WARNING: This wiki contains discussions of sexual abuse, suicide, harassment, and other sensitive subjects in context of Jess Taylor and her work.
This page discusses how Jess published stories from abuse survivors without their knowledge or consent. It also discusses her company VictimFocus, and how she deflects from/justifies her actions; as well as her frequently hypocritical behaviours and claims.
Some information comes from an article by Julian Vigo: Part 1 and Part 2. See below for more on what happened when the article came out.
Where possible, we have used archived links (rather than screenshots) that can't be faked, edited, or deleted.
Deflections and justifications
Jess views any kind of challenge or criticism (no matter how mildly worded) as a personal attack, and will always come out swinging in response. Whenever someone says something she doesn't like on the internet, expect her to come out with one or more of the following:
Accusing the other person of attacking her because she's a woman, a lesbian, working class, was a single mother, etc.
Accusing the other person of bullying, threatening, stalking, doxxing, harassing, and/or sexually harassing her
Saying that she's constantly being bullied, threatened, stalked, doxxed, and harassed by dozens of people and she just can't cope; anyone criticising her is a bully kicking a vulnerable person while she's down
Accusing feminists of a sustained, deliberate, ongoing harassment campaign against her, supposedly out of jealousy or bigotry. See "Stalking accusations" below for more on this.
Accusing "academics" or "professionals" in her field of trying to silence her because they feel threatened by her telling the "truth" about how mental illness doesn't exist and psychiatry is a scam
Hinting at serious personal troubles (usually implying it's a serious health problem or that someone has tried or threatened to kill her) that she can't talk about for whatever reason. She will often mention that police are involved, and/or hint that her wife, children, and pets are being threatened as well.
Pointing to her friend Charlotte Proudman as "proof" that Jess isn't making this up and they're both victims of bullying! Proudman is a barrister who, like Jess, deliberately misrepresents her qualifications/experience and accuses anyone criticising her of being a bully picking on her because she's a working class woman.
Talking about how "there's no sisterhood for tall poppies!" (a phrase she repeatedly uses), other women hate her because she's successful, and she's just too special and visionary for everyone else
Personal attacks
Jess frequently claims that she never personally insults or attacks anyone, and only ever talks about systemic oppression, not individual people. However, her public behaviour doesn't support this. Here are some examples of how she responds to criticism:
When the author/professor James Treadwell pointed out her misuse of the term satanic ritual abuse (see wiki page 1), Jess lashed out at him, tagged his employer, and accused him of trolling. He didn't make any inappropriate comments but she came out with "sorry, I'm married!" and deliberately tried to make it look like he was sexually harassing her.
Jess claims to be a former sex worker, and supports the controversial "Nordic Model" approach to the sex industry. A woman called Grace, who blogged anonymously about her life as an escort, expressed the opinion that Jess was speaking over women who rely on sex work to survive. Jess had spoken in an interview about sleeping with her bank manager in exchange for a loan, which Grace felt did not give her the right to speak on what's best for women in the sex industry. Jess attacked Grace and accused her of harassment, claiming Grace said that Jess supported child rape. (Like many other sex workers, Grace is of the opinion that the Nordic Model would put girls and women at increased risk of rape.) By now Grace had deleted her tweets and blocked Jess so only one side of the argument was visible, which Jess took advantage of to portray her as a bully. She now says that Jess's actions forced her to "out" herself as a sex worker.
Grace's blog made it clear that she struggled with mental health and addiction, and was very vulnerable. Even if she picked a fight, you would expect a supposedly trauma-informed psychologist to show some understanding towards her. This is very similar to how Jess treated Sally Ann, see below.
Jess had this exchange on Twitter with a clinical psychologist who pointed out that she doesn't have a clinical background and her work isn't peer-reviewed. (Why was she arguing with someone on social media while on a date with her wife?) She then posted on Facebook - where her followers couldn't see what he'd actually said - that he was "trolling" her and Jaimi, was "desperate for their attention", and was just jealous of her success.
