Hypotheses about Online Relationships

Hypotheses about Online Text Relationships

A version of this article was published as: Suler, J.R. (2004). The psychology of text relationships.

(EOPC's comments in dark blue)

excerpts:
Even though cyberspace is filled with all sorts of sights and sounds - and becoming more multimedia rich every day - most relationships among people form and grow within typed text. E-mail probably accounts for most one-on-one relating, but message boards, chat, and instant messaging also bring people together. Even web sites, especially those of an autobiographical nature, can lead to friendships and romances. The site starts out as a one-to-many relationship between the creator and the readers - and over time, contact via private e-mail between a reader and the writer refines that relationship and moves it to a more personal, one-on-one level. Such text relationships are not unique to cyberspace.

Below are a list of hypotheses that I've gathered from articles I read and written, and from my discussions with all sorts of people, online and off.

The relationship between f2f (face to face/ or real-life) and online relationships

For some people, text relationships encourage more self-expression and self-reflection than f2f communication. For others, less.

Some people experience text relationships as more predictable, safe, and less anxiety-provoking than f2f relationships. (and easier to be manipulative and lie, also)

Some important aspects of a person may be obvious in-person but almost invisible online.

Elements of people's online relationships may reveal what's missing in their f2f relationships.

In text relationships, some people explore their interpersonal style and experiment with new behaviors. What is learned online can be carried into offline relationships.

Online relationships form and disappear more easily than f2f relationships. (objectification)

Intimacy develops more rapidly in text relationships than in f2f relationships.

Absent f2f cues and stimulation

Lacking f2f cues, text communication can be limited, ambiguous and an easy target for misunderstanding and projection. (and predation)

Lacking f2f cues, text communication disinhibits people, encouraging them to be more open and honest than usual, or encouraging them to act out inappropriately.

The lack of touch and body contact can significantly reduce the experience of intimacy in text relationships.

Some people are attracted to the silent, less visually stimulating, and non-tactile quality of text relationships.

People struggling with social anxiety or with issues about shame and guilt may be drawn to text relationships in which they cannot be "seen." (or predatory narcissism, or sociopathy)

Bullies & Predators Feel Invincible Behind a Keyboard

While this article talks mostly about school-aged kids and online bullies - make NO MISTAKE - adults (and cyberpaths) bully, harass, threaten and stalk online and much of the same principles apply - EOPC

Hearing that her son's life had been threatened online brought Bonnie Harris a mix of emotions.

She was scared and nervous for her son, but her heart also went out to the troubled boy behind the violent threats.

"It was upsetting. We were all torn," the former Plattsburgh resident and mother of three recalled.

"I don't know how big of a threat he really was, but the police acted on it immediately. At the time, I felt like it was a serious threat, and we were worried about it for a long time."

What started out as a friendship turned into problems that spread to the Internet and involved more than a dozen area teens targeted by an apparent "hit list" posting and an extensive police investigation.

Online bullying and harassment is something local authorities say they're all too familiar with.

"This is a huge issue," Plattsburgh City Police Juvenile Officer Robert Annis said.

"Kids (and adults) seem to be bolder when they're behind a computer, and it gets out of control. It can become an all-night thing. People are just so open online."

'FEEL INVINCIBLE'
As the only juvenile officer in the city, Annis has investigated a number of online bullying and harassment cases during the last few years, most involving girls ganging up on female classmates.

One case involved a black student who received cruel and racist Instant Messages, while another involved a girl who was viciously tormented about her physical appearance.

"I think they feel invincible online," Annis said. "Often, they (the complaints) aren't always major things, but we deal with all of them. We try to nip it in the bud as soon as possible."

State Police Computer-Crimes Investigator Jerome Miner said people "will do things online that they would never do in person," like harass others and share explicit photos and personal information.

Miner, too, has seen his share of teen-related computer complaints, like creating fake MySpace pages to embarrass and insult others.

DRAMA
School officials have also found that online issues outside of school can find their way into the classroom.

"The technology has been a problem and an issue for sure," AuSable High School Dean of Students Suzanne Miller said.

"And it's hard for us sometimes because how far can our reach go outside of school? It's something that we're really concerned about. The anonymity factor is huge and leads to problems."

Emily Lennon, who just graduated from Saranac Lake Central School, said she hasn't been harassed online but has heard of many instances of it, especially among younger Internet users.

"The drama and problems are so much worse with younger kids, like Middle School students," the 17-year-old said.

Bailey Annis, 16, of Saranac Lake said Instant Messages and social-networking sites let teens communicate faster in both positive and negative ways.

"It kind of elevates the gossip," she admitted.

Kelly Petrashune, who just finished her junior year at Saranac Central School, has seen mean pictures and nasty comments posted online.

"And I see MySpace pranks all the time."

WIDESPREAD ISSUE
According to a national i-Safe America study of teens across the nation, about 42 percent of students reported having been bullied online. One in 4 say it has happened more than once.

About 35 percent report having been threatened online, while 21 percent of a random sample have reported receiving mean or threatening messages.

More than half of the students interviewed admitted to being mean or hurtful to their peers online.

Annis said many area schools have become proactive about trying to prevent and stop online harassment, which can lead to criminal charges, such as aggravated harassment.

SPECIAL TRAINING
Law-enforcement agencies have also been beefing up their training and technology to deal with the array of new online crimes.

One aspect of the Plattsburgh City Police Department's annual training is for threat assessment, including online warnings.

"We've dealt with hit lists being put online, and that's one of our biggest fears ... a school incident," Annis said.

"We basically go on alert mode if that happens."

He said that often the first step to bringing online harassment and threats to light is for teens to tell their parents.

"Sometimes, parents don't want to pursue charges; they just want it to stop."

Harris said she didn't know about the online threats until her son was confronted over the phone.

"He (the offender) had messaged him before, but I didn't know. I think a lot of kids don't tell their parents what happens online, and it's important that they do."

original article here

THE ONLINE SUCCUBUS

My perfect lover became my worst nightmare.

By Sue Thomas
Cyberstalkers have been in the news again recently, but not much mention has yet been made of another unpleasant phenomenon haunting the Web: the emotional vampire. Making himself (or herself) quite indispensable, this person is your best friend, your most fantastic lover, the wonderful family you never had. For some, online relationships offer the chance not to find the love of your life but to get kicks from manipulating the emotions of others. In the worst cases, these individuals carry the deceit into real life.

As we all know, e-mail gives those good with language the ability to wrap a relationship around with such intimate text that soon nothing else matters but an intense one-to-one filling every waking minute. You might pretend to be several different people to several different lovers, with some identities sustainable offline, others not.

Thus, when I first met my lover, he was a female grad student called Cindi. Also a professor in a virtual classroom. Also a man called Rhyys. Also a top-level university administrator. Also a cyborg called Plex. Also a devout Catholic. Also a sadist called Gandore. Also a devoted husband and father. Also a very sad, very frustrated small-town inadequate person with a need to exploit and control.

The story of what happened to me in cyberspace is, on the surface, pretty similar to the familiar tale wherein net user No. 1 pretends to be something s/he is not, thereby tricking net user No. 2 into falling in love with her/him. What's different in my case is, first, the number of people who were deceived; second, the fact that the perpetrator is a respectable, high-ranking academic who, one would think, has no need to pretend to be a female chemistry student wearing dangly earrings; and third, the fact that the man seems to prey specifically on artists and writers.

So what did this rather plain, little-traveled, only son of an upstate New York Polish grocer actually do to ensnare so many intelligent men and women? Well, he identified our creative passions and used them as a template to form himself into what we most desire. He is an emotional tourist warming his hands on the fires of other people's lives, focusing his attentions on artists and writers because their imaginations are so near the surface that it's easy to plunder them. For example, since I write about computer technologies, he did his research, read all of my books and articles and made himself into what he knew would fascinate me most: an ungendered cyborg. With another woman who writes vampire fiction he became a vampire slave master, a persona that, though pathetic, would probably raise hilarity among his students.

For more than three years I was mesmerized by him despite the open bewilderment of friends and family, who couldn't imagine what I saw in such a homely character. But none of us guessed the truth: that I had given three years of my life and promised the whole of my future to a sociopath who preys on others for his own gain without regard to the consequences for his victims.

Another description would perhaps be "succubus," a demon who assumes female form to have sexual intercourse with men in their sleep, though in his case, it is in order to have sex with men online. He is a shape shifter who molds himself into whatever is needed and constantly searches for new forms to take. Although a familiar type in the flesh, his ease in setting traps online makes him something new: a cybersuccubus. And the peculiarities of his practice make him very hard to accuse.

While I have no idea why he did what he did, I can at least outline the story.

In 1995 I began researching a novel set in the online community of LambdaMOO, a virtual space in which several people in different locations can talk to one another online by typing simultaneously, creating a constantly moving screen that shows short, abrupt sentences that manage to convey personalities and emotions at a surprisingly complex level. In a MOO (a multiuser domain that is object oriented), words are all you are -- and so the more adept your language, the more effective your presence.

In this setting, on a day in November 1995, I was type-talking with a female postgraduate student bearing the fanciful online name of Cindi and a description to match. ("A 5-foot-10 green-eyed redhead with a runaway imagination and a fuzzy idea of the line between virtual and real. She runs five miles or so every morning to make sure all the pizza she eats doesn't take up residence. Her hair is short enough that her earrings can dangle when she walks.") She introduced me to one of her friends, a middle-aged chemistry professor recently promoted to a powerful administrative position at his private Connecticut university. "All his students love him!" she told me enthusiastically. His online name was Rhyys.

I was briefly involved online with both of them, but the relationship with Rhyys soon became intense. We were talk-typing online several times a day until Christmas Eve 1995, when, in a slow and emotional ritual, we each typed our real-life names. After that, there was no going back. I already knew by then he was a devout Catholic, that he had been married for 20 years, that he had one small child, born late in the marriage. Of course, I should have turned away, but I did not. Instead, I opened my heart and he walked straight in. I'd never met him, never even heard his voice on the phone, but he felt like my lover, my brother, my best friend and my colleague all rolled into one. I was especially struck by his thoughtfulness. For example, he stated the need for some kind of message system in case either of us was taken ill. And who would tell Cindi, he asked? Something had to be worked out. He promised to give it some thought. A few days later he was begging me to trust him: "Just stay loving me," he wrote. "I will try with all I have to not let you down. Don't be scared of crawling under my skin, I won't crush you," he promised.
Looking back on it now, it's hard to explain exactly why I took any of that romantic tosh as seriously as I did. And why did I connect with him so strongly in the first place? All the usual manifestations of attraction were there -- the faster heartbeat, the heightened sense of that one other person, the erotic intimacy -- and yet there were no bodies. Nor was there any chemical or physical interaction beyond those we imagined, invented or role-played. But the fact is, despite the lack of all those usual signals, I fell for him long before I even heard his voice on the phone. I suppose I formed an idea of him through the "tone" of his voice -- the words he typed and the stylistic nuances of his phrases, plus a sense of his personality conveyed by what he actually said in those phrases. Our huge ability to imagine combines with an intense desire to find perfection and creates, as we say in England, a silk purse out of a sow's ear. But that moment of free fall in the weightlessness of anonymity can lead to a very painful crash to earth when you discover that the person you fell for was only exciting because you imagined him/her to be so.

It's reminiscent of the famous experiment of biofeedback suits, when a couple (he in Paris and she in New York) were hooked up remotely with the intention that they would arouse each other via remote touching and mutual feedback. It seemed to work very well, to be enjoyable for both, and it was only later discovered that in fact the connection had failed right at the start and they never had been connected at all. In other words, they had been arousing not each other but themselves! In my case,

my lover's cliched phrases of love and passion created a facsimile of emotion that was as effective as the real thing, and the fact that they had never been connected to the truth was something it took me a while to discover.

In July 1996, nine months after we first met online, he flew to England to meet me, and we fell instantly in love. That summer, I also went to his hometown in New England. But in September, he made an astounding confession: Not only had he been posing as a woman online all the time he had known me, but that woman was Cindi! While I was not shocked by the gender-bending (that is part of everyday life in cyberspace), I was very shocked by the lie. But I was in love with him, and I was used to Internet life, where people often try out new identities. And after all, I was writing a book about the subject. How could I really object to this new revelation? I was so steeped in the mysteries of the Web that my ardor overrode my caution, and I saw his duality not as deceit but as a marvelous bonus: two lovers for the price of one. He deleted Cindi from LambdaMOO, but her memory remained strong, especially when we met in real life and I stared into his pale eyes to see her looking back at me. We had always played around with gender boundaries, and Cindi's continued ghostly presence made everything somehow even more complete as we grew closer and closer. She was still part of us.

The powerful effect that Rhyys had on me was his apparent presence in my previous books. In my first novel, "Correspondence," a woman is transformed into a software virus permeating her cyborg lover's body. In my second, "Water," the main character imagines a man into existence with the power of her desire. In another, the characters are attracted to each other purely by the power of words, just like the text interface of MOOs where words are all you are. Thus, I felt that I had written this man several times already, and now here he was manifested in the sometimes-virtual, sometimes-real flesh.

My new novel turned into a mixture of invented and real online experience. Rhyys (not, of course, his real name) and I were leading a heady life, logged on for hours every night, type-talking endlessly, exchanging histories, exchanging intimacies. We experimented with programming new environments and other personas. I recorded our often bizarre interactions, writing them into my book, and if they sometimes seemed pretty strange, they were real for us even if nobody else would ever believe them. We exchanged genders. We invented new genders. We created virtual cyborg bodies and played in them. We built laboratories, caves and whole sequences of rooms, all programmed into the ever-changing textual interface of a MOO. By now, I was absorbed and obsessed by him: his imagination, his eroticism, his intensity. When we were together in the flesh and I looked into his face, I could see it shifting from male to female, from softness to hardness, from dream to reality. I could not get enough of him. He had become my only muse. I dedicated my novel to "My Beloved Technician." I wanted to be with him and write about him forever.

SOURCE - READ MORE HERE

Jailed for Running a 'Vicious' Internet Smear Campaign

A teenager who posted a death threat on Facebook, yesterday became the first person in Britain to be jailed for bullying on a social networking site.

Keeley Houghton, 18, said she would kill Emily Moore, whom she had bullied for four years since they were at school together.

On her personal page, Houghton wrote of her victim: 'Keeley is going to murder the bitch. She is an actress. What a ******* liberty. Emily ****head Moore.'

Two days before she made the threat, Houghton had intimidated Emily, who is also 18, after spotting her in a pub.

Sara Stock, prosecuting, told Worcester magistrates: 'When Emily was sitting on her own the defendant came over and sat next to her and asked her, "Are you Emily Moore? Can I have a huggle?" Emily told the defendant to leave her alone otherwise she would call the police. Keeley then told her, "I'll give you something to ring the police about".'

Yesterday, jobless Houghton sobbed as she was sentenced to three months in a young offenders' institution after pleading guilty to harassment.

She was also given a restraining order banning her from contacting Emily in person, via the internet or in any other manner for five years.

People have previously been jailed for harassment and stalking on social networking sites but she is thought to be the first to be jailed for bullying via the internet.

Houghton, of Malvern, Worcestershire, had two previous convictions relating to her vendetta against Emily, the court heard.

In 2005 she was convicted of assaulting her as she walked home from school. Houghton was subsequently expelled from school. Two years later she was convicted of causing criminal damage to Emily's home after kicking her front door.

District Judge Bruce Morgan said: 'Since Emily Moore was 14 you have waged compelling threats and violent abuse towards her.

'Bullies are by their nature cowards, in school and society. On this day you did an act of gratuitous nastiness to satisfy your own twisted nature.'

The court heard that Houghton had told police she wrote the death threats while she was drunk late at night.

But when officers examined internet records they discovered Houghton wrote the comments at 4pm on July 12 and kept them on her Facebook page for 24 hours.

Last month, an inquest heard how a schoolgirl took a fatal overdose of painkillers after bullies waged a hate campaign against her on Bebo.

Megan Gillan, 15, of Macclesfield, Cheshire, swallowed the tablets to avoid a science exam after classmates posted spiteful messages on the social networking site.

She was found dead in bed by her parents after she failed to come down for breakfast on the day of the exam.

Her death prompted the Archbishop of Westminster, Vincent Nichols, to criticise such sites, saying they encouraged teenagers to build 'transient relationships' that can leave them traumatised when they collapse.

The archbishop, who was appointed to the post in April, said the sites encouraged young people to put too much emphasis on the number of friends they have rather than on the quality of their relationships.

Emma Jane Cross, from campaign group Beatbullying, said yesterday: 'The sentencing of an 18-year-old girl for cyber bullying is the first of its kind in the UK and sets an important precedent.

'Cyber bullying is a worrying and fast growing trend which can be more harmful than typical schoolyard bullying.'

Drama on Facebook
Facebook is used by tens of millions of people across the world, but the way some users use the site has led to various dramas.

Last week, a picture surfaced of an alleged Facebook sacking, after an employee ranted about her boss online. He promptly replied, reminding her she had added him as a 'friend' before promptly firing her.

Meanwhile term 'Facebook Rage' is entering our language, often defined as feeling anger when a relationship breaks down and a former partner begins posting updates about their love-life.

It has also been used to describe users, convinced their other half is cheating, who spend hours stalking their partner online in a bid the find further proof to fuel their suspicions, deliberately searching for incriminating evidence.

Facebook was also in the dock a fortnight ago after a judge banned a gang of thugs from posting menacing photographs of themselves online.

In a landmark ruling, nine men pictured making gun gestures on social networking websites will be locked up if such images appear again.

Judge Clement Goldstone QC issued the ban while sentencing members of the Fallowfield Mad Dogs gang for affray. He was shown pictures of them pulling gun poses and talking about 'preparing for war' on a networking site.

Teacher Sonya McNally, 35, from Grimsby, is also currently suspended on full pay since calling her 13-year-old pupils ‘bad’ in a private conversation on the social networking site.

original article here

When Hate Comes to Your Homepage

The suicide of a young teenager shows we must wake up to the crossover between the virtual world and real cruelty

by J. Turner

A psychotherapist friend was explaining why she had forbidden her 12-year-old daughter from joining Facebook. It had driven several of her patients, around the same age as her daughter, to the verge of mental breakdown. But surely these girls were unusually fragile: if not Facebook, wouldn't there have been some other catalyst? Maybe, she said, but few young egos are strong enough to deal with this stuff.

I thought she was being alarmist and somewhat old-fashioned. Our generation merely utilises the internet: our children have it hardwired into their synapses. It is their medium, just as ours was television: our parents fretted similiarly - and impotently - about its new-fangled consequences.

You are supposed to be 18 to join Facebook. But you can lie about your age; no one checks. When my sons signed up I thought it sweet when they befriended their aunties and old babysitters, sent virtual pina-coladas to far-flung godparents. Then I realised they're all on there! The entire lower school, the whole prepubescent lot of them, “poking”, posting preening party pictures and telling each other “u are soooo pretty!!!”.

My friend's warning was amplified this week when a trial with implications for the future of social networking opened in Los Angeles. Megan Meier, 13, was befriended on MySpace by a boy called Josh Evans who flirted and flattered and told her she was “sexi”. When he dumped Megan abruptly, saying the world would be a better place without her, she went up to her bedroom and hanged herself with a belt. It transpired “Josh” was a 49-year-old mother called Lori Drew who, it is alleged, believed Megan was bitching about her own daughter online. Drew is charged with conspiracy and accessing computers without authorisation, not murder. But the prosecution case is that Drew “fully intended to hurt and prey on Megan's psyche” through MySpace.

