – as well as a way to distract the world at large from the brutality of their regime. They sucessfully implemented a hypersexualization on their own people, to dumb them down. To this day their marketing strategy worked and Brazil is full of idiotic machismo, rampant femicide, homophobia and fascism. People think Brazil is a “hot, sexy, free” place still because of the marketing of the hot Brazilian woman. But in reality it’s extremely unsafe and unhappy place for women. Extremely. And since there are no abortion rights, and massive amounts of poverty, the average woman in Brazil does not have that perfect Brazilian body with fake boobs. Rather they have a body broken by hard labor and unwanted children they were forced to give birth to.

      The traditional values ARE the ones that degrade and enslave women, either as a whore, a nurse or a maid. Look at the top ten countries for human trafficking. They also coincidentally have the highest levels of global porn consumption. Porn and sex slavery are intertwined. They never were separate. Both divide a man from seeing a woman as an equal human being, instead rather she is a commodity to buy. An object.

      In the US, Utah has the highest levels of porn consumption. And it’s an extremely conservative place. The more conservative you are, the more extreme the gender roles are. The more extreme the gender roles, the more the subjugation and exploitation of women there is. The more the subjugation and exploitation of women there is, the more violence against women there is. Most importantly, the more violence against women is SEXUALIZED.

      I will look into this John person, but I’m going to guess that, like most men of his time, he really didn’t consider the lives of women in his perspectives on the world, since most men just do not. . . it’s very rare. Even among academics and intellectuals.

      Men do not consider that normalizing brutal, controlling behavior against women as a form of sexual satisfaction, stretches from the family model (what the child learns) all the way out to every part of society.

      Men do not consider the massive extent that domestic violence exists in our societies, nor do men want to admit that 80%-98% of violent sex crimes are by men. I suggest you look up Lundy Bancroft. A rare man who actually studied this and how it ties to culture at large. The more authoritarian a culture is, the more domestic violence there is against mostly women. Fascism in the home and fascism in the city are inseparable. And most men who are oriented to be aroused by violence against women are violent people (including coercive violence, I.E. obtaining consent via parasocial and coersive means, like buying consent to sex from a low income woman in financial abd emotional distress, which btw, is the vast majority of women in prostitution. Healthy women don’t chose it. And no healthy mother or father would chose it for their child.)

    • Check out Umberto Ecco’s 14 points of fascism btw. Point 12:

      “Machismo and weaponry. “Machismo implies both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality.”

      Note he states Chasity. The opposite of porn/prostitution.

      Paying women for sex (whether via porn or prostitution) is actually the standard model of humanity, fyi. It’s so unbelievably standard you have to be in severe denial to say it’s not. It’s a worldwide phenomenon tied directly to treating women as subhuman, and lines right up to the present day where girls are still sold by fathers into child marriages and the sex trade, globally. It ties to the very fact it wasn’t until the 90s that women could say rape happens in marriage, because if you were a married woman you were a purchased woman, owned by your husband.

      In fact our art galleries are full of naked women and clothed men. It’s nothing new. Literally it is one of the most traditional things in existence.

      It’s constantly brought up by pro-prostitution people as the “oldest profession” even. Even they admit it’s extremely traditional.

      Even in the most extremely religious societies, it is always there, just kept as a boogieman for the “badly behaving” woman. The ones who are meek enough to submit to husbands and be owned that way, get to be privately owned rather than publicly owned.

      Non-standard is actually treating women like more than just flesh holes that are either for men’s pleasure or for making babies.

      Non-standard is letting women exist in public or at the workplace without sexualizing everything about them.

      Non-standard is not making women in financial distress feel like they are morally obligated to consider selling consent to their bodies for money.

      Non-standard is what fascists these days call “simp” or “white knight” behavior. Aka actually having concern for the welfare and dignity of women and loving them as human beings equal to men. Hint: being pro-porn and pro-prostitution isn’t pro-woman or pro-girl. If you’d listen to more actual women, especially mothers with daughters, you would know this.

      Ever heard of horseshoe theory btw? That the far left is in fact the far right and both are equally fascist? Look no further than how they both consider women at the extremes. They are either public or private property depending on the model, or a mixture of both.

      • “Paying women for sex (whether via porn or prostitution) is actually the standard model of humanity, fyi. It’s so unbelievably standard”

        Far from being the standard model, prostitution is actually outlawed. It is also viewed with contempt, outrage and/or ridicule. Guys who have to pay for sex are considered losers, and women who give sex for money have been awarded their own special name, whores. Sometimes they are viewed with pity and seen as the victims they are, but “sex workers” are not exactly viewed as heroes.

        Porn and prostitution are regarded at best with limited tolerance. As inevitable evils. At least that’s how it is on this planet.

        It’s true that prostitution has always existed. So has lying, theft and murder. They too would be the world’s oldest professions, if they reliably made money.