See wiki page 3: Jess named a man, and where he works, to her followers and said he had been bullying and impersonating her for over a year. In reality, he had criticised her on Twitter and had made one TikTok video where he wore a wig and posed as "Jess" saying ignorant/uninformed things about mental health. Jess tried to make this sound like a drag performance and suggested he had a sexual fetish for dressing up as her. Also accusing him of neglecting his wife and newborn child because he was spending so much time online bullying Jess. What's that about how she never makes personal attacks on anyone? He subsequently stated that he had been attacked by her followers, who were now contacting his employer to try to demand he be fired and "review bombing" him with negative reviews accusing him of harassing Jess.
Jess sells flashcards and journals aimed at survivors of sexual assault, which contain potentially harmful and triggering prompts and which she expects the user to complete without professional support (see wiki page 1.) Another psychologist left a comment saying this is harmful. Jess replied accusing the person of "harassing" her by sending "horrible messages" about Jess to other people, who then shared the messages with her. This is well known to be a narcissistic bullying tactic - "everyone else hates you and has betrayed your trust!" Jess was deliberately putting the other person in a situation where she'd look guilty even if it weren't true. If it is true, this behaviour still wouldn't be harassment, as the messages evidently weren't intended for Jess to see.
Attacking a man who was bereaved by a close male friend's suicide and speaking over him, saying she knows more about the matter than he does because her then father-in-law (from her first marriage) died by suicide. His obituary in local press makes no mention of suicide - so if that is indeed how he passed away, his family evidently didn't want it to be public knowledge.
Unauthorised use of survivor stories
Jess has published at least three women's stories of abuse without their consent: Sally Ann, Rosie, and Carol. Sally Ann and Carol's stories both appear in Why Women Are Blamed For Everything, and Rosie's in Sexy But Psycho. Jess has also attacked the domestic violence campaigner Rachel Williams for publicly supporting these women.
Sally Ann
Sally Ann is a survivor of CSE and has severe mental health problems. As a teenager she was traumatised by the inappropriate use of a graphic "educational" film about CSE - which are often used in schools or by social services, etc. In 2018, Jess ran a campaign against these films, which she refers to as "CSE films." Sally Ann contacted Jess to share her experience, and Jess asked to use this story in a blog post. Sally Ann agreed via a private message on social media but did not sign a consent form. At the time, she was in poor mental health and had recently been in hospital. Jess was aware of this, but didn't question whether Sally Ann was capable of giving informed consent.
When Why Women Are Blamed For Everything was released, Sally Ann saw that her story was included without permission. Later, in 2022, a friend also read the book and identified her. This upset Sally Ann and she decided to speak on Twitter about what happened. For the sake of clarity, note that Sally Ann was not interviewed for Jess's book or academic papers, and has never made any complaints about Jess's second book Sexy But Psycho. Jess has taken advantage of confusion around this in order to further her own version of events.
Jess initially denied publishing the story, claiming that she knew every woman featured in her book and all had given explicit consent. In private messages to some of her followers, she claimed that someone with a grudge against her had deliberately lied and manipulated Sally Ann into believing she was featured in the book when she wasn't; some of these messages were later shared with Sally Ann. Jess's publisher confirmed that Sally Ann's story was indeed featured in the book; but stated that no consent was necessary, as a pseudonym was used. The publisher's lawyer subsequently justified their refusal to remove the story from the book.
When Sally Ann didn't accept Jess's excuses, Jess then changed her story, saying that Sally Ann was "obsessed" with her and had been harassing her for months. She now claimed that Sally Ann had initially said that her story was used in Sexy But Psycho because the book was selling well; but then changed her story to say it was When Women Are Blamed For Everything, which would be harder to fact-check.
Jess has spoken about the importance of ongoing consent in a sexual relationship, yet doesn't seem to think it applies in other contexts, including her own work. She was repeatedly asked to take down her original blog post featuring Sally Ann's story but refused to do so, and it was only removed when VictimFocus moved to a new website without the blog. Former employees at VictimFocus have alleged on Tattle that Jess told them that Sally Ann was never abused at all, and just made it up for attention. If this is true, so much for her rhetoric around believing women - and if she thought Sally Ann was lying, why publish the story in the first place and then keep it in the book?
Jess has tried to keep Sally Ann quiet and use her as an example to intimidate others. This includes:
Accusing Sally Ann of stalking, harassing, and doxxing Jess, threatening her wife and children, and homophobic abuse.
