Prostasia Foundation was launched in April 2018, one week after President Trump signed a law, FOSTA/SESTA, that had immediate, long-term, and predictable negative consequences. The law was sold to the public as a response to an epidemic of child sex trafficking, which we were told was being facilitated by Internet companies such as Backpage.com. 

But in reality, as Backpage came down, and other websites like Tumblr, Craigslist, and Reddit cracked down on all sexual content as a precaution, it only got harder for authorities to investigate real cases of sex trafficking. Neither did the law's passage do anything to lessen the public perception of a sex trafficking epidemic. If anything, the moral panic only grew more intense, eventually metasticizing into the QAnon movement. 

We have the government-linked child safety groups, such as NCMEC and Thorn, and a compliant media to thank for this. They were all firm supporters of FOSTA/SESTA, and showed no interest in the negative consequences that the law would have on minorities such as adult sex workers. Indeed, these groups have been collaborating with the government to surveil and criminalize sex workers for years.

It wasn't just sex workers—the unacknowledged real targets of the law— who felt its harmful consequences. Also affected were LGBTQ+ communities, who found their safe spaces for self-expression and community disappearing. Artists, fans, kinky communities, and sex educators were also censored and deplatformed.

Most concerning of all, resources and forums for the discussion of child sexual abuse and its prevention were taken down because of FOSTA/SESTA. At that point, the policies of censorship, surveillance and criminalization driven by government-linked groups weren't just harming sexually stigmatized minorities. They were also harming the very children whose name was being invoked to justify them.

And that's why Prostasia Foundation was formed by experts  and communities who recognize the pernicious effects of this war on sex that is being conducted in childrens’ name, and who believe in promoting a different approach. They saw that we needed an approach that prioritized prevention and restoration, rather than censorship and criminalization—an approach guided by rationality and human rights, rather than by fear and stigma.

More than three years later, Prostasia proudly and boldly continues to champion this approach, in the face of a new volley of attacks. We continue even despite ambivalence from government, industry, and the philanthropic sector towards preventative interventions such as stigma reduction, comprehensive sex education, social services for potential victims, and mental health support for potential offenders. Prostasia prioritizes these approaches precisely because governments and the loudest voices in the child protection movement won't.

This year we raised over $70,000 towards child sexual abuse prevention research. We keynoted at ATSA 2021, the leading cross-disciplinary professional conference for prevention and treatment experts from across fields such as psychology, criminology, and social work. And we have helped bring back and improve some of the resources that had been deplatformed due to FOSTA, such as the prevention-focused peer support chat service MAP Support Club.   

Looking to the future, Prostasia Foundation will continue to bring together and amplify minority voices that are excluded from toxic mainstream discourses on child sexual abuse and its prevention. One of the ways in which we're doing this is to further strengthen our Advisory Council by instituting a periodic rotation policy that begins this year. You can find out more about the diverse and talented new members who will be joining our team at our upcoming Annual General Meeting.

Another change for Prostasia Foundation coming in 2022 is that I will be leaving as its Executive Director to pursue new full-time professional opportunities. I will be remaining on the Board of Directors in a non-executive capacity. I will also continue to volunteer for Prostasia in my spare time, laying the groundwork for the commencement of a new Executive Director later in the year.

I am immensely proud to have been a part of a courageous new movement to promote and popularize a stigma-free, evidence-based approach to the prevention of child sexual abuse. I’m also proud of Prostasia’s work in calling out human rights infringements in the child protection sector. From the outset, our team knew that this would be a difficult and contested endeavour. Yet the progress that we have made in three years, particularly for an organization of our size, has been nothing short of incredible.

Thank you for your support over the last three years, and I look forward to celebrating many more milestones with Prostasia's team in the years to come.   

Jeremy Malcolm
Executive Director, 2018-2021

Prostasia Foundation's 2021 Annual General Meeting will be held on December 13 at 2pm U.S. Pacific time. This online event will bring together staff, Board, Advisors, and members of Prostasia to celebrate our successes. It will also consider our present and future challenges, such as the unprecedented wave of attacks and misinformation that we and other members of the CSA prevention community have suffered in recent months.

The meeting will also introduce some leadership changes at Prostasia. There is a new member of our Board, new members of our Advisory Council, and other members who are rotating off. We will also discuss our plans to recruit a new Executive Director. By attending and sharing your views, you can help our incoming team to hear from the broader community about the direction that they think the organization should be taking.

If you are a Prostasia member, you are welcome to attend the meeting at no charge. If you are not yet a member, it's not too late to join from as little as $5 per month. All existing members should have received an invitation to the meeting already, but if you did not, please contact us for yours. We hope to see you there.

During October and November 2021, Prostasia Foundation conducted a short, ten-question online survey of our community, which was distributed via our social media accounts and our forum.

As of November 12 when the survey closed, 101 at least partially complete responses had been received. Responses that contained death threats, suicide baiting, slurs, calls for genocide, or other abusive remarks were deleted, although responses expressing good faith disagreement or criticism of our approach (such as “I am a victim of egregious childhood sexual abuse and I am not on board with this”) were not removed. With the removal of the abusive responses, 83 responses remained, a 9% increase over the previous year. 

In the first year we had directed the survey specifically towards our supporters. This year, its targeting was broadened towards our "community.” Therefore rather than asking respondents why they supported us, we asked why they were interested in our work. Despite the new phrasing, most respondents did still express support; for example pointing to how we take a "much more modern approach to a complex issue,” that "doesn't shy away” from "having candid conversations about uncomfortable topics.” One particularly insightful comment described how:

Prostasia has created this very strange but incredible dynamic where so many different people's personal interests and stakes, at first seemingly unrelated to CSA prevention, are being leveraged to make the world a safer place for children.

Since the survey was active during a period of intense criticism and misinformation about our work, as expected there was also some dissent from the otherwise broad approval of our work. One admitted, “it doesn't really interest me as much as it disgusts me.” Another suggested, “Concentrating on CSA is ridiculous when there is so much more physical and emotional abuse from both care givers and society alike.” Although we are mostly criticised because our work is perceived as benefiting minor attracted people (MAPs), we weren't immune to criticism from them either. One MAP observed, "They claim to support MAPs while actively working against us.”

Despite the diversity of responses, there was still a surprising degree of accord that our society's dominant approaches towards the elimination of child sexual abuse haven't been working, and that alternative approaches need to be given a higher priority. As illustrated in the chart below, by far the most favored approaches were comprehensive sex education, providing free and anonymous support to MAPs, and combatting misinformation about how CSA really happens. But reflecting a higher number of Prostasia skeptics among our respondents, 7% (up from 2%) considered reducing the sexualization of women and girls in media to be a priority, and 8% (up from 4%) thought that regulating Internet companies was the answer.

In the hope of uncovering ideas for new approaches from our community, we also asked for suggestions about what Prostasia should be doing differently. One useful response suggested that we “need to make use of image and video based platforms to attract more support especially from younger people.” Another said that we should have a "stronger focus on public education, potentially through partnerships with other organizations.” And one said that we should try "harder to win the trust of CSA survivors,” many of whom "misunderstand and fear your organization's methods.”

There was, however a conflict between those who suggested we should “stop helping pedophiles” and “speak far more negatively about self-proclaimed pedophiles and with markedly more disgust,” and those who suggested the opposite; that we should "focus less on preventative measures, and more on lessening societal stigma", and should "stop throwing MAPs under the bus every time you face criticism.” The tension between these two opposing points of view will be discussed at our upcoming Annual General Meeting.

One of the key reasons for our survey is to get an idea of the demographics of our community. Although our community continues to be majority LGBTQ+ and/or kinky, there has been a noticeable drop (from 29% to 21%) in the proportion of our supporters who identify as fans or artists. This may reflect anecdotal reports of growing attempts by the "pro-shipping” community to distance itself from toxic MAP and prevention discourse online. However it is good to see that parents (up to 6% from 2%) and CSA survivors (up to 13% from 10%) are now more strongly represented in our community. The community remains however predominantly youthful, with 46%—even more than last year's 43%—being aged 18-25, and 83% being 45 or under.

A new question in this year's survey aimed to determine which of our programs and services respondents were aware of. In the responses we discovered that although many respondents knew about our support for MAP Support Club, our blog, and our podcast, few were aware of our Prostasia Microgrants program, and a full 20% of respondents weren't aware of any of our programs or services.

Finally, we asked what social media platforms our supporters used (mostly Twitter, with Facebook, Instagram, and Tiktok also strongly represented). And we asked what obstacles prevented our supporters from donating or becoming a member (mostly financial hardship).

Some key takeaways from this survey are that Prostasia Foundation continues to have a loyal and appreciative base of supporters. Their messages of encouragement suggest that no major changes in our approach are required. However, although fewer in number, the critical messages from survey respondents suggest that we also need to strive to do a better job at selling our approach to those who are not yet convinced, and at ensuring that their legitimate concerns are addressed in our work.

Members are entitled to receive a free copy of the complete results of the survey. If you're a member and would like a copy, let us know! If you're not, you can join from just $5 per month.

The film adaptation of Steven King's Gerald's Game (9.1 on Rotten Tomatoes) was released on Netflix in 2017. It's a horror movie with a small cast, set, and budget, but with some big ideas about monsters real and imagined. It also has more than a few points of interest for Prostasia.

The film begins as a middle-aged couple, Jessie and Gerald, go vacationing in the woods in an attempt to spice up their failing marriage. Gerald has packed the handcuffs, and has a rape play scene planned—something that he hasn't negotiated with Jessie beforehand, although initially she is happy to play along. But she soon becomes uncomfortable, and tells him to stop.

Even at this point, by continuing, Gerald crosses a line. Unless a different safeword has been negotiated, the simple word "stop” or "no” should be enough to end a scene. Instead, he treats this as part of the game, asking her to "make it feel real,” and only eventually stopping when he triggers her further by calling himself Daddy. Even then, he demurs about uncuffing her—"What if I won't?," he asks ominously.

To avoid spoilers I’ll avoid describing exactly what happens next. But it heralds Jessie's descent into a dark world that is part imagination, part memory, and part real. One of the memories that surface during this time involves a childhood vacation with Jessie's family during an eclipse. With her parents at loggerheads, the 12 year old Jessie stays behind to watch the astrological event with her father Dan while her mother and siblings take a boat trip.

In what first seems like innocent father-daughter bonding, Dan defends Jessie's choice of clothing against mom's criticism, ("You look like a proper young woman", he remarks). But then he coaxes his pubescent daughter onto his lap, and fixes his gaze on her naked shoulder. 

Jessie and the audience become aware at the same time of what Dan is doing to himself while he implores her to continue watching the eclipse. His subsequent defensive apology (“it's not like I touched you Jessie, but still…”), ends in a successful attempt to silence her through reverse psychology ("I think we have to tell Mom…. because you can't keep it a secret"). Only in retrospect does Jessie recall how he turned away from her when expressing shame, thereby revealing his insincerity.

This kind of scene—simulated sexual abuse containing a real child actor—is the kind that could be banned under an expansive interpretation of child pornography law such as those promoted by other child protection groups. Yet the scene is anything but arousing. And it is an essential prelude to the resolution of Jessie's story, in which she forms a foundation for survivors of child sexual abuse, and retells her story to them, with the hope of imbuing them with the courage to do the same. 

So far so good, but where does King misstep? In this reviewer's opinion, he does so by introducing what appears to be a literal monster into the film. In addition to making the villain a necrophilic cannibal, King afflicts the character with a real-world medical condition that deforms his face and body. Since people with facial deformities battle stigma that brands them as dangerous monsters, this is a clumsy and unnecessary choice on King's part.

Equally clumsy is the not-so-subtle equivalence drawn between this monstrous cannibal and the other men in Jessie's life. "The people who were supposed to protect you from the monsters turned out to be monsters themselves,” Jessie writes to her younger self in an epilogue. While narratively neat, the false message that this movie ends with is that abuse is committed by monsters.

The less comfortable reality is that abuse isn't the inevitable consequence of inner or outer monstrosity, but a choice that human beings make. Rather than undiscovered monsters living among us, the even more chilling truth is that even our closest loved ones are capable, in the wrong circumstances, of committing monstrous acts. The greatest challenge that faces the CSA prevention community is not in keeping monsters out, but in keeping those that children love and trust from doing them harm. The challenge for King as a writer would have been to expose this truth in his story, rather than opting for an easier and more palatable narrative.