        As for porn and nudity being “standard” I point you to Facebook’s ban on the nipple. Far from being standard or accepted as mainstream, porn is viewed with scorn or ridicule, hounded to the fringes and outlawed wherever legally possible. It may be news to you, but guys with large porn collections who masturbate to their two dimensional girlfriends (“wankers”) are not viewed with admiration by other men.

        “In fact our art galleries are full of naked women and clothed men”

        In fact the Greek and Roman galleries of those same museums are full of the exact opposite, naked men and clothed women. You’re cherry picking. Beautiful naked men were the aesthetic ideal for both of these long dominant cultures, an aesthetic that blossomed anew throughout the Renaissance. See Michelangelo’s David, perhaps the most famous sculpture in the world.

        I could go through the other supposed facts you use in support of your thesis and knock them down one by one. But it’s exhausting. Let me just say that this is boilerplate radical feminist theory straight from the textbook and I’ve read the textbook.

        When I hear this standard litany of complaints about women’s oppression and the supposed Patriarchy and “rape culture”, I always wonder what planet Postmodernist feminist theory came from. Because it’s a worldview that combines stereotypes from the era of black & white TV with the harems of Baghdad.

        Porn isn’t everywhere and it isn’t destroying society. It’s tolerated, like a lot of icky things are, but only within certain very strict limits.

        • — In fact the Greek and Roman galleries of those same museums are full of the exact opposite, naked men and clothed women.

          That’s because the Greeks/Romans preferred statuesque young men as their lovers.

        • “When I hear this standard litany of complaints about women’s oppression and the supposed Patriarchy and “rape culture”, I always wonder what planet Postmodernist feminist theory came from. Because it’s a worldview that combines stereotypes from the era of black & white TV with the harems of Baghdad.”

          These type of characterizations by tv-dinner experts like you always make me laugh. It should demonstrate to anyone who can see that you have nothing rational to contribute and are not interested in the topic at all in as much as you can attack it for not fitting your own cognitive biases and self-indulgent comfort level.

          If porn and prostitution was truly a taboo in society, it would be treated like pedophilia or piracy. But it’s not. We have instead, a tacit agreement throughout history and across cultures that even in cases where it’s taboo, it’s still never really shut down and it’s still considered widely acceptable among every class of men, whether it be a farmer, sailor, soldier, or a lord.

          Most importantly that it is nearly always allowed for certain classes, and certain cases, like during wartime, or in certain closed off areas. India, Russia, Europe, China…In rare places where it has been banned from the top-down, it’s still normalized among males, such that place names have been found worldwide indicating there was a brothel here, a red light district or a famous wh-re. Buying a woman (as the personal property of a man for sex or procreation) has been ubiquitous until only recently, whether you buy her for an hour or for a lifetime.

          People who know history know this. You clearly do not.

      • To me, “pro-prostitution” is just accepting the reality that prostitution is going to happen no matter what, so society should accept that and put legal protections in place for sex workers in order to mitigate the harm however possible.

      • “Ever heard of horseshoe theory btw?”

        This sounds like exactly where you are at Ruth, right at the fascist sweet spot where far left and far right meet.

      • “Machismo implies both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality.”

        Cutting and pasting this quote from Umberto Eco is an obviously desperate attempt to pretend you actually knew what fascism meant when you wrote your comment/post. why do you insist on always using words whose meaning you don’t fully understand? it does not make you look smarter, in fact, it has the opposite effect. You can still make your points without overreaching in your vocabulary.

        By the way, it’s always bothered me and stuck in my mind that in one article, you stated that the ashram had a “veneer of Rosemarys baby.” I take it you have never seen Rosemarys baby? “Veneer of Rosemary’s Baby” makes it sound like Rosemary’s Baby was something pleasant. It’s actually about an apartment building occupied by devil worshippers and Rosemary’s baby is the second coming of Satan.

        • I think Rosemary’s baby-esque is exactly what she meant. It did feel like that especially when the corridors were empty and dimly lit. Although filled with exquisite art, something always felt a liiiittttle bit strange… the glassy smiling faces should have been the tip off 🤔

          • She didn’t say Rosemarys baby-esque , she said something like it has a veneer of Rosemarys baby, but actually it’s a place of horror or something like that. She probably heard other people accurately describe the place as seeming like Rosemarys baby and took the term as her own without understanding what it meant, something she seems to do allll of the time. It’s a really bad habit.

      • The point 12 (machismo and weaponry) you mention mirrors Stanley’s notion of ‘sexual anxiety’, paradigms may vary slightly, though it must be said that women could occupy important positions in Hitler’s war machine, and German women were just as, if not more, supportive of him than German men. The “condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits from chastity to homosexuality” has the same objective Stanley describes – to ensure procreation and the next generation of fascists.

        https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-55661782
        https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/women-in-the-third-reich

        Is prostitution the world’s oldest profession? I don’t doubt it. Where it’s legalised, unionised and properly regulated, as in countries like the Netherlands, it can work fine. Completely up to the girl if she wants sex with someone – she’s the one who opens the door and the customer (usually male but not always) is in full view before she does. Condoms are always used with men. She’s protected, the customer’s protected, the sex is consensual, the system works and the women doing it certainly don’t consider themselves “subhuman”. Male prostitution works in the same way, though the customers are usually, but not always, other men.

        !00% with you on the need to stop the selling of people into any sort of arranged marriage or slavery situation; that’s a whole other ball game. No to FGM and all that stuff of course; ‘culture’ should never be used as an excuse to mistreat anyone, particularly anyone under the age of consent. Not sure about your comments on art though. Art is art – Michelangelo’s David is as beautiful as Alexandros’s Venus, though to many the female form is more aesthetically pleasing. Nothing necessarily creepy about that.

        The “Non-standard” behviours and attitudes you outline are pretty much what I believe any civilised society or person should aspire to. Don’t get me wrong, I believe in equal rights for women as much as you do, but I also believe in people’s freedom to do what they want to do, provided they genuinely want to do it and it’s not intended to harm anyone else, regardless of sex.

        As for “horseshoe theory”, of course I’m aware of it, though I wasn’t familiar with that particular term: “Too far east is west, too far left is right, too far right is wrong” is what my grandmother used to tell me, and she was never wrong. No argument there either.

  • Where does this guest view by Ruth put us in regard to the abuse and harm of Shoemaker and his criminal, dangerous and damaging cult? J. Michael Shoemaker, his buddy, Russel Kruckman and their evil teacher, Muktananda are serial sexual abusers, with them there is no informed consent. All three used the tried and true techniques of a cult leader to build their “spiritual communities” that became coercively controled environments that served as a cover for their abuses.

    Coercive control takes away the ability of an individual to express consent or have any agency regarding their lives.

    Dr. Evan Stark recently did an interview in which he explained the unique aim of coercive control:
    “In coercive control abuse, you have a range of acts over time, a broad range of non-consensual and non-reciprocal tactics — isolation, intimidation, sexual abuse, stalking. And they’re not just used to hurt someone or to hurt their feelings, but to subjugate them in ways that make them unable or unwilling to escape, or to effectively resist a partner’s demands. The aim of emotional abuse is to hurt someone’s feelings so badly that they feel ashamed of themselves, and the aim of [physical] domestic violence is to hurt someone physically and make them afraid to resist in that situation, but the aim of coercive control goes beyond that. It uses a range of tactics to subjugate them, to make them dependent. The aim is total domination, rather than simply to win compliance on a particular issue.”

    We have read the words of Pinky, Natacha, Ruth, Jen, Jessica, Dan and the ex-members who wrote the Leaving Letter about their collective abuse at the hands of Shoemaker. They could not consent because they lived in a cult, in an environment of coercive control. They had no agency over their ives, they could not access their critical thinking skills and act in their best interest because of the indoctrination of the cult. They had to escape from the control of Shoemaker to gain insight into what had been done to them.

    For those who will object that Jessica is an unreliable narrator, her recanting is an extremely common reaction in victims of intimate partner abuse and that is what indeed she suffered, but a thousand times worse because Shoemaker proclaimed he was a gifted spiritual leader with super natural powers.

  • Those of us who know, do not find it very hard to visualize Swami Chetanananda being sadistic and outright mean towards people.
    That part of him was never very far off. He couldn’t hide it.

    • Just look at his face when he’s not posing for a photo.
      So ugh-ly and DEMON eyes. Do you see sweetness and kindness in that face? He can’t hide his true colors.

  • In Spiritual Disneyland it’s OK to transmit STDs knowingly, to strangle women–no Sadhvi-not all of it is consensual, lie to people constantly, manipulate those with something to offer. And-its all under the heading of “crazy wisdom”.
    We see the crazy. We don’t see the wisdom.

  • “Do what you want in your bedroom, but don’t argue it’s okay as long as you claim consent.”

    I don’t understand this at all. If two adults consent, why is that not ok? I’m talking true informed consent, not where any coercion is present.

    Isn’t engaging in extreme BDSM similar to a grownup deciding they want to engage in a risky sport like cliff diving?

    And yes, eating shit is disgusting for obvious reasons and potentially dangerous because of bacteria and disease transmission, but if an otherwise sane adult wants to take that risk because it gives them a thrill they can’t get any other way, so be it. It would only potentially hurt that person and no one else, so let them have their fun.

    Some people like to eat raw eggs, despite the Salmonella risk. Some people buy non-organic produce and don’t wash it before eating it. Some people like to slurp down raw oysters. Just because you think it’s disgusting doesn’t mean you need to shame other people for liking it. You sure as hell can choose not to have any part of it though. But I’m surprised someone who enjoys eating feces wouldn’t also enjoy being shamed for it. 😆

    I don’t see how acting out those roles in the bedroom would then bring that into the government. It seems to be that it is usually men who have no power in the world that enjoy acting out dominantly at home and in bed. It’s usually the men who have a lot of power and responsibility who seek to take the submissive role behind closed doors. It seems to serve as a pressure valve more than anything.

