Dr Jessica Taylor #4 Consent is for losers, not for me. Ignore that journalist spilling the tea.

[umnothatsnotokay]

For all her pretentions of being politically astute, she's actually just part of the neoliberal machine with her wannabe influencer vibes and positive affirmation tat. As previously noted, she's not very bright.

This. This is what fell into place for me several months ago. She is absolutely using all the tools she claims to want to destroy to gain power, success, money and influence. Once that clicked it all became clear and I understood the frequent niggles and uneasy feelings with her posts. Try as she might, she struggles to come across as authentic, as someone with depth and empathy. She thinks she does it well but so many came here because if that same feeling of uneasiness.

The more you look at what she actually does - how she treats people she considers vulnerable / less powerful / of little use or no to her - the more you realise she is full of shit - and dangerous with it. Because she doesn’t care who is harmed as long as she succeeds.

 

[Concerned_Person]

I see there are some incredible humans here looking out for SA

I think SA needs more support than ever right now. Her recent tweet is worrying.

JT is active on Twitter again. There were weeks/months where she went quiet. But since the BPS farce etc., she's back and seemingly louder than ever, producing more publications than ever before.

I'd hazard a guess that the farce the BPS have pedalled alongside her publisher etc. backing her, have galvanised her and that she's back in fight mode. It wouldn't surprise me at all if she's started to threaten individuals with legal action again. We know that there's no shortage of money on her side, especially now she's apparently sold the minimum for her book, has a paperback coming out, etc. If she moves from threatening to actioning legal action... where does that leave people? It's noticeable that she didn't comment on the last article, that things have gone quiet on the article front, and that since telling SA to fuck off both her and Jaimi have stopped directly interacting with any of us on Twitter beyond one-line nothings or blocking.

I won't lie - she scares me, so I've managed to fly under the radar to the extent that she hasn't even found me to block me on Twitter. But it's largely because I'm scared that her noticing me could affect my job, etc. On top of that, if she ever did move to invoke legal action against me, I wouldn't know where to go, what to do, how to cope, and I'd struggle to see a way out.

Those who have used real names and are identifiable are immensely brave and courageous - but if JT is back fighting then I think we all need to make sure we surround them with good people, moreso than ever before. It's much harder to invoke legal action against a crowd.

 

[Rach8456]

Having known her for several years, I can confirm that she’s only motivated by power and money. She doesn’t care about anyone except for herself, or people in the moment who can give her something. She uses people, including genuine friendships and partners. She’s deeply insecure and causes drama and toxic relationships everywhere she goes. She enjoys lying, she enjoys fooling people and she likes to feel better, or smarter, than people. The whole feminism, lesbianism, trauma informed victim warrior is a relatively new creation designed entirely to gain followers, influence and make money. We’ve all seen how she treats people; this is not feminism. We’ve all seen how she jumped from a heteronormative marriage to a lesbian one, and how she likes to almost weaponise this as another ‘victim label’; this is not lesbianism. She’s a fraud plain and simple.

I agree with this I’m sorry to say. Someone who replies to praise in a few minutes, yet is nowhere to be seen when you’re seeking actually help is not a good person.

The whole SA thing was wrong on so many levels. The bottom line is that consent is not absolute; the second that girl said she wasn’t happy then her experience should have been removed and an apology issued taking responsibility for any harm caused. She flat out refuses and instead chooses To demonise a victim of abuse on a public forum. That was it for me.

now the latest scandal around non CPD accredited courses and changing of T&Cs after people have signed up - she’s finished and it’s no one’s fault but her own

 

[AccidentalAcademic]

Like how she professed to speak for everyone in the sex industry and was, rightly, criticised by actual sex workers who said her experience of sleeping with her bank manager was nothing like their experiences?

Her standard response when someone tells her that her views don't fit with their personal experience of a topic is to try and turn it into a game of Top Trumps: her experience of said topic has to be the Worst Ever, and therefore definitive. She did it when someone bereaved by suicide questioned what she was saying - triumphantly flourished her father-in-law's death as though it gave her the last word. She did exactly the same thing to a vulnerable woman who was living in a hostel, in recovery from drug addiction, and who described herself as a street or survival sex worker - brought up the bank manager situation in an unnecessarily aggressive way in order to dismiss what this woman was saying. Regardless of your personal views on the sex industry or suicide, a central tenet of trauma-informed working is the ability to really listen to the other person and to try and understand where they are coming from. You have to at least recognise that someone's life experiences might lead them to adopt a different conclusion than the one you think you would choose in their place. And Jess can't do that. To her, every disagreement is a fight and a personal insult, and her response isn't to listen, it's to try and one-up the other person and so have the last word.