It is an outlandish and extreme story. Yet what struck me was how Megan's mother's reacted when her daughter came to her sobbing about Josh's cruelty. She told her she shouldn't get into silly arguments and shouldn't have been on her computer anyway. Clearly, she believed her daughter was wasting real emotions on something which was “unreal”, since it took place online. Many parents, I guess, would have been equally dismissive.

It is a quandary we have not yet addressed, despite Britons spending more time online (an average of 14 hours a week) than any other European nation and with half of us now members of social networking sites: can the virtual world cause real pain? Facebook seems so harmlessly middle-class, like an endless online evening drinks party. For us sad, solitary home-working types it is a simulacrum of cheering human contact.

But my friend suggested I look at Facebook with a 12-year-old's eyes. She pointed out the popular “honesty box” application where you ask a question - “What do you really think of me?” etc - which then anyone can answer anonymously. Like a ouija board, evil yet so tantalising. My inner pre-teen came out in a terrified sweat.

Besides, said the psychotherapist, it is the ordinary stuff which devastates her patients, the photos of a sleepover to which you weren't invited, your best friend ignoring you and chatting on someone else's “wall”. And everyone will know, by how many friends you have, whether you're a big, fat loser. It's not even proper bullying, just crude kidult passive- aggression. But, boy, does it hurt.

Even so, her patients cannot stop themselves logging in. They have to look. And so the mean-girl snubs, the whispering behind hands, follow them home and upstairs into lonely bedrooms.

We think as adults we are tougher, that something as remote and notional as a chat room cannot hurt us. Indeed, it is a blast, a liberation, when talking online to say what you really mean for once, to make mischief, to dispense with uptight British niceness, or even assume the guise of an atavar, a pumped-up, better-hung version of our own weedy workaday self.

In the glow of our screens, safely at home, we think our egos are armour-plated. But there is no protection as we step on to the ten-lane superhighway of a billion heartless strangers. It can smart like hell, that withering rebuke from someone you'll never meet. A friend, who frequents a jolly and supportive parenting website, was devastated when another mother posted “I hope your child fails the 11-plus”, particularly when she discovered the woman was a neighbour, who'd always harboured a secret grudge.
We are a fighty nation at present, itching for a scrap like a railway station drunk. Perhaps, because we feel impotent in the face of huge economic forces, we lash out at more accessible targets - Ross and Brand, Haringey social workers, the judges on Strictly Come Dancing. And our anger spews onto the BBC's Have Your Say messageboards, blogs and newspaper websites.

This morning I was forwarded a letter from a reader who berated me about something I wrote last month, with the use of two C-words and sundry other curses. From the handwriting - and by the simple fact it came by snail-mail - I could tell it was written by an elderly person. It had no address and was signed “No Nonsense Norm”. Poor Norm, I thought, with his thin notelet, shaky pen and his probably painful walk to the postbox. With a computer he could have enjoyed the same secret thrill of hate in an instant, and free.

Most journalists, me included, find the honesty box below our words bracing: in the democracy of the web, why should we claim a monopoly on thought? Others, though, find the comments too confidence-destroying to read. (If you blog about us, do we not bleed?) Although few, like the hack hero in Tim Dowling's hilarious novel The Giles Wareing Haters' Club actually track down and confront their tormentors.

Maybe future generations will learn to deal with the strong and confusing emotions engendered by the virtual world. Friends with older teens say that they log into social sites before breakfast, know the etiquette, how seriously to take it, where to complain. And later my friend rings to say her daughter just 'fessed up to having a secret Facebook account. What can we do? Not much. Online we're elderly residents of a new world, just like Norm.

ORIGINAL

Facebook Threats Trial Begins

by Peter Hall

(PENNSYLVANIA, USA) Anthony Douglas Elonis' alleged Facebook threats to attack Dorney Park, kill his wife and slaughter a class of kindergartners scared some and terrified others, a federal prosecutor said Tuesday.

But when a jury weighs the evidence against Elonis, it won't have to consider whether he intended to threaten those people, but rather that he knew it could be perceived as a threat.

Testimony in Elonis' trial on five counts of making threats under the federal cyber stalking law began Monday, with FBI Special Agent Denise Stevens explaining how Elonis attracted the agency's attention.

Elonis, 28, was arrested in December after authorities executed a search warrant at his parents' home on Schwab Avenue, Lower Saucon Township.

Shortly after Elonis was fired in October 2010 from his job at Dorney Park & Wildwater Kingdom in South Whitehall Township for making a Facebook post that his co-workers perceived as threatening, the park's chief of security, Daniel Hall, contacted the FBI.

He was concerned, Stevens said, about Elonis' subsequent Facebook messages under the user name Tone Dougie describing himself as a nuclear bomb, and warning that his employers had "[expletive] with the timer."

Another message, which included a "disclaimer" that the words were fictitious lyrics and an exercise of the constitutional right to free expression, described Elonis' fantasy of a pair of twin-engine Cessna aircraft crashing into the amusement park in an apparent reference to the 9/11 World Trade Center attack.

Questioned by Assistant U.S. Attorney Sherri A. Stephan, Stevens said the disclaimer, and similar language in a post Elonis made about killing his estranged wife, did little to ease her worries.

"To me, it made them almost more threatening," Stevens said.

Stevens read each of Elonis' messages from Facebook screen shots displayed on TV screens for the jurors.

In a Nov. 6 post about his wife, Elonis wrote it was illegal, under the terms of a protection-from-abuse order, to say he wanted to kill her. He noted it was also illegal to describe the best way to launch a mortar attack on her home.

In a Nov. 15 post, Elonis wrote: "Fold up your PFA and put it in your pocket. Is it thick enough to stop a bullet?" It ended with a declaration that he had enough explosives to "take care of the State Police and the Sheriff's Department."

The next day, Elonis wrote, "That's it, I've had about enough. I'm checking out and making a name for myself. Enough elementary schools in a ten mile radius to initiate the most heinous school shooting ever imagined. And hell hath no fury like a crazy man in a Kindergarten class. The only question is which one?"

Stevens, who had been monitoring Elonis' Facebook posts, alerted the Lower Saucon police and surrounding school districts, she said.

In his opening argument, Elonis' attorney Benjamin Cooper asked the jury of seven women and five men to consider the context of Elonis' writing. He had recently lost his job and his wife had filed for divorce and taken away their two children.

"Mr. Elonis felt the impact of all that and he wrote about it in this medium called Facebook," Cooper said, noting that rap music contains similar violent imagery.

In an August court filing asking U.S. District Judge Lawrence Stengel to throw out the charges against Elonis, Cooper argued they are unconstitutional because they criminalize speech protected by the First Amendment.

He argued that Elonis' Facebook posts don't fall into one of the narrow exceptions to constitutionally protected speech called "true threats," in which the writer intends to place the victim in fear of bodily harm or death.

Rather, they were crude lyrical expressions of his frustration about life.

In response, Stephan wrote that the federal law prohibiting the transmission of threats -- the cyber stalking law -- doesn't require the government prove that a writer intended to make a threat, only that he knowingly made a statement that made the recipient fearful.

In a ruling from the bench Monday, Stengel agreed.

The trial is scheduled to continue Wednesday with testimony from Elonis' wife and Dorney Park employees.

original article found here

130 Facebook pages to Harass - E-Impersonation

Prosecutors say a Los Angeles man created 130 phony Facebook pages and posted Craigslist profiles to harass his 16-year-old ex-girlfriend.

The Los Angeles city attorney's office says 22-year-old Jesus Felix pleaded no contest on Wednesday to two counts of violating California's new impersonation law and one count of making harassing telephone calls.

He was placed on five years' probation and ordered to perform 30 days of road-crew community service. A one-year jail sentence was suspended on condition he complete anger management and sex therapy classes.

Prosecutors say in a news release that Felix created Facebook pages and Craigslist listings using photos of his ex-girlfriend. The girl's mother discovered online profiles with her daughter's contact information as well as sexually explicit photos.

The Internet impersonation law went in effect Jan. 1.

original article found here

HOW TO MAKE E-IMPERSONATION A CRIME IN YOUR STATE? CLICK HERE

INSIDE THE ABUSIVE MIND

"..the narcissistic abuser often picks energetic, loving, successful, passionate people. They seek out in others, what they lack, then begin the process of appropriating what the other has for themselves. In this sense they are true emotional vampires, robbing their victims of their personality, they energy, their passion for life - metaphorically killing them.

Their preferred method though, in the end, is to have the victim self-destruct, allowing them to walk away in triumph seeking sympathy for what they've had to endure with this 'crazy person'."

(edited slightly for cyberpaths)
Abusive people (such as cyberpaths) typically think they are unique, so different from other people that they don't have to follow the same rules as everyone else. But actually, abusers have a lot in common with one another and share a great many thinking patterns and behaviors.

These may include:

Success Fantasies: The abuser believes in fantasies of being rich, famous, or extremely successful in other terms if only other people weren't holding him back. They're blocking the way makes the abuser feel justified in getting back at them, including through abuse. The abuser also puts other people down as a way of building himself up. Beckstead - prime example!

Blaming: The abuser shifts responsibility for actions to others, which allows the abuser to be angry at the other person for "causing" the behavior. Cyberpath example: "If you wouldn't "tempt me" I wouldn't beg you for intimate photos, cybersex or send you dirty pictures.."

Redefining: The abuser redefines the situation so that the problem lies not with the abuser but with others or the outside world. Cyberpath example: My wife/ partner doesn't love me; won't have sex with me; makes me feel bad - anyway... so I need to turn to you (and net porn) for relief. My boss stresses me out... so I take it out on you (victim) at the computer.

Making Fools of Others: The abuser combines tactics to manipulate others. The tactics include lying, upsetting the other person just to watch her reactions, and provoking a fight between or among others. The Cyberpath may try to charm the person he wants to manipulate, pretending a great deal of interest in and concern for that person in order to get on her good side. (love bombing, coercion, manipulation, brainwashing, anchoring lies)

Assuming: Abusive people often assume they know what others are thinking or feeling. Their assumption allows them to justify their behavior because they "know" what the other person would think or do in a given situation. Cyberpath example: "I knew you'd be mad because I didn't come online when you asked, so I figured I might as well stay away for a week..."

Emotional Dependence: Abusive individuals are usually very emotionally dependent on their partner. The result of their inner rage at being dependent means that the abuser acts in controlling ways to exert power and to deny their own weakness. (If they are having net affairs they may take out their rage on the new victim rather than the spouse - knowing the person they are cheating with has no one to tell without revealing the net affair!)

One major symptom is strong jealousy and possessive actions, normally sexual in nature. Another sign of dependence is the effect of what happens when the abused person leaves the relationship because of the abuse. It is common for the abuser to make extraordinary attempts to persuade them to return.

Lying: The abuser manipulates by lying to control information. The abuser may also use lying to keep other people, including the victim, off-balance psychologically. For example: The abuser tries to appear truthful when actually lying, or tries to look deceitful when actually telling the truth.

Rigid Application of Traditional Sex Attitudes: Abusive persons tend to have more inflexible beliefs about roles and functions of the opposite sex. The man may expect the woman to over fulfill all the household and mothering chores and to be very submissive and subservient.

Drama and Excitement: Abusive people have trouble experiencing close, satisfying relationships. They substitute drama and excitement (sex? playing games with people's heads & emotions?) for closeness. Abusive people find it exciting to watch others become angry, get into fights, or fall into a general uproar. Often, they'll use a combination of tactics to set up an exciting situation.
Closed Channel: The abusive person does not tell much about personal details and real feelings. The abuser is not open to new information about himself either, such as someone else's thoughts about them personally. The abuser is secretive, close-minded and self-righteous. Abusers believe they are right in all situations.

Ownership: The abuser typically is very possessive. Moreover, the abuser believes that anything that is wanted should be owned, and that the abuser can do as wanted with anything that is his. The same attitude applies to people. It justifies controlling others' behavior, physically hurting them, smearing their character, stalking, hacking their computers and taking things that belong to them.

Poor Anger Management: Individuals who have experienced a violent and abusive childhood are more likely to grow up and become spouse abusers or abused people themselves. A person who sees violence, even verbal or emotional violence, as the primary method for settling differences as a child is not going to have very many alternate ways available to channel anger. A person without an everyday outlet for anger risks exploding toward the people closest to them.

Minimizing: The abuser ducks responsibility for abusive actions by trying to make them seem less important than they are. Cyberpath example: "Everything I said online wasn't that bad", or "You took what I said the wrong way."

Fragmentation: The abuser usually keeps the abusive behavior separate from the rest of his life. The separation is physical; for example, the abuser will seduce and malign people online but not in real life.

The separation is also psychological; for example, it is not uncommon for an abuser to attend church Sunday morning and abuse his victim Sunday night. The abuser sees no inconsistency in this behavior and feels justified in it.

Above the Rules: As mentioned earlier, abusers generally believe they are better than other people and so don't have to follow the rules that ordinary people do. That attitude is typical of convicted criminals, too. Each inmate usually believes that while all the other inmates are criminals, he is not. An abuser shows above-the-rules thinking in saying, "I don't need counseling. Nobody knows as much about my life as I do. I can handle my life without help from anybody." (they usually only go to counseling when caught, as a way to say - "I straightened my life out - its ok now", then go RIGHT BACK TO COVERTLY ABUSING)

Self-glorification: The abuser usually thinks of himself as strong, superior, independent, self-sufficient, and very virile. When anyone says or does anything that doesn't fit this glorified self-image, the abuser takes it as an insult.