    And guess by your logic the man who likes to eat a hooker’s shit would then take on all of the shit jobs at work? Hmm.

    Maybe, if it’s true men are getting more extreme and wanting to act out dominant roles during sex more than ever, maybe it’s because they feel powerless in their everyday lives.

    • I challenge you that the “powerlessness” certain men feel in this current time is due to not being given the ego-consolation prize of dominating and controlling women anymore in the workplace, marriage and life in general. Even though they still do. They feel powerless because they feel a lack of collective control as a male sex over the female sex. Which is how it was for most of history. Do you think we should go back?

      The term “powerlessness” for men who still dominate society that they largely built for themselves, is a gaslighting statement in of itself. I see that term and I think, are you suggesting women don’t feel powerless and haven’t for most of history?

      You use the word “powerlessness” as a code for “purposeless” I think, too, and that purposeless is not something anyone is entitled to.

      I don’t believe that you don’t understand what I wrote. Your writing ability suggests good reading comprehension.

      People can consent to do things that are self-destructive to them, due to being modeled toxic behavior in an unhealthy way from an early age. We don’t live in a vacuum of society, family, or history. It’s why 80% of sex workers report they were sexually abused as children. Do you think little girls and little boys should grow up with a dream of being prostitutes? Do you think little girls and little boys should naturally grow up to like being whipped and choked?

      So in conclusion, yes, by my logic those who want to eat feces have some aspect of their desires reflecting and translating their total life. As shown by the anonymous comment itself, remember (?) confessing that the only reason they wanted to be involved in BDSM is they had no self esteem.

      • I’m gaslighting because I said men might feel powerless? Um, no I am not. You can say you think that’s wrong and that men don’t feel powerless. Fine. But my wondering if it is a possibility is not gaslighting. Maybe dial back the buzzwords?

        I don’t think that engaging in BDSM is necessarily self-destructive. For some people it is a healthy and enjoyable outlet. Personally, I think that playing around with asphyxia aka “breath play” is dangerous and people are stupid to do it, bc the risk does not equal the reward, but jumping out of an airplane and scuba diving are dangerous too.

        Yes, I know that the majority of prostitutes have been sexually abused. Having the ability to disassociate from your body/being disassociated from your body comes in handy for doing that kind of work, sadly.

        • Humans feel powerless sometimes. Men are not a special cohort that needs special consideration. Not only that, your premise is incredibly unfounded. It’s equivalent to saying “men need to beat up women in sex in order for their cocks to be hard – because they have unsatisfying jobs and feel sad.” You actually degrade men by saying this, do you understand?

          • Oh dear. You are ridiculous. I actually don’t believe men are getting more extreme and violent in sex. In fact, it actually seems they care more about the woman’s enjoyment than they did in the past. It used to be that women had to pretend they didn’t enjoy sex so they would just do it and get it over with. I think sex has actually gotten a lot better for women than what it seems it used to be. I wasn’t around in the 1950s in earlier but it sounds like many women back then didn’t even know what an orgasm was.

            No, I didn’t say whatever gets the cock hard is good. Those are your favorite words, not mine. I was just thinking that “maybe” if it’s true there’s been a big shift and men have become more violent/dominant sexually and woman supposedly are told to accept it as the norm, there could be psychological reasons behind it. Even adults can react in harmful ways when they are put in stressful situations, such as ones where they feel powerless. It does not excuse bad behavior. I didn’t say “oh well then it’s perfectly fine, whatever gets their cock hard.”

            The same way poverty creates pressures that lead to people committing crimes like theft. Trying to understand why people are doing something does not mean you think stealing is A-ok. Do I really need to explain this to you?

            You seem to think that women are a special cohort that need special consideration, but now you wanna point out that men don’t deserve any special consideration? Sounds like you hate men.

            Please sign up for women’s studies 101 at a local or online college and get your facts straight, at least.

          • To the Anon saying “oh dear” below. There is no correlation between violence against women in relationships, and poverty. If you are genuinely wondering, perhaps you shouldn’t be so combative. Sexual violence is a unique category of crime, the biggest correlation there, is with culture. If you’re interested in learning more about the topic I recommend you read “Why Does He Do That?” by Lundy Bancroft. He is the world’s expert on domestic violence and abusive men.

            You won’t learn this in women’s studies 101. That’s the point. Try to get on my level, please.

          • Ruth, I did not say that poverty leads to violence toward women in relationships.. My point was that exploring the possible reasons behind why someone does something does not mean that I am condoning that thing that they are doing.

            I actually have read “Why Does He Do That?” by Lundy Bancroft. And I took half of a women’s studies course in college. Does that mean I’m above your level?

        • Maybe you’d be the better person to write the articles with your half a woman’s studies course that you took. Consider contacting Frank and sending him some of your material.