 

[witchinghour]

I remember in a VictimFocus meeting with Jess and Jaimi during the time when we were trying to get them to deal with the toxicity of the work culture and commit to their supposed principles and had been met with - frankly - nothing but fuckery from them both, Jaimi lost her patience and had a rant about how she was sick of hearing about it as VF had important work to do, supposedly work that no other organisation does (not true. Lots of other orgs do similar work).

She blurted out that Jess had been having conversation with "huge, huge people in Hollywood" who'd been impressed with the work VF did. I remember thinking "WTF? Who gives a fuck about what people in Hollywood think?". Jaimi obviously thought we should be impressed that Jess had supposedly been talking to "huge" Hollywood types, but seriously, what VAWG organisation worth its salt takes its lead from Hollywood celebs? Give me strength.

She then threatened to shut down all communications between staff outside of email.

Fucking idiots, the pair of them.

Jess's main talent is blagging. It's got her so far, but her ego is too big to accept she's wrecked this blag. Everyone has seen her true colours now.

 

[ZiggyStardust68]

This was so funny on her blog, from the woman who tried to threaten another survivor by suggesting police would covisgate her electronics...
"7 reasons why I don’t support police checking victims’ mobile phones in sexual violence cases"
https://victimfocusblog.com/2019/04...ctims-mobile-phones-in-sexual-violence-cases/

It's quite astounding, as you say given her lies that SA's and Rachels's 'electrical devices' were supposedly taken by the police. I would love to see her reply to people who ask such questions rather than just block them. I mean, what is her stance now, I wonder? Is she going to create a whole new position that actually there are occasions when 'victims' don't tell the truth and therefore can be blamed---like what she is doing here---and therefore she now does support police checking mobile phones? Or not? Come on Jess, which is it? I imagine she is desperately trying to come up with some sort of theory that exonerates her. Either that or she'll book into a 6 month rehab for emotional exhaustion or something and come out rebranding herself as the champion of a whole new cause....

 

[Whatevesmate]

I'm also uncomfortable with disputing someone's account of experiencing abuse, especially considering what has happened historically, combined with the fact that it is unfortunately extremely common.

What I will say though is that experiencing CSA covers a multitude of types of abuse and earlier onset, number and types of abuse and number of perpetrators etc, obviously exacerbates the impact. As far as I know, Jess has talked about being victimised by 1 man, as a teenager. She cannot know what it's like to have been abused as a young child by multiple people and the devastating impact of such violations. Claiming to speak on behalf of all victims is overstepping the mark in a number of ways.

Jess is clearly limited in her understanding as evidenced by her saying that flashbacks are just ordinary memories. If she had ever experienced them she'd know that simply isn't the case. There's also a vast literature to back this up. Similarly, as others have said, the types of intrusive and highly inappropriate questions she asks survivors on her "training courses", are the antithesis of trauma-informed. Stating on her website that she covers the funny aspects of CSA is frankly fucking offensive.

 

[AccidentalAcademic]

I'm reminded of a non-fiction author whose first novel was panned by Publishers Weekly (the reviewer basically went, "It's trash, but no doubt the fans will send it straight up the bestseller list"). The author then put "Straight up the bestseller list" - Publishers Weekly on the book's website, so if you hadn't read the review in full, you'd think it was a glowing endorsement. I get much the same vibe from JT - to her all criticism is rooted in bitter envy at her amazing talent, which means that all criticism is praise in disguise.

 

[AccidentalAcademic]

Her ignorance about the history of mental illness and its treatment was laid bare in Why Women Are Blamed for Everything. On buying the book I was unimpressed to find it was her PhD thesis with some blog posts mixed in, especially as the blog posts contained so many errors. The bibliography doesn't contain one single source on history of medicine: she just spouts a bunch of personal opinions without any attempt to show how she arrived at those conclusions and what the evidence is. She just relies on the fact that she has a PhD on a completely different topic to rubber stamp her opinions on everything under the sun.

One other incoherent thing about her views, which I don't think has been discussed here yet, is the way she dismisses the existence of mental illness yet uses the term 'trauma' uncritically, as if it's an objective phenomenon with universally applicable definitions. Yet the very idea of trauma as we think and talk about it in the global north has modern roots (it grew out of military psychiatry and humanitarian medicine), and this understanding of what it means to be traumatised is not shared by all cultures - in fact, it has sometimes been actively rejected by survivors of war and natural disaster in the global south. So if we're taking a social constructionist approach, Jessica's idea of herself as speaking a controversial but universal truth (can we ever forget her excitement that her book might be read in "regions of Africa", and the GoFundMe to translate her work?) is itself deeply flawed and ahistorical.