Making complaints against Sally Ann to police - despite Jess saying she was "not gonna wheel out the lawyers or the police." Police contacted Sally Ann's social worker to check on her safety, and decided not to act on Jess's complaints. They subsequently confirmed with Sally Ann that no action has been taken against her. She also works with children, which requires a full criminal record check.
A lawyer for VictimFocus asking Sally Ann for financial damages and a public apology, even though VF had nothing to do with it as her complaint was with Jess. Sally Ann did not comply, and the matter went no further.
Declining Sally Ann's Subject Access Request to VictimFocus as "vexatious", and again threatening her with police and lawyers.
Jess's wife Jaimi sending Sally Ann a manipulative, guilt-tripping message. If you had a work-related dispute with someone, would you expect your partner to get involved and contact them?
Attempting to have Sally Ann issued with a court order for stalking, see "Stalking allegations" below.
In a voice message to one of the VF team, Jess claimed that she'd recently discovered Sally Ann had been stalking her for years. This was never mentioned before or since. She falsely said that Sally Ann was about to be arrested; expressing concern that Jess would be "blamed" if Sally Ann tried to take her own life. This is a transcript of the message.
It's very telling that Jess's concern was not for Sally Ann's safety, but her own public image. No one would "blame" Jess for going to the police if her wife, children, and pets were in danger - so what was she worried about? She has said that women should not be threatened with arrest for speaking their minds online, and it is unfair for police to look through a survivor's phone and computer. But she wanted Sally Ann arrested and her electronics seized. Evidently, Jess's principles about protecting survivors apply only when she likes the person in question. "Rachel" is Rachel Williams - see below.
Jess has built her career around talking about the problem of women being treated as liars and mentally ill when they disclose abuse. But this is exactly what she has done to Sally Ann. Even if Sally Ann had initially agreed to have her story published, she has now withdrawn her consent. Jess's failure to respect this demonstrates a disregard for professional ethics and the wellbeing of survivors.
Rosie
Rosie and her friend Rose both work with abuse survivors. Rose and Jess knew each other from academic circles, and Rosie developed a friendship with Jess as well around 2018. Rosie eventually disclosed her experiences of sexual violence in confidence as a friend. Subsequently, Jess used this story without consent in her second book, Sexy But Psycho. The book contains an almost exact verbatim record of what Rosie said to Jess when they went to a restaurant together. This suggests Jess made detailed notes shortly after the conversation, or even that she could have recorded it. Why would she do this, and was she already planning to use the story somewhere?
Upon reading Sexy But Psycho, Rose instantly recognised that Rosie’s story was included. Jess denied it, insisting that everyone featured in the book had given written consent. She then tried to suggest that Rose hadn't even read the book and had deliberately misled Rosie.
Rosie gave the following account of what happened (originally published on Twitter, now deleted):
Rose has also given her own version of events. Jess denied it and repeated her claim that everyone featured in the book had given permission. She also deleted tweets about going to the restaurant with Rosie, but screenshots remain online.
Rosie and Rose have used social media to draw attention to how Rosie was featured in the book without her consent. Jess has not responded as aggressively as she did with Sally Ann. This may be because Rosie and Rose both work with survivors themselves, and others in the industry know that they have no reason to lie. Rosie and Rose have attempted to contact Jess's publisher and the British Psychological Society, but have been ignored or brushed off. As with Sally Ann, even though the book in question contained specific details that identify Rosie, the publisher said Jess did not need consent to use the story because Rosie's real name was not published.
Carol
Carol came forward in the second part of Julian Vigo's article. She was interviewed for Jess's thesis, and gave consent to use her story at conferences or in academic journals. Jess mentioned that the thesis was being turned into a book, and promised to allow Carol to see and approve the drafts. Carol assumed this was an academic book. She sent feedback on Jess's interpretation of the research findings; but then never heard from Jess again. Jess then used the story in Why Women Are Blamed For Everything. Carol had specifically said that she did not want her story used in any book intended for general publication, as her family is unaware that she was abused. She chose to use a pseudonym in the article, both to maintain her anonymity and because she is concerned about reprisals from Jess.