          I don’t know though, you have a lot of “I don’t understand” “maybe” and your points that are non-points, like this one:

          “My point was that exploring the possible reasons behind why someone does something does not mean that I am condoning that thing that they are doing.”

          and this obvious reach:

          “You seem to think that women are a special cohort that need special consideration, but now you wanna point out that men don’t deserve any special consideration? Sounds like you hate men.”

          I’ve multiple times mentioned men are harmed too. It’s like you didn’t read what I said.

          It’s also like saying by discussing how pedophiles harm mostly children (they harm entire families by proxy and many are also co morbidly criminals in other ways but I digress) I must therefore hate adults. Makes total sense!

          You might have had a valid point by stating that in many ways things are changing for the better, especially in how society is now acknowledging that women can enjoy sex too. However I still cannot accept that men’s psychological issues are what drive them to be sexually violent against women.

          If you read Bancroft’s book (which I doubt you did based on your replies) you would know that psychological issues are only correlated with an increase in the intensity of violence from males who are already violent, it is not the cause of it at all. It just makes an already abusive man more dangerous if he is also mentally ill or addicted.

          I also don’t see how it helps us collectively to suggest this, and to deflect from the overall cultural contagions (many from the top-down, i.e. pushed by corporations and religions and fascist politicians) that drive domestic violence and sexual crimes…which you would know is the true driver, if you paid attention during your half a woman’s study course or actually read Bancroft.

          Maybe you read him years ago and just forgot what he said?

      • “As shown by the anonymous comment itself, remember (?) confessing that the only reason they wanted to be involved in BDSM is they had no self esteem.”

        That’s one person’s explanation for their involvement in BDSM. One.

          • One last reply regarding your comment “you won’t learn this in women’s studies 101. Try to get on my level”

            here is another snippet from a college syllabus for introduction to women’s studies:

            Among the additional texts likely to be assigned:
            -Bancroft. Why Does He Do That?
            -Buchwald. Transforming a Rape Culture.
            – Schwartz and DeKeserady. Sexual Assault on the College Campus.

            You do realize that just because you have learned something new, something that you didn’t know before, that does not mean that nobody else knows this new-to-you information, right?

            You might want to look up solipsism in the dictionary.

      • TBH Ruth, you come across as a little fascistic yourself. Though some of the points you make have some validity, your overall tone is telling people what they shouldn’t be doing and that certain behaviors are morally wrong. Preaching at others and telling them what they should and shouldn’t be doing is by its nature authoritarian, and we all know where that leads.

          • Btw Ruth, these topics are actually part and parcel of women’s studies 101. For example, here is an just one excerpt from a 101 syllabus (Stanford):

            11/19: Sex and Violence I: Rape and Harassment
            Pauline Bart and Patricia H. O’Brien, “Stopping Rape: Effective Avoidance Strategies,” RDR
            Alan Johnson, The Gender Knot, RDR
            Katie Koestner, “The Perfect Rape Victim,” RDR
            RECOMMENDED WEB: Sexual Assault Links; Real Men
            RECOMMENDED FILM: “In Harm’s Way”

            A Midwife’s Tale

            11/21: Sex and Violence II: Domestic Violence and Child Abuse
            WIC: Abigail Abbot Bailey, 232-36
            bell hooks, “Violence in Intimate Relationships: A Feminist Perspective, ” RDR
            Joy Harjo, “I Give You Back” (in class, and web)
            REQUIRED WEB: Domestic Violence Facts
            REQUIRED FILM: “No Longer Silent”

        • A “little fascistic” is as ridiculous of a statement as saying someone is “a little bit pregnant” or “tiny amount of awesome.” Absurdity.

          You clearly didn’t read what I said, since I said do whatever you want in your bedroom. I support people drinking themselves to death if they want as well. Literally the opposite of authoritarian. Just don’t claim it to be moral and good for humans and family. Read more books you might come to this idea yourself.

          I think what you mean, is my opinion on what is good or bad makes you uncomfortable and therefore if it makes you uncomfortable, then I’m a nazi or something. That’s not how it works, I’m afraid.

          • “A “little fascistic” how about “fascist leaning.”?

            OK now I really know why your arguments are so weak — it’s all about your version of morality and goodness. That is what makes it seem like you are fascist. Somehow you think you have a right to tell other people what is good and they should listen. You do sound like you would actually be very happy living in a fascist country, where everybody has to follow very strict rule, men and women are strictly segregated in daily life, and women are covered up head to toe. Would it make you happy if men were executed for looking at porn you don’t approve of?

          • To the “little fascistic” commenter again. Yes its about my view of morality and goodness. Thankfully I don’t have a binary thinking problem where everything is either all good or all bad, like you. Which is why you have to compare me to a fascist, simply because you disagree morally with me. That’s actually the archetypal thought of fascists…extreme binary thinking, character assassination of others who think differently, as well as projection of that internal issue onto others….my goodness your imagination is incredible…how does “do what you want in your bedroom” equate to executions and putting women in burqas? I don’t want to normalize men beating and strangling women for sexual gratification. Do you support this? Explain yourself.

    • — If two adults consent, why is that not ok?

      Consent has never been the basis for any rationally argued set of moral ethics. Consent is rooted on the idea of free will and conscious choice based on a developed emotional and mental faculty used in a proper way, not in an uninhibited one based on the fact that a human being can choose to do almost anything.

        • What do social contract accounts of political legitimacy of have to do with morality or ethics?

          The idea of consent is part and parcel of questions of morality, but it will never be its basis.

      • I’m not sure Im getting your point, but ok, so if an adult uses their free will and conscious choice based on a developed emotional and mental faculty to consent to engaging in BDSM with other such adults, that sounds ok to me.

        Or are you saying that only people who do what you think is right are exercising consent?

  • The idea that porn leads to Fascism is about the silliest thing I’ve read here.

    “Hair pulling in sex during doggy style snaps the vertebrae of some 20 year olds, giving them paralysis.“

    Really? Sounds unlikely, can you cite one example? ‘Cos here’s video of a woman lifting 285 lbs without snapping any vertebrae (perhaps I should include a warning, as she’s wearing tight clothing that some may find pornographic) https://www.instagram.com/reel/ChPr66QFKBG/?igshid=MDJmNzVkMjY=

    • Your woman is lifting from a stable position, like she is supposed to. If you knew anything about weightlifting you would know that safety in lifting properly is so important. She, like any man even, could have their neck snapped from hyperflexion or hyperextension in an unsafe position.

      Aka, your body being pulled or pushed in an extreme way.

      That’s why grappling works in self defense ( you know in UFC cage fighting, those arm bars can break people’s arms right?)

      The story I’m referencing was years ago and unfortunately I can’t remember the keywords for it. I will recall it the best I can: This woman was actually having pretty vanilla sex with a brand new boyfriend, with her bent over the kitchen table. However, he started pulling her hair (which she actually didn’t like much), and the hyper-extension of the neck (neck being pulled backwards to an extreme degree) snapped it. She could have been just as much of a body builder as that woman in the above video just so you know.

      • Yeah, Aristotle’s Sausage should have been smarter than this. In general, the body’s skeleton is obviously limited in the way it can be moved, some positions more natural and flexible than others while others abnormal and painful before bones start breaking and ligaments and tendons start tearing. Weightlifting in proper positions is not analogous to having your head violently snapped back in an unnatural way due to hair pulling. That being said, people often have severely injured themselves lifting weights too heavy for their body to handle or lifting in improper positions.

        • “people often have severely injured themselves lifting weights too heavy for their body to handle”

          So many opinions, so little knowledge…

          Those of us who have spent much time under a bar in the weight room know that the human body is amazingly tough. It’s an inspiration and an education.

          It’s not that easy to break things. It really isn’t.

          Ruth claimed that 20 year olds (plural) are having their necks broken by having their hair pulled during sex. Like this has become a problem.

          It never happened. Not once.

          As proof that it never happened, I cite C. Davidson et al., 2019

          “to our knowledge, there have been no reports of significant spine and spinal cord injuries as a direct result of sexual activity”
          https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6598299/

          Q.E.D.

          Now, as for your assertion that lifters “often” severely injure themselves by lifting weights that are “too heavy”, you can return with some sports injury statistics that prove your point and prove me wrong. In the meantime I’ll just assume this is another an example of your uninformed assumptions being wrong.

          • What kind of piss-weak argument is that? One article with no information as to the breadth of their research to ascertain potential world-wide spinal damage caused by hyperextension during sex. The article itself refers to single individual injury caused by hyperflexion, then claims no evidence of spinal injury due to sexual activity exists? In the whole world? Ok, solid research 🤡

          • My comment was general. And factual. And not limited to weightlifting or sexual positions, though it was given within their context.

            I don’t need to go on Google and do a statistical research and analysis of weightlifting injuries due to lifting too heavy weights or doing it improperly (there are numerous “comedic” YouTube videos of this stuff) and/or injuries due to the body’s limbs and parts being contorted into positions that it wasn’t meant for because I know there are an incalculable amount of them. Yes, it takes a lot of force for some of the severe type of injuries to the larger portions of the body to occur, e.g., broken bones, torn ligaments and tendons, etc., but they can and do happen.

      • So you can’t cite any actual examples. Just as I thought.

        “If you knew anything about weightlifting”. Dear, if you only knew…

        Barbell squats like the woman in the video is doing make the back a lever arm. In this case, twice her body weight is pressed against what is basically the back of her neck, and all that weight is transferred down her back via hip legs and feet to the floor. There’s no way around that, physically. Proof that a woman’s spine is tough.

        Weighted squats load the back, that’s why it’s an effective legs and back exercise.

        Hair pulling during sex play is not going to generate anything like that kind of force. Force is force, and hair pulling isn’t going to generate anything like 285 pounds.