 

[judgejohndeed]

As a lawyer I loathe people who use empty threats of legal action/police reporting etc to intimidate people who might not know that there's no substance to it. I consider those who do this the absolute lowest of the low. So it makes sense that Jess has done just that.

 

[Concerned_Person]

Honestly I feel like an idiot now for ever signing up for it. In 2019 I was new to her work and thought she was great, I even recommended her to others.

You’re not an idiot. Because of blocking and legal threats, until recently many people thought it was “just them” who had doubts. And for those who had a slight doubt, they wouldn’t necessarily have linked it with any other niggles. Even months into this nonsense, with many eyes on her, we’re still only just uncovering quite how deep it goes.

She is behaving in a disgusting, unethical, abusive manner.

You are not an idiot.

 

[cjanon]

Hi all, new user/recent lurker here.

I am so relieved this thread exists! I see there are some incredible humans here looking out for SA and highlighting the questionable practices of JT. You're all amazing folk!

I'm sorry if this has already been posted (I will request it be removed/remove it once I've learned to drive the site if it has!).

I noticed that VF had recently procured a very nicely paid contract to provide training to a specific police force in England. I have a screenshot of the details if helpful.

As a criminal justice academic (specifically policing) I have real concerns that her 'brand' of psychology and methods of training (as demonstrated in the recorded sessions with VF staff) will in fact be further damaging to attempts to bring about policing reform.
Has anybody here contacted the organisations presently associated with JT and actually been met with any positive response?

If I've done this all wrong, please do let me know! Bit nervous posting here. And keep up the good work!

 

[ZiggyStardust68]

What do you mean? Have they paid for things for her before?



I’m curious how long her longest serving member of staff has been with her. Didn’t she have an assistant when the first book came out?

Other people on here have talked about staff having to club together for spa days for her when she's been feeling down....

 

[empowered1]

Wow I’ve just found a rape support service listing her in their useful contacts I shall be informing them of her unethical behaviour she is a danger to anyone who has been raped/sexually assaulted.

Rape & Sexual Violence Project | Useful links

rsvporg.co.uk

 

[AccidentalAcademic]

also weird what she says about autism and adhd as she told me her kids had that!

I remember her saying on Twitter that her son was autistic. It was years ago. She did share a few anecdotes that sounded quite typical of autism, so perhaps she was telling the truth there. Looking back, I wonder if she was scoping out the possibilities of the Autism Warrior Mother Grift a la Jenny McCarthy, but abandoned it as too crowded a field. Styling herself as a hero parent would also have meant casting her son as a main character, and I doubt that would sit well with Jess - if there's one thing I've learnt about her over the years, it's that she considers any moment not spent talking about her own self as a moment wasted.

 

[oopsislipped]

I don't mind the article
I know of a similar case of a cult leader type Daniel Foor, was exposed in a group letter posted to Medium which was then signed by a large number of affected individuals

What if there was some type of open letter on there, calling on the BPS to act? Signed by survivors and professionals in the field.

 

[destinyschild22]

Yes the interactive one is the one I took. Here's some of the questions

Write about the grooming tactics that were used against you.

What did I think feel and do when the abuse was happening to me?

Are there any life events that have triggered you?

Write about your own experiences of victim blaming?

Write a letter to the younger version of yourself.

How has sexual trauma impacted your sex life?

Write about the intimate contact you do and do not enjoy.

Write about your own personal opinions of the term survivor or victim.

I'm a senior researcher and my work is on VAWG, and I would never ask my research participants, or anyone else for that matter, to answer such questions in a virtual environment. Doing so would run afoul of BPS ethics guidelines for internet-mediated research, as well as my own personal standards for what constitutes ethical research. That participants are answering questions like the ones above in an online environment opens up considerable issues -- Is the participant over the minimum age required to give informed consent? And given the lack of control in an online environment over the research process with regard to minimising harm to research participants, will participants partaking in her course be adequately protected? On these issues, the BPS has offered guidance and state that this type of research should not be done online; See page 18: https://cms.bps.org.uk/sites/default/files/2022-06/Ethics Guidelines for Internet-mediated Research_0.pdf.

I hope one of the people who have registered for the interactive module takes these issues up with the BPS.

 

[Stella.alletS]

I think we should stay away from criticizing people's looks. She can't help how she looks and it just makes us look petty and feeds into her "they're just trolls who hate me because I'm amazing" rhetoric. I think it's totally fine to laugh at her for wearing a black thong under a white jumpsuit though because that was wholly a choice and probably done on purpose so everyone could see her "sexy" underwear.

 

[CuriousTherapyCat]

Reading that. I don’t think the “friend” exists. The story is about her IMO

 

[Rach8456]

Fuck I’d love to take one for the team and read that pile of utter shit but I’d rather poke my own eyes out than give her one penny