UPDATE: June 30, 2024 / The BioPsychoSocial Quicksand Model™ is still based on psychological, social and biological aspects of coercive control, but the name has now been shortened to The Quicksand Model™
As I continue research and consultation with other experts in the fields of coercive control within domestic abuse, cults, extremist groups, human trafficking, gangs, trauma, betrayal trauma and coercive violence, I continually tweak my PsychoSocial Quicksand Model™ of coercive control to reflect emerging aspects and missing elements from early conceptualization of the model. The fields of coercive control and trauma, in particular, are growing rapidly, and every day I discover new research that supports the model and brings additional insights that are important to include.
While working with targeted victim/survivors of coercive control I have come to realize that a critical aspect of coercive control is missing from my model's name. I coined the term PsychoSocial Quicksand™ in 2021 to describe the psychological and social tactics & strategies coercive controllers use to trap target/victims in a confusing and terrifying situation, inescapable without assistance. But I left something out, and I don't mind admitting that what I left out is really important. Today I will remedy this exclusion.
In addition to the psychological and social aspects of coercive control that are used to entrap targets, there are also ways that a target's biology is weaponized against them, and is harmed by coercive control.
Civil, criminal and family courts are lagging way behind at incorporating research into their policies and practices. Through research we know that the single incident model of physical violence is NOT working. This perspective lacks the proper framework to protect victims and hold perpetrators accountable, for several reasons. Firstly, our courts see physical violence, and the harm it causes the victim, as the only important aspect of domestic abuse. Many risk assessments focus exclusively on hitting, kicking, slapping, pushing, strangling, "choking", etc. However, this is a very limited perspective and is not in alignment with targeted victim's experiences.
Physical violence does cause physical harm, but what about the coercive controller's tactics that cause physical harm without ever laying a hand on the victim? This is another aspect of the single incident model of physical violence that causes problems. Domestic abuse, and coercive control, are not single incidents. They are patterns of behavior, occurring over time, and including many different types of abuse... not just physical violence. From research we know that psychological abuse, emotional abuse, litigious abuse, financial abuse, weaponizing children etc., all aspects of coercive control, cause physical harm. These harms are caused mainly by the toxic chronic stress created for the victim by the coercive controller.
We have known for decades that trauma and toxic stress damages the body's nervous system, the system that regulates the body's fight, flight, freeze or fawn response. It also negatively impacts our body's immune system, our cognitive abilities, our hormone regulation, and our brain. Toxic stress and trauma increases inflammation in the body, which can increase numerous disease processes, including artery and heart damage and auto-immune diseases. Trauma, which coercive control inevitably causes, if left unaddressed, can cause significant physical changes to the body and brain. These are physical impacts. They are biological harms, and in my opinion, means that coercive control, whether physical contact is made or not, is a form of Physical Violence.
Targeted victim/survivors of coercive control often develop numerous physical health problems from being subjected to the coercive controller's tactics, strategies and betrayal. It is time that we recognize these harmful impacts and begin to hold perpetrators of coercive control responsible for the enormous physical and biological damage they are doing to the target.
With these factors in mind, I would like to announce a name change for my model from The PsychoSocial Quicksand Model™ to The BioPsychoSocial Quicksand™ (BPSQM™). (I have also added two new Doubles, Double Cross and Double Team, which I alluded to in a previous post, and which I will explain in future posts).
If you have been impacted by BioPsychoSocial Quicksand™ resulting from a coercive controller's coercive control, I want you to know that you are not alone, and you are not to blame! Coercive controllers are 100% responsible for their coercive control AND for any and ALL damage caused by their behavior. Just because the court doesn't understand this yet, does not mean that you have to live within their inaccurate reality of the single incident model of physical violence. Instead, you can frame your perspective using the BioPsychoSocial Quicksand Model™ of Coercive Control which, in addition to teaching easy ways to detect and prevent coercive control, also advocates that we #PartnerWithSurvivors and #PivotToThePerpetrator (two concepts incorporated from the Safe & Together Institute's Model).
Stay tune for the new Doubles, Double Cross and Double Team.
The feelings of hopelessness and helplessness caused by coercive control can be overwhelming, anxiety, terror, and depression-inducing, and often result in PTSD or CPTSD.
Coercive control can also be life-threatening and life-altering.
I have known for a long time that coercive control creates suicidal ideation, because I have experienced it myself many times. Every survivor that I have asked about suicidal feelings has indicated that they experienced them, at some point, as well. This happens, not only because of the direct coercive control of the coercive controller, but also because, when the target tries to escape the PsychoSocial Quicksand™ they are trapped in, they often encounter biases and #SystemicCoerciveControl where they are not believed and are instead blamed for their own victimization.
When I was married to a coercive controller, I became so physically, emotionally, psychologically and financially bankrupt from his sadistic and inescapable coercive control that I not only felt suicidal during the day, I also began having vivid nightmares of killing myself. In one particularly terrifying nightmare, I died by suicide in a graphic and bloody way, specifically so that my coercive controller would be forced to clean up the mess. (Yes... being victimized by a coercive controller can make a targeted victim feel angry and outraged that someone who claims to love them is terrorizing them). By this point, it was obvious that he was not going to stop his coercive control, and if I attempted to escape again, he would likely escalate to killing me, (and maybe even my kids).
Once, during this time, while driving, I contemplated swerving off an overpass to escape the PsychoSocial Quicksand™ he had trapped me in. What stopped me was the thought that I might injure or kill innocent people in the process. My life had become so constrained, terrifying and painful, because of my coercive controller's threats, deception and torture, that I was only concerned for the lives of strangers and no longer wanted to live my own. During this time I also came to believe that my children would be better off if I were gone. After all, he would have no desire to torture them as a way to punish me, if I were no longer alive to watch. My life had become a living nightmare, and I was willing to do almost anything to wake up.
Maybe this is how Catherine Youssef Kassenoff felt. Maybe it is how Kellie Sutton felt. Research indicates that domestic abuse / domestic violence strongly correlate with suicidal ideation for targeted victims. Jane Monckton Smith's domestic homicide timeline, used to detect and prevent domestic abuse homicide, ends with stage 8, homicide / suicide. In the cases of suicide, stage 8 often occurs due to systemic failures which cause victims to feel so trapped that they resort to what they perceive as their last remaining #ActOfResistance, death by suicide.
TRIGGER WARNING: Proceed with caution when watching this video. #DomesticAbuseSuicide
#IAmCatherine #IAmKellie
Contact the Suicide & Crisis Lifeline for help in the US. In the UK, click here.
UPDATE: June 30, 2024 / The PsychoSocial Quicksand Model™ is still based on psychological, social and biological aspects of coercive control, but the name has now been shortened to The Quicksand Model™
The terms victim and target will be used interchangeably to indicate that victims are not to blame, and are most often directly targeted by coercive controllers.
Coercive controllers use multiple tactics and strategies of coercive control to dominate their targets using the PsychoSocial Quicksand™. These strategies can be as straight-forward as physically forcing their target into submission, through physical violence, or as subtle and sophisticated as The Mirage™.
The coercive controller's strategic plan to dominate targeted victims using the PsychoSocial Quicksand™ of coercive control include strategic phases called The 5 Es. Don't think of The 5 Es as linear, because their use is much more flexible than that. The coercive controller may use the phases in order, but usually, these strategies are like tools in a coercively controlling toolbox. The coercive controller selects the tool or tools that best fit the task at hand. If one doesn't accomplish what the coercive controller is after, they may switch to another phase seamlessly, even combining phases to overwhelm a particularly strong and savvy target.
1. Ensnare - in this phase the coercive controller ensnares the targeted victim in a trance using The Mirage™ (The Mirage™ is the first half of the Double Cross, which I will cover in a future blog).
2. Entrap - coercive controllers begin introducing, usually slowly, but sometimes quite rapidly, the tactics of Double Standards, Double Binds, Double Speak, Double Think, Double Cross & DARVO. If the coercive controller uses the tactic of Double Team (aka enlisting flying monkeys) early on, it is often done secretly, behind the target's back, and therefore, is invisible (see Double Team explained in a future blog).
3. Exploit - once the target / victim has been ensnared and entrapped, the coercive controller can more easily exploit the victim for their resources, and use of the Doubles and DARVO often increase (this can become incredibly oppressive and, in the extreme, is akin to modern day slavery).
4. Prevent Escape through Escalation - targets often begin to wake up to the fact that they are being exploited, and sometimes resist. This makes it necessary for the coercive controller to escalate their use of the Doubles and DARVO in order to prevent their target from escaping the PsychoSocial Quicksand™, so they can continue to exploit them. If physical violence has not been used by the coercive controller previously, a victim using #ActsOfResistance, can lead a coercive controller to escalate to physical violence. This is especially true if the target separates from the coercive controller. Research shows that separation is the most dangerous time for a targeted victim.
5. Eradicate - if the target somehow manages to escape the PsychoSocial Quicksand™, the coercive controller will either attempt to Re-Entrance the target back into the PsychoSocial Quicksand™ or Eradicate them altogether (eradication correlates with stages 6, 7 & 8 of the 8 stages of domestic violence homicide/suicide).
To ensnare a target, coercive controllers use of three highly manipulative and deceptive tactics: mirroring, future-faking, and manipulative kindness (aka love-bombing). These three tactics, especially when used together, combine to form an illusion intended to override critical thinking and put the target into a trance-like state. I call this combination of tactics The Mirage™. While the target is being ensnared by The Mirage™, they are tricked, as if by magic (neuromagic to be specific) into seeing the coercive controller as their hero and/or soul-mate. The Mirage™ is critical for laying the foundation for the other phases of the coercive controller's plan.
Let's take a look at how The Mirage™ in the Ensnare phase works.
The Mirage™ consists of combining the powerful tactics of mirroring, manipulative kindness (love-bombing) and future-faking, which coercive controllers use to facilitate the first phase of the PsychoSocial Quicksand Model's™ strategy, Ensnare.
During mirroring the coercive controller imitates the "gesture, speech pattern, or attitude" of their target. This tactic is commonly used by salespeople to create rapport, and build trust, with another person quickly. Mirroring helps increase liking, one of Robert Cialdini's seven principles of influence.
"Future faking is when someone uses a detailed vision of the future to facilitate the bonding and connection in a romantic relationship", and Manipulative kindness (aka love-bombing) is the use of deceptive, but seemingly loving, kind and/or extravagant gestures of affection and attention to manipulate or influence the target.
When the coercive controller uses all three together the effect is to hijack the target's imagination, values, goals and dreams to quickly cause that person to believe the coercive controller can be trusted and has their best interests at heart. The mirroring and manipulative kindness create the illusion that they are "meant to be together", and the fake future the coercive controller paints causes the target to lose sight of present reality, ignore red flags, and focus instead on The Mirage™ that is hiding the PsychoSocial Quicksand™ lurking behind it, intentionally made invisible. If you are a highly creative and imaginative right-brained person like myself, you will be especially vulnerable to The Mirage™.
It is critical to understand that, first and foremost, The Mirage™ is an intentional use of tactics, part of an overall strategy, to dominate and subjugate the target. Many people still believe the myth that abusers / coercive controllers are unaware of what they are doing. I believed this myself for a long time. Then, once I started to doubt the myth's validity, I still vacillated between knowing I had been intentionally harmed and questioning that reality. This was mainly because of the constant gaslighting I was experiencing, which created my Double Vision. Even after I was finally sure that what I had experienced had been a strategic and sadistic intentional strategy to entrap and exploit me, I was thrust once again into doubt while conducting my research.
Two of my research participants were not convinced that coercive controllers act with intentionality. They had doubts, and their doubts were reasonable, given their experiences. However, after reviewing the interviews and conducting extensive additional research to definitively answer this question, this is what I discovered. As I discussed in previous blogs, there are two tactics that coercive controllers employ that deceive others, and even themselves, into believing their own lies: Double Think and Double Speak. I believe that the reason why so many targeted victims (and outsiders, including therapists) think that coercive controllers are not fully conscious of their actions is because the coercive controllers have so effectively deceived themselves (through Double Think), that when they lie (Double Speak) about their intentions, they often appear genuinely truthful.
Double think is used by coercive controllers to "know but not know". It is a form of self-denial that permits them to temporarily block off or ignore parts of their knowledge and/or memory and claim they don't exist. Double Speak is then the way that Double Think manifests in their words and behaviors, where coercive controllers contradict themselves and use every manner of smoke-screening to avoid the negative truth about themselves.
Coercive controllers words and actions do not match, and while they may be incredibly adept at concealing it, they are fully aware of their own self "denial".
Coercive controllers appear quite authentic when they employ mirroring, manipulative kindness and future-faking to create The Mirage™ for their targeted victim. These three tactics override the target's defenses by removing, or at least reducing, their critical thinking ability, and leave the victim vulnerable to entrapment, exploitation, escalation, and eventually (if the target attempts or escape), eradication!
Did your coercive controller use The Mirage™ to entrance you into PsychoSocial Quicksand™?
NOTE: This blog is written primarily for victimized mothers of coercive control. The statements within are not intended to imply that mothers are never abusive or coercively controlling, or that fathers are never victimized. Some are. However, the majority of coercive control within families is perpetrated by males against adult females and children, so this article focuses primarily on that evidence-based finding.
Let me start by saying that you have the right and the freedom to call these behaviors whatever you choose to call them. The following are my thoughts on the usefulness of using certain terms within the family court system in the US...
Parental Alienation Syndrome, Parental Alienation, and Alienation all refer to a theory created by Richard Gardner, who promoted victim blaming and pedophilia. (Read prior blogs on Parental Alienation here, and here). This theory, which is not evidence-based, refers to one parent intentionally turning the child(ren) against the other parent.
Parental alienation is most often used in custody cases as a legal strategy, where coercively controlling parents (usually fathers) claim that the protective parent (most often the mother) has convinced the children to dislike the father and to make "false" allegations of abuse against him. In other words, parental alienation theory is used to DARVO the court into disbelieving valid abuse allegations and instead reversing the blame for the children's natural fear of the abusive parent onto the adult victim.
There is no valid empirical evidence that mothers make false abuse claims and coach their children to turn against their father. This is a widespread misconception in family court, that false abuse claims are common. They aren't. Research indicates that false allegations of abuse are no more common than false allegations of other crimes. However, the misconception has taken root, co-opting legitimate research regarding alienating behaviors and estrangement.
To be clear, there is evidence that some parents turn their children against the other parent. However, this is most often the case with the coercive controlling parent using the tactics, not the victimized one.
Parental Alienation "experts" sprung up all over the US after Gardner's theory took root, and these "professionals" have been facilitated by the AFCC (Association of Family & Conciliation Courts) and the court evaluators who are indoctrinated into this dangerous theory. The AFCC has been so successful in using parental alienation to remove children from their protective mothers in the US that it has spread to most of the rest of the world. (Do I smell a class action lawsuit?)
On April 13, 2023 the United Nations banned the use of parental alienation theory. Check out what Doreen Ludwig, an expert on Govt-funded Custody Court Systematic Malfeasance, had to say about the AFCC and it's connection to the "father's rights" movement (I call it the abuser's rights movement).
"AFCC members include judges, court employees, legal and mental health practitioners. AFCC’s genius is in this symbiotic relationship between the judiciary and those that profit from positions of appointment (judicial orders for services). An obvious, unethical interdependence reaps enormous profits for those who align themselves within this structure. AFCC’s publications and conferences bring an ever-increasing number of family court dignitaries into the fold. An illusion of legitimacy helps hide a subterranean layer of family court operators – those who willingly commit fraud and align themselves with the more nefarious principles of the father’s rights movement."
There are two main reason not to use the terms parental alienation syndrome, parental alienation, or even the further watered-down term "alienation".
First, we don't want to promote a debunked theory of Parental Alienation, which has led to misconceptions about tactics of child estrangement and primarily functions to remove children from protective parents and give them to abusive coercive controllers (usually fathers). And second, if you are a protective mother, claiming parental alienation is not likely to work for you in court anyway.
Joan Meier's research showed that claiming alienation in family court really only works for fathers (usually coercively controlling fathers). When mothers claimed alienation, in the cases she reviewed, it rarely worked. The AFCC claims parental alienation is non-gendered, but that appears to be another deceptive smokescreen to protect their interests by falsely claiming they are unbiased.
Unfortunately, the wide use of parental alienation theory, and especially this misconception that women lie about abuse, has caused a great deal of confusion for genuine victims of coercive control and domestic abuse who discover the theory on legitimate-sounding web sites promoting its use in family court. Promoters of parental alienation do not come right out and say they function (primarily) to protect coercive controlling abusers from accountability, so when targeted victims of coercive control read articles on parental alienation, they think this is what they are experiencing.
What targeted victims of coercive control are really experiencing is just another tactic of coercive control, where their coercive controller is weaponizing the children, and the unscientific aspect of Gardner's theory, to maintain control over them and/or punish them for daring to leave.
But he IS turning my children against me, if I don't call it Parental Alienation Syndrome, what do I call it?
Great Question! After all, it is well-known to coercive control experts that coercive controllers are divisive and often turn their children against their protective parents in order to further isolate and control both their children and their adult targeted victims. So, when I recommend you NOT use terms related to parental alienation theory, I do so not because alienating children from their parents doesn't occur, but because parental alienation "experts" are using these terms to DARVO family court using deceptive means, and if you want to protect you and your children, while maintaining your integrity, you do not want to associate yourself with these "professionals" or this theory.
Instead I recommend terming it a tactic of coercive control, and more specifically, the term Dr. Emma Katz uses, parent-child relationship sabotage.
Coercive control and parental alienation are diametrically opposed concepts, and coercive control has been widely researched, whereas parental alienation is based purely on Richard Gardner's own ideas. Coercive control research can be found in the related terms of undue influence, brainwashing, mind control, thought reform, coercive persuasion, domestic abuse etc.
While parental alienation relies on a simplistic patriarchal and misogynistic foundation... that women are "vindictive" and lie... coercive control is more nuanced and complex. Coercive control tactics and strategies can be detected and documented, whereas parental alienation is essentially "see, she must have told them to lie about me", and relies on implicit bias and "himpathy". There is no actual evidence supporting this aspect of parental alienation theory... only the suggestion that women are vindictive, and children love their parents, so therefore, if a child does not want to spend time with a parent, the other parent must have turned them against them.
Parental alienation theory completely disregards what we know about children's development, trauma, abuse, toxic stress, coercive control, ACES etc., whereas coercive control is founded on these evidence-based principles Parental alienation theory that is often used by coercive controllers to entrap their targeted victims. It is a #DoubleBind, because once claimed in court, the person accused has no way to disprove it. Any attempt to disprove alienation would include proof that the coercive controller is abusive, and reinforces the abuser's claim that the victim does not support a relationship between the father and child. Since PAS relies on the false belief that women are deceptive and vindictive (misogyny), those who have internalized this implicit gender bias are often swayed to believe the coercive controller's claim and completely ignore all true evidence to the contrary (or worse, use it against the victim as further "proof" of alienation).
Coercive control is different. Coercive control includes context, while parental alienation intentionally REMOVES context. Someone claiming parental alienation is most often using the theory to cover up their coercive control. If they have been accused of abuse, PAS becomes their defense... their legal strategy. In order to do this, they must decontextualize actions by each party. They must prevent the court from seeing the coercive control they have been perpetrating and shift the blame to their targeted victim. They do this by cherry picking information and re-framing party's actions using DARVO. They exaggerate the victim's responses to their coercive control and use these normal reactions to being tortured and terrorized against the targeted victim, often claiming the victim is "crazy" or "mentally unfit" to parent. Coercive controllers also regularly fabricate "evidence", which indoctrinated court professionals, unfortunately, often take at face value.
Coercive control is backed up by evidence, and parental alienation is not. Coercive control shows a consistent pattern of (usually multiple forms) behaviors over time. Parental alienation claims are often no more than smoke and mirrors. This is why "parental alienation experts" shifting their language to that of coercive control is dangerous. These "parental alienation experts" are attempting to exploit the legitimacy of coercive control to continue their systemic coercive control within the family court system. If a person used to promote parental alienation and now they are claiming it's the same thing as coercive control... Watch Out!
If you are a protective parent, especially if you are a protective mother, parental alienation theory is NOT your friend! If your partner/ex-partner is sabotaging your relationship with your child(ren), what you are experiencing is coercive control and parent-child relationship sabotage (or the newest term Child and Mother Sabotage - CAMS).... NOT parental alienation . If we are going to shift the family court system away from unscientific biased theories to evidence-based science that protects children and targets of coercive control, it is critical that we use the appropriate language.
And I didn't even get into the horrors of reunification therapy, the abusive "cure" promoted by "experts" in parental alienation. Perhaps I will tackle that in a future blog.
What are your thoughts? Feel free to comment below.
If you are a protective parent attempting to navigate the family court system in the US (or any other country), you have probably run into the problematic use of the terms Parental Alienation Syndrome, Parental Alienation and Alienation... all of which refer to the same phenomenon. (Read my prior blog on Parental Alienation here, if you are unfamiliar with these terms and their deceptive use by coercive controllers in family court).
Parental Alienation "experts" have infiltrated the family court system in many countries, causing a hostile environment for protective parents, especially mothers, when attempting to prevent their children from being further coercively controlled by the child's coercively controlling parent. Parental Alienation theory has been debunked by every credible organization, including the UN. It does not, and has not ever, been included in the DSM. However, untrained professionals, often monetarily motivated, continue to introduce this unscientific theory, created by Richard Gardner, an advocate of pedophilia, sexual sadism, necrophilia, zoophilia, coprophilia, klismaphilia and urophilia, into family court proceedings as a strategic means of obtaining custody of children for coercive controllers and other abusive parents.
The introduction of PAS into a family court case is often the death nil for protective mothers (and sometimes protective fathers) facing a sadistic coercive controller in family court.
If that weren't bad enough, there appears to be a distressing trend emerging. Parental Alienation "Experts" appear to be re-branding themselves as Coercive Control Experts. As a legitimate coercive control expert, with decades of lived experience, and a master's degree in the psychology of coercive control, this infuriates me!
Let me be crystal clear... Parental Alienation Syndrome is NOT Coercive Control! These two phenomena are diametrically opposed. You are either on the side of the debunked science of parental alienation, assisting coercive controllers to DARVO family court into granting custody of a child to an abuser, or you are an expert in coercive control, helping to prevent a coercive controller from obtaining custody of a child. While a person may be an expert on both terms, as I am, if you are making claims that coercive control and parental alienation are the same, you are either highly confused, or, more likely, a wolf in sheep's clothing and NOT an expert with true scientific knowledge!
The parental alienation "experts" appear to be trying to cash in on the growing trend to criminalize and/or include coercive control into legislation. As the term coercive control becomes more widely recognized and respected, and parental alienation further debunked and dismissed, these so called "experts" need a new gravy train. They have been parasites on the family court system for decades now, robbing protective parents of healthy relationships with their children, and now they are jumping ship and turning to coercive control to save them.
BEWARE! If someone claims to be a proponent of both parental alienation AND coercive control, I recommend you do your due diligence before hiring someone who may turn out to promote the exact OPPOSITE of what you need to protect your children!
In my next blog I will go into how and why this confusion is taking hold and the importance of keeping the terms Parental Alienation and Coercive Control from becoming synonymous... especially in family court proceedings.
A large majority of targeted victims of coercive control have, or will, develop symptoms of, or full-blown, PTSD (post traumatic stress disorder). In my opinion, based on the research I've reviewed and the clients I have worked with, if you are targeted by a coercive controller, unless you are able to effectively escape their PsychoSocial Quicksand™ early on, developing symptoms of PTSD is practically inevitable. And, if you already had significant trauma when you became entrapped by the coercive controller, your chances of developing full blown PTSD, or even CPTSD (complex post traumatic stress disorder) increase.
NOTE: The Quicksand Model™ of Coercive Control terms all of the negative impacts to the target #DoubleVision. This includes all mental, emotional, physical, and psychological symptoms caused by the coercive controller.
The fact that many targeted victims of coercive control will develop PTSD or CPTSD creates additional challenges for survivors, by providing coercive controllers more avenues to further terrorize and torture their targeted victims. Receiving a mental health diagnosis on top of already having been victimized by a coercive controller can increase shame and stigma and lead to victim-blaming.
Since the name PTSD (post traumatic stress disorder) was introduced in 1980, there has been debate over the term. By using disorder in the name post traumatic stress disorder, there is an implication that the condition is not treatable, and is permanent. Such is the case for personality disorders, which are known to be "permanent and persistent" across the lifetime. Personality disorders are known to be incredibly difficult to treat, if not impossible, and there is often a link between domestic abuse, especially coercive controlling domestic abuse, and personality disorders.
Because PTSD and personality disorders are both considered mental illnesses (I won't go into all my reasons why I believe this should not be the case here) when a targeted victim of coercive control develops symptoms, and is then diagnosed with post traumatic stress disorder, it opens the door for the coercive controller to claim the two conditions present equal risk. This gives the coercive controller the opportunity to claim mutualize harm.
More commonly though, coercive controllers use the targeted victim's diagnosis to obscure and distract outsiders from detecting their own personality disorder and/or pattern of coercive and controlling behaviors, focusing attention on the targeted victim's "disorder" instead.
But post traumatic stress disorder and personality disorders are not the same. PTSD is treatable. The symptoms of PTSD can be reduced and even eliminated with treatment. Therefore, "post traumatic stress disorder" is more like an injury than a disorder, which is why there have been attempts to rename the condition post traumatic stress injury.
This survey reveals that renaming post traumatic stress disorder to ‘Injury’ would reduce stigma for 69% of those surveyed.
The reason why this is important is that there are major myths and misunderstandings that pervade societal attitudes and beliefs. One such myth is the idea that a relationship with a coercive controller should even be classified as a "relationship".
Coercive controllers most often target individuals using fraud to convince targets that they desire a "romantic relationship". However, coercive controllers lie about what they really want. They do not want a mutually beneficial "relationship". Coercive controllers wish to completely dominate the other person. They desire to rob that person of their autonomy, liberty and identity. Coercive controllers do not want an equitable partnership. They want a slave to serve their every desire and need, and they expect their "slave" to completely surrender their thoughts, feelings, values... their very identity, to the coercive controller's distorted version of reality.
Once the targeted victim discovers this underlying hidden agenda they will often try to escape the PsychoSocial Quicksand™ that the coercive controller has entrapped them in. This is when the situation can become very dangerous for the targeted victim, and if they have developed symptoms of something called post traumatic stress disorder, that can really work against them.
This is especially so in family court where a coercive controller can exploit the system's misunderstanding, and lack of education, about coercive control and the resulting trauma. The coercive controller can use the target's diagnosis of post traumatic stress disorder to paint the victim as the problem. It seems absurd that anyone could get away with blaming a victim for the very problem (PTSD) that the coercive controller caused... but it works. In family court, victims are very often blamed for the symptoms they are experiencing due to the coercive controller's coercive control, and in a majority of cases, when a coercive controller further complicates matters by claiming their targeted victim is "alienating" them from the children, the coercive controller often wins custody.
This is one place where a change in our language could be useful. By changing post traumatic stress disorder to post traumatic stress injury, much of the blame for the symptoms can be removed from the victim and appropriately placed upon the person who caused that injury... the coercive controller. A protective parent in family court who displays symptoms of post traumatic stress injury is (hopefully) less likely to lose their children to a coercive controller, due to the harms that coercive controller has caused, than one diagnosed with a "disorder".
So, I fully support changing "disorder" within post traumatic stress disorder and complex post traumatic stress disorder to "injury."
But there is another problem with the term post traumatic stress disorder and that is the word "post". This is especially problematic in family court. Judges often misunderstand the ongoing and escalating nature of coercive control and domestic abuse, and believe that once the targeted victim has left the "relationship" that there is no longer any danger. But nothing could be further from the truth. Because most court professionals are not trained in the dynamics of coercive control, and don't realize how targeted victims are trapped in PsychoSocial Quicksand™, that is nearly impossible to escape, they don't realize that leaving a coercive controller is one of the most dangerous things a person can ever do. Separating from a coercive controller has a high likelihood of making the coercive controller escalate to physical violence, or even potentially, to murder and/or suicide, because they are infuriated by their loss of control over their victim. Separation is the most dangerous time for a targeted victim of domestic abuse, especially when that domestic abuse includes coercive control.
The reality is that targeted victims of coercive control will most likely experience months, years or even decades of post-separation coercive control from the perpetrator, especially if they have children. When we consider that coercive control causes trauma, and that targeted victims are likely to be subjected to ongoing coercive control post-separation, it is unrealistic to call this trauma "post". Targeted victims of coercive control who have not yet insulated themselves from ongoing post-separation coercive control, often facilitated by family court, are dealing with ongoing, and often constant, trauma. There is nothing post about it!
So... if we are going to rename PTSD and/or CPTSD, my recommendation would be to call them TMI & CTMI. "Traumatic stress injury" and "complex traumatic stress injury" would remove the offending word "disorder" and the misnomer "post" and leave us with a diagnosis that is less likely to further stigmatize sufferers and facilitate coercive controller's continued coercive control.
Some people disagree that changing the name will make a difference. However, as someone who has experienced the horrors of coercive control and family court, I can see the benefit of re-framing PTSD to reduce the ability of coercive controllers to DARVO family court into blaming the victim.
What are your thoughts? Have you been diagnosed with PTSD or CPTSD? And, if so, how do you feel about the terms traumatic stress injury and complex traumatic stress injury?
As I have discussed before in previous blog posts, DARVO is perhaps the most effective and often used strategy of coercive controllers. And of the possible uses of DARVO, Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) or Parental Alienation (PA) is arguably the most commonly used DARVO strategy of coercive controllers in family court.
PAS is a theory created by Richard Gardner, a child psychiatrist, who developed the theory exclusively from his own work, and without any empirical evidence in 1985. He specifically created it for custody cases and used it often "on behalf of father's accused of molesting their children". This theory became widely touted by groups formed under the deceptive misnomer of "father's rights". What these groups are actually pushing are abuser's rights. They want to obscure the fact that they are abusive by using DARVO and PAS to paint the victim as the perpetrator.
How do DARVO and PAS work together in family court to protect abusers from accountability and demonize the protective parent?
When a protective parent accuses a partner or ex-partner of abuse, domestic violence, or coercive control, whether that's abuse of the adult survivor and/or the children, attorneys worldwide have learned that the most effective legal strategy to hide the fact that their client is a coercive controller is to DARVO the court.
DENY: "Your honor, my client would never abuse his ex-wife or children. My client is a loving father who just wishes to maintain contact with the children that he desperately loves. He works hard every day to provide for them, and he is insulted by these baseless accusations against him."
ATTACK: "It is sad to say, but Ms. ______, has mental health issues. She is an addict and regularly neglects and abuses the children. Because she was abused as a child, she thinks everyone is abusive. That is why she has falsely accused my client of abuse."
REVERSE VICTIM & OFFENDER: "Ms. _____ has alienated my client's children from him and has made him out to be a monster. She withholds the children from him, because she is vindictive, and she only wants full custody so that she can bleed my client dry through child support."
This strategy, unfortunately, is incredibly effective in family court, where most judges are untrained and hold implicit bias against mothers who allege abuse. It is so effective that many attorneys advise their clients NOT to raise abuse claims, no matter how egregious or provable, because the very presence of abuse allegations raise suspicion in the eyes of uneducated biased courts.
Joan Meier's research uncovered significant gender bias in US family courts when abuse is alleged, and she found that counter claims of parental alienation further reduced protective mothers' chances of obtaining custody. Here are some of her findings:
In cases where alienation is NOT cross-claimed:
- "Courts accept Mothers’ reports of Fathers’ abuse less than half the time (41%)"
- "Courts are far less likely to accept child abuse claims than partner violence. (DV)." For child abuse, courts only credit claims 29% of the time and for child sexual abuse only 15%.
When alienation IS cross-claimed:
"Alienation cross-claims dramatically reduce rate of acceptance of abuse - especially child abuse (average: 23%)". In these cases DV is credited only 37%, child abuse 18% and child sexual abuse is only credited (believed) 2% of the time.
Although previous research studies have revealed that 50-73% of cases of child sexual abuse are valid, Meier's research showed that only 1 out of 50 cases of child sexual abuse was believed in US family court between 2005-2014.
These figures are astonishing and outrageous! But they are not surprising to those of us who work in the field or to survivors of coercive control. Every day I receive phone calls from protective parents, mostly moms, desperate to protect their children from a coercive controller in family court.
Last year I lost primary custody of my child to a convicted family violence perpetrator whom a jury found guilty of family violence assault with bodily injury, and who repeatedly violated a family violence protective order. My coercive controller's deceit and manipulation were not only invisible to the court, his unsubstantiated lies were taken at face value, while my actual evidence of abuse was ignored.
Meier's research did not distinguish between alleged cases of family violence and proved cases. However, my own experience, and that of my clients, tells me that family court judges are regularly prioritizing father's rights over the well-being and safety of survivors and their children by placing children into the hands of known abusers.
Attorneys, judges, GALs, court evaluators, social workers, therapists, police, and all other professionals who come in contact with coercive controllers (often mislabeled "high conflict" cases) need to learn about the strategy of DARVO and how Parental Alienation Syndrome, and all it's permutations, are actually EVIDENCE of coercive control. That is what I testify to, when I am called as an expert witness in cases of coercive control. Persons who use DARVO and claim "alienation" are not victims, they are actually perpetrators exploiting the system to avoid accountability and continue their coercive control over the adult and child survivor.
THE GOOD NEWS!
On April 13, 2023 the United Nations released information, recommendations and warnings about the use of Parental Alienation pseudo-science within the family court systems worldwide. This is fantastic news! Hopefully, it will begin to undo some of the damage DARVO and PAS have done to protective parents and children across the globe.
So far I have covered the first three of the 5 Doubles in the #PsychoSocialQuicksand Model of #Coercive Control, #DoubleStandards, #DoubleBinds and #DoubleThink. The fourth Double is #DoubleSpeak.
#DoubleSpeak, thank goodness, is easier to grasp than #DoubleThink. I covered #DoubleThink first, because it is the driving force behind #DoubleSpeak. What the coercive controller thinks in their mind becomes apparent in their words and actions. We cannot see what the coercive controller is thinking, and so their #DoubleSpeak is confusing, but, if we can remember that they are operating from #DoubleThink, the things they say and do as a result, become less confusing.
What is #DoubleSpeak? #DoubleSpeak, in the #PsychoSocialQuicksand Model™, includes several tactics coercive controllers use to manipulate and deceive their targets. Perhaps you will recognize some of these from your own experiences. #DoubleSpeak includes the following:
1. Deliberately euphemistic, ambiguous, or obscure language: this is used to confuse and obscure the truth
2. Spin: "spin is a form of propaganda, achieved through knowingly providing a biased interpretation... to influence public opinion"
3. Gobbledygook: "language that is meaningless or is made unintelligible by excessive use of abstruse technical terms; nonsense"
4. Contradiction: "a combination of statements, ideas, or features of a situation that are opposed to one another"
5. Smoke-Screening: "something that hides the truth about someone's intentions"
6. Minimization: "the representation or estimation of something at less than its true value or importance"
#DoubleSpeak is used by coercive controllers to control conversations, outcomes and people. Being on the receiving end of #DoubleSpeak can, and often does, lead to cognitive dissonance (what I refer to in the #PsychoSocialQuicksand Model™ as #DoubleVision). Living with someone who uses #DoubleSpeak is like living 24/7 in a pharmaceutical commercial. The main theme of the ad includes beautiful images and music, with promises of "ending your depression" or "reducing your anxiety", but at the same time you hear (in a soothing, calm voice) that side effects include vomiting, migraine, and even death. Side effects are minimized and positive outcomes maximized.
Contradictory images, words and sounds create confusion, or cognitive dissonance, which our brains are compelled to resolve. Because these types of commercials put so much emphasis on making their drug appear to be the answer to all your problems (similar to love bombing or manipulative kindness), and they minimize the damaging effects, your brain is likely to resolve the conflict by choosing the positive messages and ignoring the negative ones. The reality is that there's no such thing as "side effects". There are only effects. And pharmaceutical companies want you to focus on their positive effects and forget or ignore their negative ones.
The same goes for coercive controllers. Confusion causes the target to perceive the coercive controller who is using #DoubleSpeak similarly. It is very painful to be in a constant state of confusion. So targets are often lulled into a false reality by #DoubleSpeak, a reality where the coercive controller is loving and helpful... a FALSE reality where their negative intentions (and coercive control tactics) are ignored, and the target convinces themselves that they are safe.
Again, the truth is that if a person is using #DoubleSpeak, they are hiding something. They are trying to control how you think and feel about them by leaving out critical information that would likely alter your opinion of them, potentially reducing your respect for them, and perhaps even causing you to avoid them altogether.
Warning signs of #DoubleSpeak:
1. Repetitive conversations with no resolution: If you are frustrated by trying to fix problems in your relationship where conversations go nowhere, it is likely that the other person is INTENTIONALLY using #DoubleSpeak to prevent resolution... probably because they don't want to own up to something they said or did.
2. Circular Logic: "A is true because B is true; B is true because A is true."
3. DARVO: DARVO can also be a type of #DoubleSpeak, where deception is used to shift the focus off the perpetrator and onto the target. "I did" such and such "because YOU made me".
4. Saying one thing and doing another: Also known as hypocrisy, this is a clear sign you are dealing with a coercive controller using #DoubleSpeak. Hypocrisy is also evident in #DoubleStandards, where the coercive controller demands things of the target that they themselves refuse to adhere to.
5. Gaslighting: Gaslighting can be very dangerous for the target. If someone is saying that things you know happened, didn't happen, or claiming things that were said weren't said, this is a particularly dangerous form of #DoubleSpeak that can literally drive you crazy if you aren't able to identify it and protect yourself.
As I alluded to earlier, the first 4 Doubles can cause severe damage to the target. The 5th Double of the #PsychoSocialQuicksand Model™ is #DoubleVision. I will cover #DoubleVision in a future post.
Stay tuned...
So far I have covered the first four of the #5Doubles in the #PsychoSocialQuicksand Model of #Coercive Control, #DoubleStandards, #DoubleBinds, #DoubleThink and #DoubleSpeak. These four doubles, along with DARVO, improve ease of detection of coercive control tactics and strategies as well as help identify coercive controllers. The 5th Double of the PSQM™ is #DoubleVision. Double Vision is a sign that a person may be a victim/survivor of coercive control. While the other Ds in the PSQM™ reference the perpetrator, #DoubleVision is the catch-all for the signs of trauma a target/victim/survivor may display.
Webster defines Double Vision as a disorder of vision in which two images of a single object are seen. Whereas #DoubleVision usually refers to two identical images, however, in the #PsychoSocialQuicksandModel, Double Vision refers to any and all trauma responses caused by coercive control, including the tendency to see two opposites images of the coercive controller.
The easiest way to think about and remember Double Vision is to reference the story of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.
Coercive controllers often present with opposite personalities in private than in public. And, as we've seen in previous blogs, coercive controllers are oddly dichotomous.. demonstrating signs of Double Speak, Double Think, Double Standards and Double Binds. Coercive controllers with dark triad or dark tetrad traits are especially good at masking their true personalities in public, while they terrorize those closest to them where no one else can see what's happening.
Living with someone whose true personality is often being masked by manipulative kindness and other forms of deception, causes Double Vision for the targeted victim. Double Speak, Double Think, Double Standards and Double Binds wreak havoc on the victim/survivor and traumatize them into a state of Double Vision.
When a "relationship" with a coercive controller first begins, the target usually has no idea that the person they are with is not who they appear to be. Early on, most targets are enthralled by the coercive controller's love bombing (manipulative kindness) and believe the coercive controller to be a kind, loving, generous, caring and helpful person. But these traits are not genuine for the coercive controller. Their words and deeds during this phase are generated out of a desire to entrap the target by making them believe that they are loved and cared for, perhaps more than they have been in their entire life.
The target develops beliefs about the perpetrator in response to the false positive mask of the coercive controller, rather than their true (negative and abusive) self. The coercive controller utilizes three main tactics to accomplish this: narcissistic mirroring, manipulative kindness and future-faking.
Mirroring:
"They use the words you use, claim to like the things you like, and copy your mannerisms. Narcissistic mirroring isn’t about true closeness (narcissists, in general, tend to avoid true intimacy). It’s a trick to make you feel comfortable with them, to gain your trust – to get you to lower your guard."
Manipulative Kindness:
“I call it manipulative kindness, because it's not love, it is manipulation,” Julie Owens, certified domestic violence counselor, trauma professional, and expert in the field of violence against women, tells Elite Daily. The perpetrator may be trying to flatter you in an attempt to regain (or gain) the upper hand in the relationship."
Future-Faking:
"Future faking is when someone uses a detailed vision of the future to facilitate the bonding and connection in a romantic relationship." Often the target doesn't know the coercive controller used this tactic until they discover that the coercive controller has actually been working AGAINST the future they claimed to be supporting.
Mirroring, manipulative kindness and future-faking cause the target to develop a confirmation bias over time. The target comes to believe that they are supremely loved, lucky or blessed to have found such a wonderful partner... their "soul mate". They see this person in a distorted positive light because of the constant mirroring, manipulative kindness and future-faking they are subjected to.
Double Vision starts to develop when the coercive controller's mask begins to slip. Because the coercive controller's Dr. Jekyll side is false, they cannot maintain it forever (although some are very good at maintaining it for a long time). Once the coercive controller has entrapped their target in some way, they begin to let their guard down. This might happen gradually with minor incidents of abuse, or it may be shockingly fast and severe, taking the target completely by surprise and causing them to feel fear, or even terror.
Slow and gradual shifts toward abuse are often excused away by the target as inconsequential, due to their confirmation bias that this person is not only safe, but their one and only true "soul mate". Targets can excuse away abusive behavior for a long time if they have been sufficiently groomed by the coercive controller to believe they are Dr. Jekyll. But the more Mr. Hyde shows himself, the more Double Vision will increase.
So, Double Vision is the target's version of Double Think. The main two distinctions between the two are who uses them and why. Double Think is intentional contradictory thinking that the coercive controller uses to justify and/or conceal their misdeeds, whereas Double Vision is the traumatized state of confusion it creates for the target. Double Think (in the PSQM™) harms, and Double Vision is the harm Double Think (and the other doubles) cause.
Double Vision includes more than just cognitive dissonance. Double Vision, in the PSQM™, also includes the harmful aftermath of being targeted by coercive control. Double Vision includes the ways that victims think, act and behave due to their extended exposure to a coercive controller. These responses to coercion and control, which are completely normal responses to being intentionally harmed by another person, are often misinterpreted as character defects, and used to blame the victim for the negative impacts caused by the perpetrator.
Double Vision includes: (Essentially, Double Vision is the PSQM™'s term for the Signs of Trauma)
1. Cognitive Dissonance: "Cognitive Dissonance is often described as “reality switching,” “ping-ponging” or what George Orwell called “doublethink,” where conflicting thoughts and contradictory realities pop up but you’re plagued with such intense self-doubt, confusion, and fog from the abuse that you’re not able resolve anything."
2. PTSD/CPTSD Symptoms: Enduring coercive control is torture. Therefore, it is no surprise that targeted victims of coercion and control can, and often do, develop severe physical, mental, emotional and psychological symptoms from having been tortured by a coercive controller.
3. Substance Abuse: Targeted victims experiencing Double Vision may use substances as a way to cope with the chronic stress of the abuse, or they may have been coerced through substance use coercion. One study found survivors of intimate partner violence had higher rates of substance abuse than those who had not been victimized (26% vs 5%).
4. Trauma-Coerced Attachment: Sometimes referred to as trauma-bonding, (but not Stockholm Syndrome, which was created to protect police from criticism by blaming the victim), Trauma-Coerced Attachment can result when a coercive controller intentionally exploits a target's vulnerabilities and natural human desire for connection to forge a false bond through intermittent reinforcement. Some like to refer to this as "love addiction", but while it certainly mimics addiction, it has nothing to do with love.
Now that we've discussed the #5Doubles it's time to revisit DARVO, which I will do in my next post.
Stay tuned...
So far I have covered the first two of the 5 Doubles in the #PsychoSocialQuicksand Model of #Coercive Control, #DoubleStandards and #DoubleBinds. The third Double is #DoubleThink.
#DoubleThink is a bit harder to wrap your head around, probably because it is contradictory and confusing by its very nature. #DoubleThink is a type of conscious self-deception. The term #DoubleThink was coined by George Orwell in his novel Nineteen Eighty Four. Here's a quote from the book.
"To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy was impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy, to forget whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it again, and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself—that was the ultimate subtlety: consciously to induce unconsciousness, and then, once again, to become unconscious of the act of hypnosis you had just performed. Even to understand the word—doublethink—involved the use of doublethink."
Confusing... right? Well, guess what? Confusion is often the point!
I am going to say that again, because it is critical to understanding the use of coercive control tactics. Confusion IS the point!
Coercive controllers know that shock and confusion can dismantle their prey's ability to think critically, at least momentarily. If stress becomes chronic it can even damage the structures of the brain. Here is a quote from a journal article detailing the impact of stress on pre-frontal cortex functioning.
"Even quite mild acute uncontrollable stress can cause a rapid and dramatic loss of prefrontal cognitive abilities, and more prolonged stress exposure causes architectural changes in prefrontal dendrites (Amy Arnsten, 2020)."
Shock and confusion (which are stressful and even traumatic) reduce critical thinking by activating the fight, flight or freeze part of the brain (the amygdala). This gives coercive controllers the upper hand while their prey's pre-frontal cortex is offline. Coercive controllers often make up bizarre and outlandish lies to cover their tracks... the more unbelievable, the more shocking, the more their lies are often believed, because the person hearing the lies is unable to access their critical thinking. The coercive controller then uses the negative impact on their prey's fight/flight system as "evidence" that there is something wrong with the targeted victim, and therefore, the victim must be to blame.
Here is a video by Richard Grannon presenting the strategic manipulative thinking of narcissistic coercive controllers and how they use strategic #DoubleThink to control and punish their target while still believing and maintaining that they are a good person.
A fabulous book on fast and slow thinking systems, another way coercive control bypasses cognitive defenses, is called Thinking Fast & Slow by Daniel Kahneman.
Coercive controllers create confusion and chaos for those they wish to dominate, while #DoubleThink prevents them from feeling the guilt and shame that might arise if they were burdened by the awareness that they are doing so. #DoubleThink allows coercive controllers to remain innocent in their own minds (self-deception), by carefully forgetting that it was their actions that led to the destruction they are complaining about. #DoubleThink is a strategic combination of denial and lying.
It's difficult to present examples of #DoubleThink. Because #DoubleThink occurs in the mind of the coercive controller, it cannot be observed from the outside. However, there are narcissists and sociopaths online who discuss their thinking openly, including their #DoubleThink. Sam Vaknin and Ask A Psychopath's YouTube channels include some examples of their distorted thinking, including some which would qualify as #DoubleThink.
Psychopaths may not use #DoubleThink. Since they completely lack empathy, they probably don't feel the need to lie to themselves. Narcissists, on the other hand, rely heavily on #DoubleThink in order to survive in the world. Narcissists come in two basic varieties, the grandiose narcissist and the covert narcissist (also called the victim narcissist or the vulnerable narcissist). Both types use #DoubleThink. Grandiose narcissists use #DoubleThink when the world provides evidence that conflicts with their belief of being fabulous, gorgeous, brilliant etc. The covert narcissist uses #DoubleThink to "forget" that they create their own "victimization".
A grandiose narcissist is usually more direct with their coercive control, whereas a covert narcissist is typically more manipulative and deceptive. Both types of narcissists use coercive control to get their way and to paint themselves as innocent, and both use #DoubleThink to deceive themselves. However, they tend to rely on different tactics to "know and not know". Grandiose narcissists are often more aggressive, where covert narcissists are often more passive aggressive or covertly aggressive.
A grandiose narcissist focuses their energy on being successful, beautiful, brilliant etc. in the world, while a covert narcissist is more of a parasite, exploiting others and then claiming their victims are victimizing them. While a grandiose narcissist may use #DARVO to avoid accountability for something awful they have done to someone, a covert narcissist's entire focus in life is to collect evidence that they are the victim of a cruel world. Therefore, #DARVO rules the covert narcissist's entire life. He doesn't use #DARVO just to get out of trouble, he knowingly and strategically arranges complex scenarios to entrap his prey, and then when he has successfully convinced others that his victim is the perpetrator, he uses #DoubleThink to forget it was he who actually set the whole thing up.
Only through #DoubleThink, which carefully maintains the covert narcissists' false reality, is the victim narcissist able to protect his fragile underdeveloped ego from the reality that the only thing he has to show for his life is a trail of destruction in his wake. He may be a victim... but not a victim of another person, he is a victim of his own #DoubleThink.
Here's a great article showing that abusers know they receive benefits by being violent and abusive. They know, but they don't know (#DoubleThink), that they opt for these benefits over changing their negative behaviors. They use #DoubleThink to pretend the benefits don't exist, and they are so good at this strategic self-deception, and so convincing to outsiders, that they are often able to avoid accountability.
#DoubleThink is the engine that feeds the fourth Double of the PsychoSocial Quicksand Model™ of Coercive Control, #DoubleSpeak. #DoubleSpeak is easier to understand and detect than #DoubleThink, because it occurs in communication, rather than inside the mind of the coercive controller. I will cover #DoubleSpeak in the next blog.
Stay tuned...