        So no, women aren’t having their necks snapped through sex. You think you heard of it happening once but can’t remember where or who. I just showed video proof that people aren’t nearly that delicate. So Q.E.D.

      • That sounds like a random freak accident, and I’m sure the man felt horrifically awful about it. Hardly a case for enthusiastic sex is destroying America.

      • say, Ruth,I’ve heard horror stories of Shoemaker the Salami inuring women with his “adjustments”…extreme manipulation of joints and bones. Do you know anything about that? And is it true acupuncture treatments were being given by Moni? WTF?

        • He’d crack my neck every single day. Every day. He’d go around the room and just crack people. It was his thing.

          • Did those “cracked” consent to this? Did anyone say no? If they did not say “no”, why? Was there peer pressure to accept the actions of Shoemaker? Was everyone conditioned to accept his authority, his actions, his behavior? Was everyone in the room silent about this treatment? Did everyone “cracked” submit to this? Did anyone refuse? or did they just obey? Was this just a way to “normalized” Shoemaker putting his hands on the necks of his “loved ones?”

        • I heard that Gretchen used accupuncture needles on the “loved ones”. Was this done pre or post cracking? Gretchen doesn’t have any medical training to go sticking people. Who else got stuck by this group?

          • @Don’t needle….

            Gretchen is a Dr of Chinese Medicine. She can needle as she sees fit and would never do anything without consent.

            Note, I’m not dismissing Chet’s abuse.

          • You are completely full of shit. She certainly did go to school for acupuncture and practiced for years. Quit spreading falsehoods, it doesn’t help any of this and makes you look dumb.

          • @Fla. Man, Dec. 5th, I don’t remember signing any consent forms before the needles went in….no office secretary, no file cabinet….just a crazy woman coming at me with those sharpies. Hey I didn’t even have a professional work up or diagnosis. I would like to see her diploma, it wasn’t on the wall where I could see it. Is her license good for both California and Oregon?

      • Do you understand what “combative” means? Just because a person does not agree with your opinions and conclusions does not mean they are being combative.

        My “non-point” was in response to what you wrote here’ “It’s [my wondering if men feeling powerless in life could be leading to this supposed increase in violence in relationships] is equivalent to saying “men need to beat up women in sex in order for their cocks to be hard – because they have unsatisfying jobs and feel sad.”

        That is in no way equivalent. Just like if I said, “I wonder if these women are prostitutes because they were sexually abused as children?” is NOT equivalent to “these women need to be a prostitutes because they were abused as children.”

        Get it?

    • Oh yeah, Fox News – must be true then! And then there’s that big ugly mug of Fucker Carlson, so educationally inspiring.

  • Fuertes imágenes para quienes no estamos acostumbrados. Tema de reflexión. Creo que dañar a alguien no es sano, ni aunque esa persona lo pida. Veo algunos comentarios de mentes desquiciadas.

  • I got roasted by a certain well known director of USA porn. He came to the rescue of his actress who I was in a debate with on Instagram. This actress allowed her ‘ladyparts underneath’ to be sewn up. Yes, all sewn up. Then she was penetrated graphically busting up the sutures. This is on Instagram which apparently has an anti porn stance. So they gave me the whole adult consent bollocks. PornHub doesn’t age check you when you go for a look see, as many teens do. A fucking Meryl Streep average actress has to carefully sieve the projects she chooses. Lest she depicts someone that will culminate in her cancellation. Porn, anything goes.

    • Yes anon! This very thing is one of the reasons I wrote this article. It’s unreal and incredible how brazen these predators have become.

      What part of selling handbags requires combining children with BDSM gear and drug paraphernalia? 🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮

      They’re pushing it on us as part of normalizing fetishizing authoritarian control (master-slave) and to obtain “consent” for us to brutalize and dehumanize ourselves.

      Another source for people to see.

      https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/kelseyweekman/balenciaga-teddy-bear-ad-response

  • Typical argument up there with video games the cause of all violence. Basically this person thinks woman discovering, exploring, and engaging in sex the way they want must be a sign of abuse. The idea that a woman would want anything but vanilla sex is absurd. Missionary and doggie style and if really feeling extra frisky, maybe on top. And since the idea of woman being sexual is absurd, anything that happens must be because a man is abusing her.

    • Nope. Point missed completely. None of us live in a vacuum of our experiences. None of us. We do chose, but many of us still chose badly because of patterns of abuse in our own families and a society that models violence to us combined with sex. So many people are indeed engaging in it and harming themselves. I reserve the right to shame them, especially with dangerous behavior. Just like someone consents to alcohol for example, doesn’t make it good. You are straw manning and it’s clear. How about I do the same to you? Ready? You clearly think in order for sex to be fun and exciting it must be violent. And that only low libido women like vanilla sex. Right? You also think women naturally like extreme violence in sex and thus, any woman who likes such violence is merely exercising her normal “curious” or “natural” human behavior.

      Sucks to be straw manned, right? Although I am probably more right about you than you’d like to admit.