Inability to express feelings with words: This type of person is rarely capable of true intimacy and may feel very threatened by the prospect of being open and vulnerable. Particularly when frustrated, the abusive person expects instant gratification from their partner who is expected to "read" their mind and "know" what their mate wants. When the mate doesn't know what is expected the partner may interpret this as meaning they do not really love them. Therefore with an abusive individual, rejection = violence (verbal, physical, emotional). (if they do genuinely express themselves its generally a sarcastic remark, a putdown or anger)

Vagueness: Thinking and speaking vaguely or selectively skewing facts lets the abuser avoid responsibility. Cyberpath Example: "I'm working, I can't chat right now." (Working on OTHER VICTIMS??)

ORIGINAL ARTICLE FROM THIS GREAT SITE

Please Sign the Petition for a National Marriage Database

Sign the Petition for a National Marriage Database

Bigamy (and Dating Site Fraud, Married Cyberpaths and Internet Con Persons) would become a crime of the past if there were a National Database of Marriages and Divorce.

Donna Layne Roberts, victim of the notorious "Don Juan of Con"--William Michael Barber--has begun a petition asking Congress to support this request and pass a law that will require All marriages and ALL divorces to be entered into a National Database.

Bigamy is a serious social and criminal problem that is overlooked, laughed at, and enabled by the way in which applications for marriage licenses are haphazardly given to applicants in the United States. (And despite claims to the contrary, 'background checks for married people' are not done on Dating Sites because there IS NO NATIONAL MARRIAGE DATABASE AND NO REAL WAY TO CHECK!!)

For example, if you apply for a marriage license, no background checking is done, and you are "at your word" to provide honest answers on the marriage application. A man or woman who is already married, could easily go tomorrow and get married and no checking would be performed. Furthermore, there is no centralized database for jurisdictions to check to see whether or not a person is being truthful on their application.

Even a bigamous marriage that takes place in the same jurisdiction can occur. For example, Julia Bish Judah Hunt White McGovern, married two men in Las Vegas. The marriages even appear in the Clark County, NV marriage database. No checking was done to see if serial Bigamist Julia Bish-Judah-Hunt-White-McGovern obtained a divorce, therefore, she was married Judah while still married to Randy Bish and was free to marry Hunt while still married to Bish and Judah.

Bigamy is classified as a felony in most states, yet rarely do bigamists ever spend a night in jail and many get off with fines less than what most of us get for reckless driving tickets. It is cheaper to be a bigamist than get a divorce. What is wrong with this picture? Not only do bigamists dish out emotional abuse to their victims, but they ruin them financially as well. (Married people who troll the dating sites cause considerable emotional, mental and financial damage to their spouses, their families and the innocents they meet and romance who have no idea they are dealing with someone with a spouse & possibly children.)

Please sign the petition today and help ensure that the prevalent crimes of bigamy, fraud, embezzlement, and identity theft will be harder to commit against the people of this country, and the sanctity of both religious and civil unions will be protected.

Cross posted from this site. We fully support this petition at EOPC - it would also end Dating Site Frauds and Married Cyberpaths preying on the innocent. We ask that our readers sign it and pass it on to everyone they know!

Serious Jail Time for Cyber Harassers

New Mexico is taking another look at cyberstalking with legislation that could mean serious prison time for those who use the Internet to harass someone.

Albuquerque Mayor Martin Chavez and two state lawmakers are proposing a new state law that would bump up cyberstalking to a felony and would force cyberstalkers to register as sex offenders.

APD Chief Ray Schultz said it's time to make laws tougher to stop predators in cyberspace, who have managed to operate from behind bars.

"One of those loop holes is the fact that somebody in jail can cyberstalk from jail via electronic means and there's no way for that to be successfully prosecuted," he said.

Mayor Chavez unveiled new legislation Thursday that will make it a sex crime to cyberstalk an adult--a fourth-degree felony.

"Right now, stalking an adult is a misdemeanor in New Mexico," Chavez said.

Last year, a Sandia Labs worker was sentenced to two years under federal law after using her work computer to stalk the lead sing of the rock band "Linkin Park" in 2006.

Children are already protected from being stalked electronically in New Mexico, but the mayor said that isn't enough. He wants all convicted cyberstalkers to register as sex offenders.

"I think any legislator would be hard pressed to say anyone convicted of stalking a child online ought to be able to proceed in anonymity in the future. They need to register like all the other creeps," Chavez said.

The FBI said it will have a new, state-of-the-art computer forensics lab in Albuquerque next year that police departments will be able to use to enforce local laws and track cyberstalkers.

ORIGINAL

Manipulation

(We have replaced the words narcissist and psychopath with CYBERPATH for clarity)

by Kathy Krajco

The way cyberpaths interact with others makes them extremely potent manipulators. How potent? So potent that their powers of manipulation are spooky and seem downright magical.

How does the way they interact with others make them such expert manipulators? Because practice makes perfect, and they have been practicing the art of manipulation in every interaction since birth.

Indeed, in playing to the mirror of your face, that's what they're doing, isn't it? Manipulating you. Everything they say and do is entirely for effect, to get the reaction they want from you. That IS manipulation.

They're regulating, manipulating your reactions. But you aren't like them. Your reactions come from within. So, what are they ultimately regulating and manipulating? Your thoughts.

Manipulation is mind control.

Manipulation is a subtle thing. So subtle that we are usually unaware of being manipulated, unless the manipulator blows it and breaks the spell. So, manipulators are putting thoughts into our heads that we think are ours. A very dangerous thing.

Since a cyberpath isn't acting on normal human premises, since all he is doing is playing you for the reaction he wants, truth is irrelevant. Truth or lies — it's all the same to him. Whichever works. Usually that's lies.

It would be more correct to say that there is no such thing as truth to a cyberpath. Because there is no such thing as truth when playing Pretend. That's why cyberpaths beat lie detector tests. (In fact, so do many people from "shame" cultures where lying to save face of oneself, one's family, one's tribe, and one's religion is considered morally necessary and expected.)

Psychopathic types (such as Cyberpaths) are known to get so good at manipulating people that, by the time they're teenagers, they routinely fool and manipulate mental healthcare professionals, judges, prison officials, parole boards, and social workers who know they are psychopaths, are on the lookout for attempts to manipulate them, and should be immune to manipulation.

