Some ways in which people use misdirection to erase abuse.


Misdirection is an important method of deception, whether you’re deceiving people as entertainment, like magicians, or deceiving people as a tactic, as in politics. As long as your misdirection attracts, and keeps, people’s attention, you can do whatever you want with the other hand, literally or metaphorically.

I’ve talked about how I think various political issues are hiding misdirections: gun control as a way to hide the use of guns by the State, immigration as a way to hide the effects of neo-liberalist policies, and the minimum wage as a way to hide the control that the power elite has over people’s livelihoods.

Misdirection also applies to prejudice. Take sexism, for example. So we are told by the sex-pozzies that pornography and prostitution lessen rape and sexual assault. As I detailed in my recent entry “The catharsis theory used to defend pornography,” this conclusion is based on a deeply flawed model of internalization, at least insofar as pornography is concerned. But more relevant to this topic is the fact that this equation is a misdirection from the fact that prostitution and pornography are themselves ways by which men can rape women with impunity. Many pornography actresses (13.6%, according to one study, although there was no gender distinction made there), including famous ones, have reported coerced sex taking place on movie sets. A majority of prostituted women (around two-thirds) report having been raped “on the job” (although this conception of rape implies that paying someone for sex is consent, which I disagree with).

This is not to put a number on the rapes in pornography and prostitution, or to debate their relative importance compared to rapes in other areas. The point is that concentrating on these assumed beneficial effects erases the fact that they enable many rapes. Sex-pozzies do not want you to look at the rapes they are enabling, therefore they use misdirection with the “lessening rape” tactic, which is also a clear projection, since they are actually pro-rape. But they support the rape of “bad women” (i.e. women who supposedly get pleasure from violent sexual acts in pornography or prostitution), not of “good women.” To them, the rape of “bad women” needs to remain hidden, and they do so through talking about the rape of “good women,” a standard divide-and-conquer tactic (“we’re not like them so we need to respect their choice, although we would never make that choice ourselves”).

Childism has its own misdirection in the form of “stranger danger,” an old propaganda line which states that children must be protected from strangers trying to kidnap them. Clearly, children getting kidnapped is an extremely bad thing, but the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children reports that only 3% of its kidnapping cases are caused by strangers. The vast majority of children are kidnapped by a parent, caretaker, or acquaintance. So there is another misdirection here: our attention is directed towards people who we can easily imagine as dangerous kidnappers, strangers with candy, while the real danger is the parents and people close to the family.

The same thing is true of assault and abuse against children in general. For instance, parents are far more likely to spank a child than anyone else, but we are told that spanking is not “really” criminal and that it prevents children from becoming criminals later in life. That may be so, although I rather doubt it, but either way this hides the truth that parents are the real danger. By directing our attention to the idea of strangers as the source of danger, they distract us from the fact that the vast majority of abuses take place within the home. In this generation, parents are reported to be afraid of letting their children play outside: I fear for the children who are stuck inside, with the people who are most likely to assault them.

But there is, again, this divide-and-conquer mechanism: we need to “discipline” the “bad children” so they don’t end up as criminals on the street. “Good children,” that is to say, obedient children, have nothing to fear. So the standard story has a “good child” get kidnapped by a sinister stranger with candy, as a way to divert attention to all the abuse inflicted on “bad children.”

Racism has its own misdirection, at least in the United States: we call it the politics of respectability, the principle by which black people need to “clean up their act” by erasing the behaviors and language proper to black American culture in order to gain respectability. According to this principle, it is the people who adopt black culture, meaning that they speak black English, listen to rap, use drugs, or wear their pants low, who are oppressing black people. If these people were to be “reformed,” then black people would be respected and racism would end.

This is another clear example of both misdirection and divide-and-conquer tactics. It is clearly not black culture that is putting millions of black people in jail, segregating their housing, or raising their unemployment rates. All of these points have to do with the massive systemic racism wielded by the power elite (which is 95% white) in order to keep black Americans as second-class citizens, which both affords white people some protection from the worst of the State and, as we’ve seen historically, prevents solidarity between white workers and black workers.

Again we have the division between good and bad black people, the former being those who adopt white culture and are “unthreatening,” and the latter being those who adopt black culture and are “threatening” to white people (such as how police officer Darren Wilson described an unarmed 18 year old who was one inch taller than him as a “demon” and a “Hulk Hogan” who he had to shoot because he was “bulking up”). I think there are two parts to that: one is that it’s easier for the privileged to divide the oppressed against each other, and another is that it’s easier for the oppressed to go after each other than to go after the privileged.

Also, it’s easier to maintain your moral status if you’re going after “bad” people, and I think childism has a lot to do with that. From the youngest age, we learn to associate obedience with goodness, and disobedience with badness. I’ve talked about this in regards to the obedience circuit: we are all indoctrinated to support authority and go after its victims. This applies to everyone; even people like me (and, I presume, you), who hate authority, adopt their position as a reaction to that indoctrination.