      Start from the beginning, and read what I wrote again.

  • No normally adjusted person would be into BDSM. It’s a sign of mental illness. But in today’s world what ever “feels good” and is “consensual” is “positive” and that’s all that matters!

    • Very few people are “normally adjusted,” so many people are going to do things that you think are weird. Get used to it.

    • Nicki’s a good writer, eloquent and articulate, and it’s awful that anyone would ever threaten her or anyone else. That said, she’s a tall poppy and the world has its fair share of nutcases, ironically including Nicki herself. Her own Twitter account is peppered with extremist right wing rhetoric, which I have no doubt has contributed to the culture of hatred and violence we see in our polarized political world.

  • I like the writing style. But a question for Ruth aren’t you making a case for infantalizing women by saying they can’t consent to BDSm?

    • No. Although I speak of women more, men and boys are also damaged by it.

      You don’t have to infantilize (go to the extreme of removing a person’s agency) to discuss how trauma (especially that absorbed as a child or via epigenetics) influences you. It’s also not infantilism to discuss how marketing, media and culture influences us and normalizes certain things, to the point where people do or desire things and they don’t even know why.

      • So are we going to ban / censor marketing, media and culture now in the quest for behavioral moral perfection? Epigenetics plays a vital role in evolution, and at the end of the day we are what we are.

        • My word, are we?

          Regarding epigenetics and evolution, are you saying evolution has intent and is inherently good? Because that would be a naturalistic fallacy. Evolution is not good or bad and many people suffer from it’s randomness and/or trade offs. (Evolution has elements of both order and randomness, btw.)

          • Evolution is good in that it allows a species to adapt to a changing environment. It is bad if that species then goes on to destroy the environment. Evolution is either good or bad, neither good nor bad or both good and bad. It is a quantum variable.

    • Yeah, why the pictures? That’s like writing about the evils of child abuse and then showing graphic pictures of child porn to illustrate the article.

      I know an author in her 80s (recently deceased) who frequently opined that “sexual liberation” has only hurt women because it puts an expectation on us to perform like prostitutes in our relationships. It used to be that men would have to pay a hooker if they wanted to do something really nasty and potentially dangerous to a woman. Now it’s like every woman is expected to do tricks like she’s working in a bordello. Initially her opinion kind of seemed uptight to me, but now I think maybe she was on to something.

      • Hello. Thank you for saying. The images were chosen by the editor not me. I asked to have the ones using real people either blurred or removed because they contradict the very thing I’m saying and these women could indeed also be victims, or part of an organization/business that victimized someone and thus by sharing them they promote that.

        However the drawn images, although I wouldn’t have picked them myself; I understand the editor using them to show just exactly how extreme some of the material is out there.

    • Thank you Jane. These images were chosen by the editor not me. I have already sent a request to change the ones that involve real people to protect against the very thing I explain is the problem. That consent doesn’t mean there was no harm. Real people are really hurt for life.

      The Editor’s choice to use drawn ones however was something I wouldn’t have chosen but I understand his intent to really illustrate the kind of material that is out there and being marketed to us as healthy so people can understand what is going on.

      Thank you and I appreciate your comment.

  • My fetish is to beat, strangle, get an erection, rape, kill then throw the body in the river or pond in the forest. I do not get specific consent but I get something better – I remove all their bad karma and put a blessing on their families for six generations both forwards and backwards. Plus I get an erection.

About the Author

Frank Parlato is an investigative journalist.

His work has been cited in hundreds of news outlets, like The New York Times, The Daily Mail, VICE News, CBS News, Fox News, New York Post, New York Daily News, Oxygen, Rolling Stone, People Magazine, The Sun, The Times of London, CBS Inside Edition, among many others in all five continents.

His work to expose and take down NXIVM is featured in books like “Captive” by Catherine Oxenberg, “Scarred” by Sarah Edmonson, “The Program” by Toni Natalie, and “NXIVM. La Secta Que Sedujo al Poder en México” by Juan Alberto Vasquez.

Parlato has been prominently featured on HBO’s docuseries “The Vow” and was the lead investigator and coordinating producer for Investigation Discovery’s “The Lost Women of NXIVM.” In addition, he was credited in the Starz docuseries 'Seduced' for saving 'slave' women from being branded and escaping the sex-slave cult known as DOS.

Parlato appeared on the Nancy Grace Show, Beyond the Headlines with Gretchen Carlson, Dr. Oz, American Greed, Dateline NBC, and NBC Nightly News with Lester Holt, where Parlato conducted the first-ever interview with Keith Raniere after his arrest. This was ironic, as many credit Parlato as one of the primary architects of his arrest and the cratering of the cult he founded.

Parlato is a consulting producer and appears in TNT's The Heiress and the Sex Cult, which premieres on May 22, 2022.

IMDb — Frank Parlato

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Parlato,_Jr.

Contact Frank with tips or for help.
Phone / Text: (305) 783-7083
Email: frankparlato@gmail.com

Archives