It isn't a matter of intelligence: it's a matter of practice, experience. This is because most of what transpires in interaction happens too quickly to think it through.

In playing to the mirror of your face, the cyberpath receives a steady stream of your feedback to the steady stream of words he sends. He continuously reacts to every nuance of it in "real time," if you will. An odd question from you might make him alter his choice for the next word in the sentence he is saying. Or the tone of his words. Or it might make him try to get even closer to you.

So, no matter how cunning a manipulator is, he isn't consciously analyzing your every slight reaction and fine-tuning his act to it. I say that because he can't be. That would be impossible, because no one could think that fast.

He must be relying on a lifetime of experience at this game, reacting habitually in certain ways to certain things he observes in you on the fly. In other words, this manipulation must be rather like the act of hitting a forehand in tennis.

You cannot consciously think your way through the stroke. Too many things are happening too fast. In fact, you will botch your stroke and be lucky to even connect with the ball if you try to consciously think your way through with "Watch the ball ... bend your knees ... keep your arm straight ... keep your head still ... step into the shot ... et ad infinitum." Well, that's exaggerating a bit, because there are only about 100 instructions I could list for hitting a forehand ;-)

You can't think that fast. No one can. So, you must practice that stroke enough under varying conditions to program the unconscious centers of the brain to execute it virtually automatically. When you net your shot or hit it out (provided you note how far off the shot was), your "program" is revised to get the bug out.

This phenomenon is called Natural Learning. It's how we learn to walk and talk.

That "program" isn't just a fixed set of muscle commands from the brain. It's an interactive program like a computer program. Because no two forehands are the same. Yet the more you practice, the better your forehand program, and the more effectively it faithfully produces a good forehand under widely varying conditions. You have only to make the major decisions, such as where and how to hit the ball: speed, spin, and placement. But Natural Learning is so powerful that even tactical decisions become virtually automatic in advanced players. Hence the best players in the world do very little conscious thinking while the ball's in play.

The power of Natural Learning is also illustrated by comparing experienced drivers with young drivers. Young drivers have no experience, so they must think their way through problems. Result? Crash. But with the same problem an experienced driver has no problem. He or she spontaneously makes an intuitive, instinctive move faster than the speed of thought. Result? No crash.

When playing to the mirror of your face, that must be what a cyberpath is mostly doing — relying on a lifetime of experience that allows him to react instinctively to every bit of feedback he gets from you. That's how he fine-tunes your reactions into the feedback he wants. Rather like turning the knobs on a short-wave radio.

This is manipulation. And it's occurring faster than the speed of thought, because a cyberpath has had so much constant practice at drawing the reaction he wants that most of his "moves" are virtually automatic.

This is why, I think, cyberpaths seem like machines with their knee-jerk reactions to things. But those reactions aren't knee-jerk reflexes: they are learned through experience to the point that they become habitual as second nature.

This is also why, I think, we tend to overestimate the intelligence of cyberpaths, narcissists, psychopaths, con artists, and other manipulators like dictators who con their way to power. We think they must be brilliant to be so manipulative. But even a stupid cyberpath can be extremely manipulative. Their skill is the fruit of constant practice at manipulation in every human interaction.

But it doesn't pay to underestimate them, either. That same practice makes them extremely observant and perceptive. Over time that will improve their intelligence, at least some aspects of it.

In fact, they are much more observant and perceptive than they seem. That's because all they're interested in is what they can use. So, though they block out much, what they do choose to see, they see very well. They are interested in your reactions, not you. So, they probably are more aware of how you react to things than you are.

But the only information about you they're interested in is what that can use to exploit you.

The rest they filter out of consciousness = forget.

CLICK HERE FOR A GREAT GRAPHIC OF HOW MIND CONTROL WORKS

So, never think that you are too smart to be manipulated by a cyberpath, narcissist, psychopath, or con artist. You aren't. And you surely can never beat one at his own game.

That's nothing to be ashamed of. It just means that you are an innocent who hasn't spent his or her whole life practicing the black art. So, you won't win that game.

ORIGINAL

Jury awards $11.3M over defamatory Internet posts

By Laura Parker, USA TODAY
(2008) A Florida woman has been awarded $11.3 million in a defamation lawsuit against a Louisiana woman who posted messages on the Internet accusing her of being a "crook," a "con artist" and a "fraud."

Legal analysts say the Sept. 19 award by a jury in Broward County, Fla. - first reported Friday by the Daily Business Review - represents the largest such judgment over postings on an Internet blog or message board. Lyrissa Lidsky, a University of Florida law professor who specializes in free-speech issues, calls the award "astonishing."

Lidsky says the case could represent a coming trend in court fights over online messages because the woman who won the damage award, Sue Scheff of Weston, Fla., pursued the case even though she knew the defendant, Carey Bock of Mandeville, La., has no hope of paying such an award. Bock, who had to leave her home for several months because of Hurricane Katrina, couldn't afford an attorney and didn't show up for the trial.

"What's interesting about this case is that (Scheff) was so vested in being vindicated, she was willing to pay court costs," Lidsky says. "They knew before trial that the defendant couldn't pay, so what's the point in going to the jury?"

Scheff says she wanted to make a point to those who unfairly criticize others on the Internet. "I'm sure (Bock) doesn't have $1 million, let alone $11 million, but the message is strong and clear," Scheff says. "People are using the Internet to destroy people they don't like, and you can't do that."

The dispute between the two women arose after Bock asked Scheff for help in withdrawing Bock's twin sons from a boarding school in Costa Rica. Bock had disagreed with her ex-husband over how to deal with the boys' behavior problems. Against Bock's wishes, he had sent the boys to the boarding school.

Scheff, who operates a referral service called Parents Universal Resource Experts, says she referred Bock to a consultant who helped Bock retrieve her sons. Afterward, Bock became critical of Scheff and posted negative messages about her on the Internet site Fornits.com, where parents with children in boarding schools for troubled teens confer with one another.

In 2003, Scheff sued Bock for defamation. Bock hired a lawyer, but he left the case when she no longer could afford to pay him.

When Katrina hit in August 2005, Bock's house was flooded and she moved temporarily to Texas before returning to Louisiana last June. Court papers that Scheff and her attorney David H. Pollack mailed to Bock were returned to Pollack's office in Miami.

After Bock didn't offer a defense, a Broward Circuit Court judge found in favor of Scheff. A jury then heard Scheff's arguments about damages. Pollack did not seek a specific amount for the harm he says Scheff's business suffered.

"Even with no opposing counsel and no defendant there, $11 million is a huge amount," says Pollack, adding that Scheff is considering whether to try to collect any money from Bock. "The jury determined this was a significant enough issue. It's not just somebody's feelings are hurt; it's somebody's reputation is ruined."