Yet another factor is the fact that we all want to believe that we live in a just world, that people who are abused somehow must deserve it. Because if they didn’t deserve it, then it could happen to us, too. And that’s a very scary thought. But the premise that it only happens to “bad people” is satisfying to us, at a conscious or subconscious level (I admit that even I get this sometimes), because we know we’re not “bad people,” and therefore it can’t happen to us.

So while it appears that pornography and prostitution, child abuse, and systemic racism, are unrelated, isolated issues, they do partake of the same impulses within the human psyche, and their supporters use basically the same tactics. All these issues are strongly related.

6 thoughts on “Some ways in which people use misdirection to erase abuse.

  1. John Doe January 13, 2017 at 17:16

    Whenever people like me get abused whether it’s because they don’t believe in God or question there sexuality, it always comes back to whether or not it’s a simple opinion. I try telling these people over and over again that whether or not they agree with my so called lifestyle is totally irrelevent.

  2. ukielady January 13, 2017 at 22:26

    “This applies to everyone; even people like me (and, I presume, you), who hate authority, adopt their position as a reaction to that indoctrination.”

    You bring up so many good points, overall I guess the message is that someone has to be blamed for something/everything. I myself blame the “power elite (which is 95% white)” for every single goddamned problem that exists on this earth.

    School is the institution where every single one of us begin our brainwashing. We get treated like little robots, we all have to learn at the same time, at the same rate, with the same curriculum, no matter what the kid prefers or shows talent/abilites for. It’s an unfair system right from the start.

    I can remember being so bored in school at 9 years old (and getting shit for daydreaming because what the hell is a bored kid suppose to do?) and come to think of it, that’s the age I became antinatalist ( I just didn’t know what it was called then). I was so angry when my high school counsellor (male and white) told me that my desire to be a commercial artist would “interfere with my ability to be a mother”…even though I insisted I wasn’t going to have children. He’s dead now. And I did end up in the art biz, so fuck him I guess…

    I am willing to bet that every single antinatalist / gay / or anyone considered a ‘maverick’ in this world has been subjected to “violent reactions” frequently, daily, or has to be on guard for it at all times. Especially as a woman, I have a difficultly with other women who trash other women /me for their/my choices but I understand that everyone who lives on this cesspit of a planet is some kind of wounded soul in some way or form. Even MRA’s/red pillers I guess haha, although I really, strongly, dislike those dudes.

    And speaking of stupid…Re your blog Parenting makes you stupid: Give my regards to your friend as I feel bad for her raising a son on this shit hole of a planet. There are no ways to avoid his indoctrine into manipulations of this world, no matter how she raises him, no matter how she locks down his cell phone/computer/tv etc. But if she does have good ideas, I would love to hear them.

    Thank you for your blog Francois, I’ve been lurking here quite awhile (came by way of another blog), your writing really appeals to me and my inner ‘maverickness’ lol. Look forward to reading more in the future. Feel free to edit my post if necessary.

    • Francois Tremblay January 14, 2017 at 02:03

      Thank you ukielady, I’m glad you like this blog! Welcome!

      I agree with you about schools. Schools of course are perfectly designed to indoctrinate children and turn them into authoritarian puppets. And that’s what we observe when they grow up: children generally start pretty egalitarian and end up being, well, like the average person (I suspect this is worse in the US than elsewhere because the US is more collectivist)..

      I have no problem with other people regarding antinatalism. Then again, I don’t talk to a lot of people about these issues. The most trouble I get about it comes from the silly misunderstandings by other people, mainly because antinatalism is so little known that people don’t really understand what they’re trying to refute.

      In case you don’t know, I have an antinatalist category if you want to read all of those entries (it’s the drop-down menu on the right side, under the search box).

  3. ukielady January 14, 2017 at 13:47

    Hi Francois, actually it was antinatalism that brought me here and after spending many hours on that subject, I stayed for the plethora of other posts. Thank you. I especially enjoyed the link on how to deprogram yourself, actually reminded me of a similar book I read about 15 years ago called “how to live free in an unfree world” by Harry Browne.

    I am not American, I reside in central Alberta but I do travel to the good ol’ USA once a year and agree with you that people there are definitely more collectivist than here in Canada. It should be interesting to see what happens politically and economically here in the next couple of years though. Do you have any predictions?

    I myself also don’t talk to anyone about anything resembling over-population et al (DGR). Not unless they believe themselves, very rare in this part of the country where I am (the majority of dumb red-necked blue-collared alcoholic prairie beasts). I don’t particularly have a lot of patience when it comes to intellectual laziness/dishonesty etc. either.

    • Francois Tremblay January 14, 2017 at 16:22

      Always nice to meet another antinatalist. There are so few of us on the Internet. Although hopefully that will change as the subject is talked about.

      I used to be into Harry Browne. Cried when he died. But that was more than ten years ago :)

  4. ukielady January 14, 2017 at 14:29

    Actually, don’t quote me on the author of how to live free in an unfree world, for some reason that name came to me regarding the subject…

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: