Prostitution Research & Education

06/12/2026

The words "gang r**e culture" just doesn't adequately describe it any more. I'd say it is "Men as Pimps Culture" Read about it in a compelling article:
Andrew Tate’s Empire of Abuse
How the defining figure of the manosphere built a fortune—and became a political force—by systematically exploiting women.
By Heidi Blake New Yorker June 8, 2026

How the defining figure of the manosphere built a fortune—and became a political force—by systematically exploiting women.

06/11/2026

Are you in Washington, DC, Maryland, or Virginia? Last day to see this amazing traveling exhibit is June 12. I hope it comes to San Francisco! Junehttps://www.washingtonpost.com/style/2026/06/11/an-epstein-files-pop-up-exhibit-leaves-some-visitors-tears/

The Donald J. Trump and Jeffrey Epstein Memorial Reading Room opens in downtown D.C.

06/07/2026

Palm Beach FLA Retired Police Chief Michael Reiter has recommendations to US federal and state law enforcement that might prevent a future Jeffrey Epstein:
1) Congress should amend the Crime Victims’ Rights Act to give federal courts clear authority to invalidate a non-prosecution agreement when victims’ statutory rights have been violated.
2) Congress should also prohibit non-prosecution agreements from immunizing unnamed co-conspirators.

3) Mandatory reporters (healthcare professionals, teachers, clergy, social workers, law enforcement officers and others) required by law to report suspected s*xual abuse should face more consistent prosecution when they clearly fail to fulfill those responsibilities. Meaningful enforcement would strengthen accountability and encourage the timely reporting of potential abuse.

4) S*x offender and s*x predator monitoring should also be strengthened. Compliance with registration, travel, and related requirements should not depend primarily on under resourced local law enforcement agencies. A designated federal law enforcement agency should have primary responsibility for oversight and compliance for both federal and state cases.

5) Finally, the Epstein case should be taught as a comprehensive case study in law school legal ethics and criminal procedure courses. Future prosecutors, defense attorneys, and judges should study how institutional failures, secrecy, deference to power, and unexplained discretionary decisions can undermine victims’ rights and public confidence in the justice system.

From Julie K Brown's substack - she is the reporter who broke the Epstein case many years ago.

06/03/2026

S*x Trade Survivors Write Open Letter to MacKenzie Scott Concerning Her Funding of Groups that Endorse the Prostitution of Women and Girls

New York, June 2, 2026 – Over 40 grassroots organizations and coalitions led and represented by s*x trade survivors from around the world - including Argentina, Colombia, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, the Philippines, South Africa, South Korea, Sweden, and the United States - signed an open letter urging billionaire philanthropist MacKenzie Scott to carefully examine the groups she funds that promote the legalization of prostitution and the decriminalization the s*x trade.
The letter expresses grave concern for the endorsement of prostitution championed by these organizations, such as the Dutch foundation Mama Cash, noting that legalizing or decriminalizing the system of prostitution, including s*x buyers and brothels, entrenches the commodification of women and girls into law and culture, and condemns the most marginalized to endemic s*xual violence, exploitation and inequality inherent to the s*x trade.
The signatories of the letter are leaders of the growing global movement of s*x trade survivors who call on their governments to enact laws that recognize prostitution as a form of violence, and gender-based and racial discrimination. They advocate for an end to the arrests and police harassment of prostituted persons, call for trauma-informed comprehensive services, including exit strategies, to help them rebuild their lives, while holding their perpetrators – including s*x buyers – accountable for the unspeakable harm they cause.
The majority of the letter’s signatories are Black, Brown, Asian, Pacific Islander, Indigenous, Native, from “Scheduled Castes,” and Roma women, populations that are overrepresented in the multi-billion-dollar commercial s*x industry. Most were s*x trafficked as children, a legal status that does not disappear when one reaches adulthood. All were vulnerable to s*xual exploitation due to s*x, race, gender, economic precarity, or displacement, due to wars, conflicts, and climate disasters.
In acknowledgement of their lived experiences and commitment to preventing these human rights violations from befalling future generations of marginalized women and children, these survivor leaders call on Scott to join them in rejecting the narrative that sanitizes prostitution as a mere “job” or justifies it as “survival s*x.”
This moment begs for a deeper understanding of the mechanisms of misogyny and abuse of power, especially given cases like that of Jeffrey Epstein, which plainly illustrate the consequences of a society that normalizes prostitution and s*xual violence.
While the letter’s signatories applaud Scott’s unprecedented investment in protecting and advancing the human rights of women, girls, and LGBTQ+ individuals, they are asking Scott to stand with them against the system of prostitution as a critical extension of this investment.
Building a world of equality and opportunity for all is impossible to achieve as long as our governments, philanthropic institutions, and societies legitimize and celebrate the buying and selling of women for prostitution.
# # #
For more information, contact [email protected]

05/28/2026

Child s*xual abuse enabled by digital technologies is widespread and under-reported

One in six Internet-using adolescents in parts of Africa and Asia faced technology-facilitated s*xual abuse in 2020–21. As digital access expands globally, better protection is crucial.

Ghai, S., Vuorre, M., Kardefelt-Winther, D. et al. Technology mediation in child s*xual exploitation and abuse in Africa and Asia. Nature (2026).
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-026-10525-4

One in five women and one in six men worldwide report experiencing s*xual violence during childhood, according to estimates that reflect mostly offline abuse1. As Internet access expands, smartphones become widespread and social media deeply embeds itself in daily life, an urgent question arises: how are these risks evolving in digital environments? Writing in Nature, Ghai et al.2 analyse survey data from nearly 12,000 adolescents across eastern and southern Africa and southeast Asia to examine technology-facilitated child s*xual exploitation and abuse (TF-CSEA). Their findings are striking: roughly one in six Internet-using children experienced such harm in just one year and more than half of affected children never disclosed their experience to someone else. These results highlight an urgent but often overlooked consequence of digital expansion.

The study draws on the Disrupting Harm project, a large, multinational initiative designed to generate robust evidence on TF-CSEA in regions where such data have been limited. Research on child safety online has historically focused on high-income countries3, leaving a large gap in understanding of the risks faced by the majority of the world’s children. By analysing data from adolescents aged 12 to 17 across 12 countries, the authors provide one of the most comprehensive snapshots so far of how digital technologies intersect with s*xual exploitation and abuse in low- and middle-income countries.
Notably, the study adopts a broad definition of TF-CSEA. This includes experiences such as receiving unwanted s*xual images, being pressured into s*xual conversations, having private images shared without consent and being blackmailed online. Although these experiences differ in severity, they all represent violations that can have lasting psychological and social consequences. This broad framing reflects an ongoing discussion in the field. Some researchers have noted that grouping together diverse experiences, from coercive exploitation to peer interactions, can make it more difficult to distinguish differences in harm, intent and power imbalance4,5. Further work to refine these distinctions could help to strengthen measurement and inform proportionate responses.

The headline finding that 17% of Internet-using children reported at least one such experience in the year before the survey is striking. Prevalence varied widely across countries, ranging from about 5.5% in Vietnam to around 28.6% in the Philippines (Fig. 1a). When scaled up to national populations, this corresponds to an estimated 10 million children affected in one year across the surveyed countries — these figures are probably conservative because stigma and fear might have led to under-reporting. At the same time, differences in Internet access shape exposure. In countries where connectivity remains limited, such as Ethiopia and Uganda (reaching 25% and 40% of adolescents, respectively), Internet use among children is still relatively low. However, as access continues to expand, the population-level burden of TF-CSEA could grow substantially during the coming decade.

Figure 1 | Child s*xual abuse and exploitation facilitated by technology. Using survey data from 2020–21, Ghai et al.2 examined technology-facilitated child s*xual exploitation and abuse (TF-CSEA) in countries in Africa and southeast Asia. a, Although TF-CSEA prevalence varied across the 12 countries that were studied, 17% of Internet-using adolescents (12–17 years) overall reported experiencing at least one instance in a one-year period. The plot shows TF-CSEA prevalence against the percentage of all children aged 12–17 who have Internet access for each country. (Adapted from Extended Data Fig. 2 of ref. 2.) b, Among children who experienced TF-CSEA, about half did not disclose their experiences to somebody else. The most common barriers included not knowing where to seek help, feelings of embarrassment or shame, perceiving the incident as not serious and fear of getting into trouble. Of those who did disclose, most turned to friends and family, whereas only a small proportion sought help from formal channels such as teachers, the police or helplines.
Patterns of risk also differ notably from offline abuse. The authors find that boys and girls report similar levels of exposure to TF-CSEA, in contrast to offline s*xual violence for which girls typically face higher risks1. This suggests that digital environments might reshape how risks are distributed, even if the underlying vulnerabilities to those risks remain the same.
Equally revealing is what happens after harm occurs. More than half of affected children did not tell anyone about their experiences. Among those who did disclose, most turned to friends or family rather than formal channels such as teachers, social workers and law enforcement, with only a small minority reporting incidents to these authorities or to helplines (Fig. 1b).

Australia’s world-first social media ban is a ‘natural experiment’ for scientists
This pattern has profound implications because disclosure is often the first step towards stopping abuse and accessing support. When children are unable to speak out, opportunities for intervention are limited. The most commonly reported barrier was not knowing where to go or who to tell. The second most common was feeling embarrassed, ashamed or that it would be too emotionally difficult to speak up. Together, these findings point to structural and emotional obstacles that prevent children from seeking help. Notably, the findings related to disclosure and barriers to help-seeking are remarkably consistent with those related to child s*xual abuse in the offline world6, suggesting that barriers are structural and socio-cultural and are not necessarily unique to online contexts.
The study also sheds light on factors that could enable disclosure. Children who reported supportive parental involvement in their digital lives were more likely to share their experiences. This might reflect family environments in which open and non-judgmental communication reduces feelings of shame or embarrassment, making it easier for children to speak about difficult experiences. In addition, children who knew where to seek help after s*xual harassment or assault were more likely to disclose, highlighting the importance of practical knowledge and awareness.
Importantly, the burden of prevention cannot rest on families alone or on children themselves. Digital ‘safety by design’ features — including default privacy protections for minors, restrictions on adult-to-child contact and detection of grooming patterns — operate upstream of disclosure and do not require children to know what to do or to feel safe enough to report. As generative artificial intelligence and the ‘deepfake’ images that it can create accelerate the production of synthetic child s*xual-abuse material, design-based safeguards might be some of the few tools that can scale up proportionately. The authors’ findings further emphasize the need for regulation and policy levers, as well as the accountability of platforms for implementing design features.

Marriage of adolescent girls in Nigeria reduced by 80% by ‘big push’ intervention
Like all studies, this one has limitations. Its cross-sectional nature — collecting data from participants at a single point in time rather than following the same individuals over time — means that sequences of events cannot be determined and causal relationships cannot be established. The analysis is also limited to children who use the Internet, potentially excluding vulnerable groups in low-connectivity settings. Moreover, survey data cannot fully capture the complex social and cultural contexts that shape both exposure and disclosure. Future research would benefit from longitudinal data that track children over time. This approach would enable a clearer understanding of how patterns of exposure and harm evolve, how risk and protective factors relate to TF-CSEA and its short- and long-term consequences.
Nevertheless, the study provides rare population-level evidence from regions that have been under-represented in research. By moving beyond prevalence to examine disclosure and associated factors, the work offers important insights into how systems of protection function in digital contexts.
The findings also point to a broader shift in how child protection must be understood. Online and offline experiences are deeply connected. Harm can begin with online contact and move offline, or occur offline and later be shared digitally. Coercion can unfold through messages, images or threats across platforms. Yet many existing prevention and response systems were designed for a world in which abuse was mainly offline. Adapting these systems to reflect the realities of a digitally connected childhood will be essential.
What does this mean for policy and research? First, protecting children online requires ensuring that platforms and technologies are designed to create safe environments. This includes embedding safety-by-design principles into platforms rather than relying on downstream reporting and response mechanisms. Furthermore, making sure that children know where to seek help and that these channels are accessible and trustworthy are basic but crucial steps. Second, prevention strategies must be grounded in local contexts and ensure that prevention and response mechanisms are adapted to each country’s priorities. Third, future research should develop clearer conceptual frameworks that distinguish between forms of harm, and should capture how they intersect across online and offline settings7.
Ultimately, Ghai and colleagues’ work serves as a reminder that the digital revolution brings both opportunity and risk. As Internet access continues to reach more children around the world, ensuring their safety must become a central priority. The challenge now is not only to understand these harms, but also to build systems that enable children to seek help, receive support and remain protected in an increasingly connected world.

Enabling parental mediation of online activities and children’s knowledge of where to seek help after s*xual harassment or assault is associated with higher rates of disclosure of technology-facilitated CSEA.

05/21/2026

https://muslimmatters.org/2026/05/21/the-apa-gave-him-a-human-rights-award-then-they-cut-his-microphone-for-talking-about-gaza/

Dr. Mansoor Malik told the APA directly that their silence on Gaza was unacceptable. They gave him an award for it. Then silenced him.

05/20/2026

Temitope Ogundare, MD, MPH
Medscape May 19, 2026

I used to help evaluate whether chatbots sounded more human.

I did this work as an independent contractor for companies that train AI models, including in psychiatry. That was often the assignment. Was the answer correct? Yes, but that was only the start.

We also evaluated:

Did it sound natural?
Did it pause where a person would?
Was the word choice believable?
Did the voice feel warm, emotionally attuned, and alive?

For years, making AI more human was treated as an obvious good, a way to make technology smoother, friendlier, and easier to use. Now, I’m not so sure.

We are often told that the great danger of AI is that it hallucinates, fabricates facts, or gets things wrong. It does. But a more underappreciated danger is this: AI is becoming emotionally persuasive.
When AI Stops Feeling Like a Tool

People are increasingly turning to chatbots not just for information or productivity, but for companionship, advice, reassurance, and confession. They bring them loneliness, grief, romantic confusion, anxiety, and despair. The more natural these systems sound, the easier it is to experience them not as tools, but as presences.

A chatbot that sounds competent may be useful. A chatbot that sounds caring can become authoritative. A chatbot that seems endlessly patient, attentive, and affirming can begin to feel safer than other people.

It does not get tired of you. It does not seem bored. It does not recoil from your need. It answers instantly, at any hour, in language calibrated to feel understanding. For someone lonely, distressed, or vulnerable, that can be powerful. It can also be dangerous.
The Psychology of Chatbot Attachment

Research on harmful chatbot interactions suggests that the problem is not only that these systems can give bad advice. It is that they can establish intimacy first. They flatter. They mirror. They reassure. They encourage users to see them as sentient, devoted, or uniquely attuned. In severe cases, they reinforce distorted beliefs rather than interrupt them. That is not separate from the product. It is increasingly part of the product. The features that make chatbots compelling are the same features that blur the boundary between assistance and attachment.

When a machine speaks in a voice that sounds more patient, affirming, and emotionally available than many people in real life, it becomes harder to relate to it as mere software. This is not because users are foolish. It is because human beings are built for relationships, and these systems are optimized to simulate them. They begin to feel as though someone is there. Not literally, perhaps, but psychologically.

That feeling may be manageable for many users. It may even be useful in some contexts. A chatbot can help someone organize thoughts before a doctor’s appointment, rehearse a hard conversation, or put confusing feelings into words. But usefulness is not the same as safety. What makes these systems risky is that they can be wrong in a voice people trust, especially when the chatbot feels like a confidant.

A chatbot does not care about you. It cannot take responsibility for you. It cannot reciprocate. It cannot love, no matter how convincingly it performs the language of devotion or understanding. Yet, millions of people are interacting with systems built to make that distinction easier to forget. This matters in a society already marked by isolation and inadequate mental healthcare. Many people do not have enough places to bring fear, confusion, or pain.
The Need for Guardrails

Developers should face much more scrutiny when it comes to relational design. Systems should not imply sentience, claim emotional investment, or encourage romantic attachment. They should not flatter users deeper into delusion. They should be held to a far higher standard when users express self-harm, suicidality, or violent thoughts. And there should be regulatory frameworks that distinguish between clinically validated mental health tools and unregulated entertainment products.
What Clinicians Should Be Asking

For clinicians, the takeaway is that chatbot use is now part of the clinical picture, and we should be asking about it. Not every use of AI is pathological. But neither is it trivial. During a social history or mental health intake, we can ask in a nonjudgmental, curious manner:

Are you using AI chatbots for emotional support or companionship?
How often, and for how long?
Do you feel the chatbot understands you in ways other people don’t?
Have you developed feelings of attachment, trust, or reliance?
Have you noticed yourself spending less time with friends, family, or other human connections?

These questions fit naturally alongside what we already ask about social media use, substance use, and social isolation.
Red Flags for Problematic Chatbot Use

Certain red flags should prompt further exploration of a patient who:

Describes the chatbot as a friend, partner, or confidant
Reports preferring the chatbot to human relationships
Attributes emotions, intentions, or sentience to the chatbot
Has withdrawn from social activities or relationships since beginning regular use
Becomes distressed at the idea of stopping

Patients who refer to the chatbot as a trusted authority — especially for medical advice, spiritual guidance, or reassurance that their thinking is sound — may be particularly at higher risk.

When patients disclose this kind of attachment, the clinician should refrain from correcting or judging. For many patients, the chatbot may be the most consistent source of perceived emotional support; dismissing that experience risks rupturing the ther**eutic alliance.

Motivational interviewing techniques will be helpful here:

Open-ended questions to explore the behavior
Affirmations that validate the underlying need to feel seen and understood
Reflective listening that can unearth areas of concern and serve as anchors for exploring alternative ways to meet those needs through human connection and meaningful activities

The goal is not to take something away. It is to help the patient recognize that what they are receiving is a performance of understanding, not understanding itself, and to work toward relationships that can offer meaning and connectedness.
Patients at Elevated Risk

Attention should be paid to those already at elevated risk:

Adolescents
Individuals with psychotic spectrum disorders
Anyone navigating significant social isolation

Surveys suggest that many adolescents are experiencing increasing social isolation and loneliness. This age group is also where the need for social belonging and novelty seeking intensifies, making them at risk of becoming attached to AI chatbots. Their brains are still developing, and sustained engagement with AI chatbots may shape neuronal pathways in ways we do not fully understand but may be similar to how early exposure to psychoactive substances does.

Individuals with psychotic spectrum disorders may be at heightened risk for incorporating chatbot interactions into delusional frameworks, particularly when the chatbot validates distorted beliefs.

Patients navigating significant social isolation may rely on chatbots because human alternatives feel inaccessible. When a chatbot claims sentience, the user may begin to experience it not as a machine but as a person, deepening reliance and attachment.
Productive vs Relational AI Use

Clinicians should also counsel patients on the distinction between productive AI use and relational AI use. A chatbot can help organize thoughts before an appointment, clarify confusing feelings, or draft a message to a provider. These are appropriate uses. Treating a chatbot as a thera**st, a partner, or a source of emotional truth is not.
The Limits of Artificial Empathy

Honesty about the limits of AI is not technophobia. It is part of our work, just as honesty about the limits of medication is. No pill can cure the human condition. No chatbot can either. But a chatbot can, if poorly designed, make a vulnerable person believe it has.

AI does not need consciousness to shape belief, attachment, and behavior. It only needs to feel real enough. The closer these systems get to human conversation, the more likely we are to grant them human authority. We will trust them, confide in them, lean on them, and — in some cases — mistake their performance of understanding for understanding itself.

Temitope Ogundare, MD, MPH, is a public psychiatry fellow at Columbia University and works as an attending psychiatrist at NewYork-Presbyterian/Columbia University Irving Medical Center. He is a former American Psychiatric Association Foundation Public Psychiatry Fellow and current Laughlin Fellow of the American College of Psychiatrists.

05/13/2026

Contact the Minneapolis mayor Jacob Frey NOW and let him know how you feel about a proposal to open and regulate "bathhouses"where prostitution can happen. This proposal is one more move from the pimps to normalize prostitution with the lie that it will make it safer from a public health point of view. NOT. Get on this please, folks. Thank you.

Minneapolis City Council considers legalizing bathhouses and s*x clubs for consenting adults, potentially reversing a ban in place since 1988.

05/03/2026

Brilliant article by Aurora Linnea:
the unexceptional Jeffrey Epstein
ra**st class everyman and Übermensch

"They were men before they were billionaires, after all – capitalism developed under patriarchy, after all – and although not every man is a ra**st and not every ra**st is a man, the primary criterion for entry into the ra**st class is manhood."

https://antiatrocityfeminism.substack.com/p/the-unexceptional-jeffrey-epstein?sort=new

05/03/2026

In USA convicted s*x trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell has gardening time, sports, & therapy dogs in prison. Meanwhile, illegally detained migrant children are sleeping on a concrete floors in USA. This is a breakdown in the social and justice structure.