Rachel
Rachel Williams is a respected campaigner against domestic violence. She had some doubts about Jess after a previous negative experience of hosting a webinar with her. When Rosie and Sally Ann spoke out about Jess publishing their stories without consent, Rachel followed and retweeted them on social media. Jess contacted Rachel privately, asking her not to share these tweets. Rachel refused, and also made critical remarks about Jess’s approach in other areas.
Some time later, former members of VictimFocus staff sent Rachel screenshots from a group chat where Jess and others had made threats/abuse against her. See "VF group chat" section for details. Rachel shared these screenshots on her social media and wrote about what happened. The feminist author Julie Bindel (a friend of Rachel) defended her. Jess's subsequent claims of being harassed by "feminists" are likely an attempt to discredit Rachel and Bindel. Jess again tried to use police to intimidate Rachel, justifying this to VF staff by saying that Rachel had doxxed her and shared her "house details."
British Psychological Society complaint
After Sally Ann made several complaints against Jess to the British Psychological Society (BPS), they decided not to take any action.
Their response states that they did not find Jess to have broken their rules about confidentiality in Sally Ann's case specifically. It does not say that Jess did nothing wrong or that her work is ethical. It's highly questionable to put the burden of proof onto Sally Ann, and to tell her not to share the verdict with anyone else. The BPS is known for loose regulation of its members, and its complaints handling procedure has been subject to an investigation by the Professional Standards Authority for Health and Social Care.
Jess made a statement suggesting that the BPS had found all allegations about her since the publication of Sexy But Psycho to be false. This is dishonest; the decision referred solely to formal complaints made by Sally Ann. Jess mentioned Sexy But Psycho (the book featuring Rosie's story) as a way to deflect and make it sound like this was a "get out of jail free." She and Jaimi shared a gloating meme on Instagram, along with photos of them celebrating with dinner and cocktails. She later said that anyone questioning the BPS was part of a "smear campaign" and more concerned with wanting her to look bad than with anyone's safety.
Jess has also claimed that Sally Ann's complaints were homophobic in nature and "referenced (Jess's) sexuality." This is deliberately vaguely worded - for example, it would reference Jess's sexuality if Sally Ann were to mention that Jaimi was involved. Without further clarification or evidence, it doesn't show Sally Ann did anything wrong. The text of the BPS decision doesn't mention any complaints about Jess's personal life.
Julian Vigo investigation
On 23 October 2022, the journalist Julian Vigo published the first part of an investigation into Jess, as an article on Substack (links above.) Vigo interviewed Sally Ann, Rose, Rosie, Carol, and Rachel along with a couple of VAWG professionals who expressed doubts about Jess.
Jess was approached for comment, but chose not to respond. When the first part of the investigation came out, Jess claimed that legal action would be taken; Vigo hasn't mentioned this happening. Jess and Jaimi have also tried to suggest that Vigo is just a "blogger" and not a real journalist because she publishes online. She's an experienced print journalist, and online platforms are a valid medium for journalism. Does Jess consider herself not to be a professional writer because she also has a Substack?
Jess and Jaimi tried to control the narrative by accusing Sally Ann of doxxing (yet again), and coming out with a barrage of accusations about her and unspecified "feminists." Jaimi tried to intimidate two Twitter users by giving their real (full) names, making it clear she knows who they are. Apparently it is OK to share someone's personal information when Jaimi does it. In the below screenshots, the red indicates where she used someone's real name. She also falsely claimed that Sally Ann had lied about her story being in Sexy But Psycho, and had misled Rosie into thinking her experiences had been published without consent.
Stalking allegations
On 12th January 2024, Jess released a Substack article about being a "victim of stalking." She stated that Sally Ann was served with a Stalking Protection Order (equivalent to a restraining order) in August 2023 for stalking Jess and Jaimi, but they hadn't been permitted to talk about it until now. This is strange, as a Stalking Protection Order is a civil matter and there are generally no restrictions on discussing it once the case has concluded - except in circumstances such as the offender being under 18.
In the article, Jess again defended using Sally Ann's story in her book, with a version of events that contradicts what she has said previously. Again, she failed to address the fact that she refused to remove the story after Sally Ann asked. She gave Sally Ann's full name and deliberately set her up for others to attack. When a Stalking Protection Order is granted, the complainant will normally be advised not to provoke the stalker in any way. A court order doesn't magically stop an offender and Sally Ann says she was told by her solicitor that stalkers typically break the order as soon as it's issued. You would expect Jess, a self-professed expert in stalking, to be fully aware of this. She evidently didn't feel that Sally Ann posed any threat to her.
What actually happened was that Sally Ann was served with an interim order in August 2023 while waiting for the case to be heard. An interim order is granted as a protective measure for the complainant's safety until the case comes up; it doesn't mean the person is guilty (which hasn't been decided yet.) On 19th January 2024, Sally Ann posted evidence confirming the case had been closed and no Stalking Protection Order was granted, therefore she was no longer under the interim order either.
Sally Ann alleges that Jess portrayed her as being unstable and dangerous because of her mental illness, and made very serious, unfounded accusations against her (which Sally Ann believes was done in an attempt to push through the order.) For example, Jess allegedly said that she had to cancel a public event because she felt she was at risk from Sally Ann. But the event organisers had posted on social media with photos showing that it went ahead and Jess was there. Even though the threshold of probability was lower than in a criminal case, no grounds were found to justify a Stalking Protection Order. Remember that next time Jess talks about how women's mental health diagnoses are used against them.
Jaimi stated that the SPO was necessary because she had become suicidal over Sally Ann's behaviour, which included suggesting that Jess was abusing Jaimi, and tagging Jaimi's university on social media asking them to intervene. (Jaimi hadn't revealed publicly at the time where she was studying.) This was inappropriate on Sally Ann's part, but it's not stalking or illegal. Jaimi can't complain when she herself has revealed personal information about others on Twitter (see above), and Jess has repeatedly made malicious complaints about people to their universities or employers. Jaimi insisted she and Jess had "never retaliated" against Sally Ann before, which is blatantly false; and that they were continuing legal action against Sally Ann. In other words, continuing to abuse the legal system.
Remember, this began over Jess's ongoing refusal to remove Sally Ann's story from her book - re-traumatizing her and causing her ongoing distress. Even if Sally Ann had actually stalked Jess, she has severe mental illness and is very vulnerable; it would still be inappropriate to "name and shame" her when she has never been convicted of an offence. Effectively, Jess published a hit piece to attack Sally Ann and to drum up support and publicity for herself before the release of her memoir.
Jess's article also contains a number of accusations against nameless "feminists." Most of these were a combination of:
Misrepresenting legitimate criticisms of herself as personal attacks. E.g. concerns over her fundraising and company accounts became "I/my company have been maliciously accused of fraud and tax evasion" and "I was falsely accused of stealing from a charity". See wiki page 1 for more on that.
Lies and distortions aimed at identifiable people. E.g. claiming her "house details" were shared online (which she's previously accused Rachel of) or that someone had published a series of articles claiming she traffics women (suggesting this was Julian Vigo - whose articles did not mention trafficking, which would be an extremely serious allegation.) She mentions an "academic" who was supposedly investigated over lies about Jess. We believe this is referring to someone who alleged her university was falsely told she'd been "stalking" Jess for a year; she and Jess had never even spoken to each other.
Misrepresenting discussion on Tattle or social media as harassment by "feminists." E.g. Jess stated, "I have been maliciously accused of being my wife’s ex-schoolteacher, lecturer, tutor etc." No one said this but there has been discussion of the fact that Jaimi taught Jess's children when she worked as a private tutor.
Supposed personal attacks that are actually backhanded compliments/make her look better. E.g. saying feminists were jealous of her for having big breasts or that she had been accused of completing a Master's degree in Jaimi's name. It's questionable why anyone would lie about this when Jaimi has never claimed to have a Master's.
Claims that numerous women had all been "warned by police!" for threatening/harassing Jess. This is again twisting words. Jess reported a number of women to police for supposedly stalking, doxxing, or threatening her, but some of them never even heard from the police. At least one person was contacted by the police, but the complaint was quickly closed because she had done nothing illegal. See wiki page 1 and this comment for more.
One allegation was that someone had sold a false story about Jess to the Daily Mail, but they declined to publish because it would be libellous. This is very similar to when Jack Monroe claimed that an ex had gone to the Mail with a story about her but they could not publish it. (The Mail regularly courts libel suits from people far more powerful and noteworthy than Jess or Jack. If they didn't want to publish something, it was probably because their readers wouldn't be interested!) Jess is friendly with Jack on Twitter; was she "borrowing" from Jack?
It's very telling that Jess feels the need to emphasise herself as a "victim" of other women, and that "there's no sisterhood for tall poppies!" The real problem here for her is that other women are not giving her the reverence and acclaim she thinks she deserves.
Most posters on Jess's Tattle thread are people who have worked with Jess, have personally met her, or who work in VAWG/mental health and have concerns about her work. There is no concerted effort to harass/defame her via Tattle and no evidence that "feminists" are using any other site to do so. It is also worth noting that Jess's definition of stalking is quite broad - see this episode of her podcast (around 56 minutes in) where she suggests it is stalking if women who disagree with her follow her content!
She further falsely claimed that HCPC (Health and Care Professions Council), the NHS, and BPS had all investigated her and found her to have done nothing wrong. See above for the BPS verdict, which did not say this. The NHS cannot investigate her because she doesn't work for them or have any connection to them. She was reported to the HCPC because she appeared in a Netflix documentary which falsely referred to her as a "forensic psychologist", a title she does not have the right to use. The HCPC compelled the makers of the programme to remove this. They could not investigate Jess because she isn't registered with them, but did add her to their "watchlist", meaning Jess will be subject to extra checks if she ever does register. That's not an endorsement! See this post by someone who works in clinical psychology and reported her to the HCPC.
VF group chat and other concerns
Most information in this section is alleged by former employees of Jess and cannot be proven. Some of them have posted on Tattle and have said that screenshots provided are part of a long conversation in the same vein - they are not "cherry picked." Even Jess and Jaimi haven't denied these images are real; they've just spoken vaguely about lies or things being taken out of context.
At VF, everyone works remotely and Jess organises the team via WhatsApp groups. She had told them that Sally Ann and Rachel were harassing, threatening, and doxxing her and had lied about it. This led to the chat turning into a vicious attack on both women.
Jess's staff called Sally Ann an "horrific little turd" and wanted to send her "glitter and shit" in the post. They also planned to "ambush" her at a webinar where she was due to speak; and joined under false names. Jess laughed along with this and encouraged it.
Some people in the group were so disgusted by the conversation that they warned Sally Ann about the webinar, and sent her screenshots of what had been said about her in the chat. She was also told that Jess had "joked" about contacting her abuser and/or releasing sensitive information about her.
The discussion regarding Rachel included talk of murder, knives, and bullets - which Rachel found very intimidating, as she was shot by her ex-husband (Jess was aware of this.) There is also a poorly Photoshopped image of what was supposed to be Jess and Rachel having a rap battle - taken from the film 8 Mile. However, it's a very bad Photoshop and could be mistaken for a physical fight. Again, Rachel was sent these screenshots by people who had been in the VF group chat. In the below screenshots "Mandy" is Jess's mother-in-law, who is also employed at VF.
Jaimi later suggested that she and Jess had been "abused", doxxed, and threatened by Rachel, which wasn't true. Another member of VF staff, B., defended the chat and suggested that it had been taken out of context. (Again, it's hard to see what kind of context would justify these comments.) Elsewhere in the group chat, B. had used Kanye West's mental health as a punchline, and had said she wanted to fight Rachel and threaten Jess's critics. This kind of talk is concerning coming from someone who works with vulnerable people.
On the day of the offending chat about Sally Ann and Rachel, the conversation continued until evening when Jess said she had reported them both to police for doxxing her. She did not share any evidence of them doing this. Jaimi indicated that Jess had involved three separate police forces.
Jess acknowledged the chat had gone too far, and shut it down. She said that she promotes "free speech" and there would be no consequences for what anyone had said. But within a few hours, new WhatsApp groups had started up and the conversation soon developed into insulting Sally Ann and Rachel again. Other inappropriate topics were discussed; such as conspiracy theories, admitting to illegal drug use, and offensive comments about child autism.
Jess and Jaimi allegedly began a long conversation about sex toys, including photos, and saying that they were going to send all staff sex toys. If true, it's concerning that Jess casually brought up detailed discussion of sex in a chat that staff were expected to participate in. Especially when it was widely known that there were several members of staff who had experienced rape or sexual violence. The fact that it was supposed to be an off topic chat would not have protected them legally if someone had chosen to bring a sexual harassment case against them.
When the Met were exposed & the existence of problematic WhatsApp groups of serving officers highlighted people were quite rightly appalled.
If it can ever be proved that someone has engaged in/facilitated a WhatsApp chat (even if it were the informal work channel) on dildos I fail to see how they can credibly be in a position to advise any public institution about any aspects of misogyny.
Says she's "trauma-informed" and always puts the wellbeing of victims first. But look at her treatment of Sally Ann, Rosie, Rachel, and Carol - all victims of domestic and/or sexual violence. And a lot of her content and the advice she gives are at best insensitive, at worst harmful, to victims.
Says she focuses on systemic issues and doesn't attack individuals; but will openly and publicly attack anyone who criticises her.
Says she's anti-porn; but posts "thirst shots" of herself and provocatively posed photos with her wife.
Says there's nothing unusual about her relationship with Jaimi, because Jaimi was 20 when they got together, therefore was a consenting adult and obviously not being influenced in any way. But has acknowledged when talking about Amber Heard and Johnny Depp that a young adult in their early 20s is vulnerable to manipulation by an older partner.
Complains that she and Jaimi are ostracised in the lesbian community. But describes other lesbians as promiscuous, sexually predatory, and/or bullies; and butch women as lazy and unattractive.
Complains about ageism and being ignored, dismissed, and treated poorly because she's a young woman. But makes ageist, misogynistic comments about women older than herself. And she rarely, if ever, talks about the many young women in their teens and twenties who are active in VAWG and feminism.
Spoke about having had a number of serious/chronic health conditions including allergies, anxiety, abnormal heart rhythm, a stroke, visual impairment, and no period for years (so effectively a very early menopause.) She claimed that all these ailments were miraculously cured when she came out as a lesbian and got together with Jaimi. But Jess has since repeatedly said that she still has these conditions, that she may have to reduce her workload for the sake of her health, and her critics are bullying her because she's chronically ill and vulnerable.
Talks a lot about the impact of racism, colonialism, and anti-Blackness and criticises other women for "white feminism." But she uses AAVE; generalises and stereotypes cultures she knows nothing about (such as saying that non-western cultures have no concept of mental illness); and talks as if she weren't a privileged white woman herself.
Talks about the importance of "lived experience" but dismisses and shouts down anyone whose personal experiences do not align with her views.
Grew her audience through feminist circles, especially gender critical. But then turned against them and started attacking and blaming feminists for everything in order to make herself look better.
Talks about how women should always be believed when they disclose abuse. But tries to portray Sally Ann, Rachel, and others as liars and fantasists. According to former VF employees, she explicitly told them that Sally Ann was lying about being a victim of CSA. In that case, why did Jess keep Sally Ann's story in a published book if she believed it not to be true?
Talks about how academia is corrupt and built on institutional bias, academic journals are a scam, professional standards in academia are non-existent, etc. But expects to be unquestionably accepted as an expert because she has a PhD.
Claims to believe in free speech but will aggressively try to shut down people who criticise her.
Describes the police as an inherently misogynistic and racist institution, and says that women and survivors shouldn't trust them. In particular, she criticised police for reports of WhatsApp groups where they fantasised about abusing women. But she repeatedly uses the police to try to intimidate others into silence, including women she knows to be vulnerable. And is alleged to have started an inappropriate discussion about sex toys in a company group chat with survivors of sexual violence.
Jess and her staff at VictimFocus used the company WhatsApp group chat to make plans to harass Sally Ann. But she accused "feminists" of plotting to harass her via a group on Zoom, and said it was disgusting, unacceptable behaviour.
Says she is "trauma-informed and anti-pathologising" and that mental illness is just a reaction to "trauma" and doesn't need treatment. Despite this, she sells a self-help programme designed to treat the effects of trauma. She used to have a list on the VictimFocus website of approved professionals who meet the VictimFocus ethos, but the first person on the list states clearly on her own website that she treats personality disorders (which Jess claims do not exist and are pathologising.)