Bock says that when she moved back to her repaired house over the summer, she knew the trial was approaching but did not know the date. She says she doesn't have the money to pay the judgment or hire a lawyer to appeal it. She adds that if the goal of Scheff's lawsuit was to stifle what Bock says online, it worked.

"I don't feel like I can express my opinions," Bock says. "Only one side of the story was told in court. Nobody heard my side."

ORIGINAL ARTICLE HERE

thanks to BETH for this find!

Jealousy Behind CyberAttacks & Smears

(MUMBAI, India) Cybercrime is usually perceived as the province of depraved men. But a disturbing trend has come to light of late. Increasingly, women are resorting to online tactics to achieve some nefarious end.

Recently, the woman CEO of a multinational corporation's India operations was detained by the police for cyber-harassment of a co-worker in HR - also a woman.

The CEO, aged 43, posted derogatory remarks about the HR executive, aged 39, on a consumer website to malign her. She described the victim as a sex pest who eyed newly recruited young men and was also "having a good time with a former employee", said an officer with the police's cyber crime investigation cell. The CEO was traced through the IP address from where the posts were made.

"In her police complaint, the victim, who is unmarried, told us that someone was posting comments about her character, or lack thereof, and that she was described as someone who frequently slept with her colleagues and 'spoiled' them," said a police officer.

"She said it all started when she found a change in the way her colleagues perceived her, so much so that she found it difficult to work with them. It was only when her friends and well-wishers asked her about the online posts that she realized what the matter was. She told us she was taken aback and did not know how to react." The police sought from the website the IP address from where the posts were submitted. "It was found to originate from an apartment in a residential complex in Goregaon. When we reached there, we were shocked to find that the house belonged to the CEO of the firm where the victim worked," the officer said. "Initially, the CEO was not cooperating. She accused us of harassing her. But we had technical proof. When we confronted her with it and emphasized that the IP address belonged to her own PC, she surrendered."

The CEO broke down at the police station. "She found herself in front of the victim, who she could not look in the eye. She even had tears," the officer said. "In a written apology, she said she was jealous as the victim was getting quick promotions. So, she started writing online posts, the website being one that is visited by private companies, to do background checks on potential recruits. She wanted the management to take note of the posts and initiate action against the victim." She was later let off.

original article can be found here

PREDATORS HUNT THE WOUNDED

(an article everyone who goes online should read; whether you are an abuse survivor - or just vulnerable! - EOPC)

An abuse survivor e-mailed me saying how she seemed to attract men who want to exploit her. On the other hand, good people seemed to run from her. Tragically, this is the common experience of abuse survivors, whether they be men or women. I had often puzzled as to why this is. The woman sent me a couple of photos of herself and suddenly I understood. No, she was not dressed to seduce.

The reply I sent her was a little gentler than the following, but here is the essence of what I said:

Your photos, though nice, give the impression that you are sad, shy, lacking in confidence and aching for love. An evil man (cyberpath/predator) might look at those photos and think to himself, “I bet her self-esteem is so low that she thinks no decent guy would want her. Her need for love and for a boost in self-esteem seem so great that if I let her think that I could meet these needs, she would be so scared of losing me that she would give me anything I want, no matter how perverted. (sounds EXACTLY like Yidwithlid, Beckstead,Capers and Jacoby)

If I initially treat her tenderly and kindly and flatter her, I’ll have a good chance of turning her into little more than my slave. Then I could treat her however I wish.” (read our past Predator exposes: Hicks, GRIDNEY/ Yidwithlid, Jacoby, & Beckstead in particular!)

If, on the other hand, a man saw you as happy, confident and relatively content, he’d assume you are quite choosy as to who you relate to and how far you would go. He’d assume you have none of the desperation that pressures some women to compromise their morals to get the love they crave.

Anyone with evil intentions would be likely to back off and look for someone who seems more vulnerable.

Not only could this be a factor in men with evil intent being attracted to you, it could cause good men (or good women who are lesbians) to feel tempted to try to get their way with you. Because they are honorable, they are likely to run from you, fearing that if they stayed close to you they might yield to that temptation.

Regardless of how resistant to sexual pressure they really are, people with low self-esteem and who crave love give the impression that they are vulnerable to exploitation and/or seduction. Upon finding such a person, immoral people feel emboldened to test their suspicion that they have found someone they could seduce.

People lacking in self-esteem are likely to mistakenly believe that sex – not their personality – is their only way of winning the love they desperately need.

They fall for the horrible lie that their only chance of receiving even an illusion of the love they crave is to yield to sexual advances.

This makes them highly vulnerable. So intense is the pressure, that they need far superior self-control than what other people need in order to remain sexually pure. Moreover, abuse survivors are strongly tempted to accept the lie that because they have been mistreated before, they have little purity left to protect.

As if these strong pressures were not enough, abuse survivors find resisting an evil man much harder than other people find it because they have suffered the past horror of having done everything possible to resist and yet still being overpowered. Having suffered situations in which resistance was impossible causes them to lose hope that they could ever successfully prevent anyone from exploiting them. They become convinced that any attempt to resist would be a futile waste of effort.

Sexual & Emotional predators know this, so they are on the look out for emotional/ verbal/ mental/ or sexual abuse survivors!

A tragically large number of abuse survivors have mistakenly thought that perhaps they have low morals or are evil or that God is against them, since that they seem to attract sexual predators. This is most certainly not so. The thought is so obviously incorrect that, theoretically, there should be no need to deny it.

Sadly, it needs to be spelt out because sexual offenders are skilled at cruelly manipulating tender consciences, causing their victims to have a mistaken view of themselves.

The truth is that abuse survivors tend to attract repeat offenses simply because they are hurting, and sexual predators, like beasts of prey, think the wounded might be an easier target.


Knowing why the wrong sort of people might try to exploit you can be a relief. There is nothing wrong with you, other than the simple fact that you are hurting. I am sure what you really want to know, however, is how to prevent this attention. It’s easy to say that self-esteem, confidence and feeling loved is the answer, but the difficulty is knowing how to grow in these things.

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

MY HYPNOTIST:The Big Roulette Wheel Of Internet Dating (a Story Of Spousal Abuse)

REVIEW:

"I could not put this book down once I began to read it. I found it very informative as to what could happen when you meet someone over the Internet. I just hope that someone can gain insight and knowledge from reading Paulette's book. It is easy to understand and never boring."

FROM THE BOOK: "I have met several men over the Internet, as I look for someone interesting, in the hopes of fulfilling my seemingly desperate need for companionship..."

FOR MORE INFORMATION ON THIS GREAT BOOK CLICK HERE