#compliance is enslaving making sick and killing humanity | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

scripttorture · 5 years

Note

So I know it’s been mentioned that victims do not change beliefs or are brainwashed when undergoing torture but is it completely impossible for a character to undergo so much abuse that they stop fighting, are resigned, or become more submissive. And I know that this might be a bit out of the torture theme but , would a person undergoing abuse/torture and then being comforted by the villain make them more compliant or the likes. Aka how easily does it take for Stockholm syndrome to show up. Thx

Iknow next to nothing about Stockholm syndrome and questions aboutthat in particular are better directed towards @scriptshrink (who hasanswered questions on it in the past I believe). I don’tthink (based on Scriptshrink’s definition) what you’re describingis Stockholm syndrome.

Torturegenerally makes people much more strongly opposed to the torturer(and often anything related to them) then they were prior to torture.

Thatdoesn’t always mean violent resistance because violence is neverthe only way to resist.

Ithink how possible this is depends on what you mean by ‘submissive’and how long term you’re imagining that state being. Because rightnow this looks to me like it could be edging into… ‘torturesurvivors are broken’ territory.

Alot of torture victims dostopphysically fighting while they’re still captive. There are a lot ofvery good reasons for doing that; for starters a lot of commontortures make victims less physically capable of fighting back. Sleepdeprivation, dehydration and starvation all decrease reaction times,lower strength and increase the chances of someone fainting becausethey moved too quickly.

Andbluntly, trauma doesn’t make people stupid.

Torturevictims are perfectly capable of judging how much danger they’re inand what’s likely to increase that immediate danger. Violentresistance, fighting, usually puts victims in immediate danger. Ifviolent resistance fails at any point, if it’s anything short of acompletely successful breakout and escape, then it means reprisalsand possible execution.

Sometimeseven if it doesresult in a completely successful breakout and escape victims couldstill expect reprisals, aimed against their families, friends or hometown. That’s a fairly common feature of a lot of regimes. It’shappening now with the Uighurs in China; people with relatives abroadseem to be especially targeted. It happened in Syria, with wholefamilies ‘arrested’ when male members were suspected ofsupporting an opposing side. It also happened in Nazi-occupiedEurope.

Forthe vast majority of torture victims violence isn’t going to getthem anywhere. The chances of success are vanishingly slim and thechances of more pain are incredibly high.

Thesituations we’re talking about generally are modern high techprisons. Thevast majority of people do not think they’ll be able to fight theirway out a place like this with their fists.

Inthat context choosingnot to fight can be a smart survival decision. Conversely choosing tofight can be a sign of suicidal feelings.

Nowvictims can and do organise.Organised groups of victims canoccasionally fight successfully. But when you’re talking abouttorture specifically, you’re talking about a group of injured,unarmed, malnourished people successfully taking on a group of wellfed, well rested, heavily armed people who are trainedto fight.

Thereis one undisputed successful slave revolt in history: Haiti. And Ithink that number illustrates just how difficult it is for victims‘fighting’ to be successful.*

You’retalking about people without proper clothing going up against peoplewith guns and Kevlar. When those are the odds fighting is usually notthe best option for any individual victim.

Butequating a lack of fighting with a lack of resistance is a veryblinkered view. I think equating a degree of compliancewith a lack of resistance is also a mistake.

Alotof victims pretend to give in and comply over some things as aconscious strategy. It can give them better opportunities to escape,better chances of survival in the short term and better opportunitiesto sabotage the torturers’ operation.

Peoplewho ‘gave in’ under torture have been some of the most successfulspies and saboteurs in history. This is not violence. It is, in theircontext, a more effective way of resisting.

They’vealso been key witnesses in virtually every trial for crimes againsthumanity I can think of.

Cantorture make people seem‘compliant’? Yes. But this is a sham.It’s short term. It’s unreliable.

Victimscan manifest symptomsthat make it more difficult for them to resist in a material way.Depression to the point of catatonia, coupled with forced labour andstarvation does stoppeople taking up arms.

Butit doesn’t stop them refusing to work. It doesn’t stop thembreaking equipment. It doesn’t stop them purposefully doing as poora job as possible. It doesn’t stop them from committing masssuicide.

Thoseare all strategies that people in forced labour situations have used.

Andthere is absolutely no wayfor a torturer to control what symptoms any victim manifests. It ischance. It can’t bepredicted. Hence they can not control whether or not a victim ends inthis state.

Thenthere are the more inventive things people have come up with. There’sthe Chinese man who hid letters in the decorations he was forced tomake. There’sthe American, HenryBox Brown, who posted himselfin a box to the free north.

Thisis not ‘submission’.

Weare resilient, resourceful creatures with an immense capacity forsurvival and recovery.

Barbarismdoes not make people obedient. It canmake people comply over the short term. It can make people wait forthe moment when their personal chance of success is highest. It canmake people go along with things that don’t contradict their moststrongly held beliefs.

Butit fundamentally can’tchange hearts and minds.

Therewill always be things people would rather die then do. Mostpeople would not rather die then put on a uniform, or engage in asimple repetitive task like cutting stone. But the more complex thetasks victims are forced to engage in the more opportunities forresistance they get and the higher the chance of their oppressorsjust failing.

Ifyour story is entirely based around the idea of a character beingtortured and hencebecoming entirely subservient to the torturer- then what you arewriting is unrealistic andit is torture apologia.

Iknow that my two posts on torture survivors aren’t particularlypopular compared to most of my Masterposts, but there’s a reasonthey’re up there. It’s to showcase exactly how different thereality is to this myth. This myth that favours the lies of torturersabove the lived experience of victims and is used to justify andcondone atrocities.

FelaKuti was beaten so many times over the course of his life that it’sthe likely cause of his death. The military government he clashedwith so may times attacked his family, his friends and his home. Theymurdered his mother. They raped and mutilated his friends.

Felawrote songs about it.He marched his mother’s funeral procession up to the biggestmilitary barracks he could find in one of the most populous cities inhis country and left her coffin on the steps.

RonaldSearle drew his experiences as a POW in Japanese camps. He drew thedeaths of his friends. He drew the torture of other prisoners. Hedrew his own emaciated, sick, starved, over worked body.

Hedid this knowing thathe could be killed for these drawings.

Helldid you hear what Bobi Wine had to say a few days after beingtortured? He’d been flown out to America for specialist medicaltreatment. He couldhave stayed put. He couldhave stayed silent. He could have done the safe ‘submissive’thing.

He’sback in Uganda now.

Bywhat measure does this look ‘submissive’?

Becausefrom everything I’ve read this is the normnot the exception. This quiet opposition.

Yesvictims can ‘comply’ in some short term sense; Searle didn’trefuse to work when ordered. He knew that if he did he’d be killedand he saw his duty as bearing witness.

Yesvictims can despair; that is a symptom. But treating that as the onlyemotion survivors can experience is a gross misunderstanding ofmental illness. It is treating survivors as if they are incapable oflife and growth, as if they are already dead.

Asthings stand what you’re suggesting is a fantasy. And it’s onethat’s usually used to demean survivors.

Thinkabout whether your story needstorture. Think about what it’s adding to your story beyond theseunfortunate implications.

Thinkabout why this story,this pattern appeals to you. What draws you to this story? What’sinteresting about it?

Becausethe chances are that the bit you feel is the core, the interestingbit, can be achieved in a different way. Itmay take a little more inventiveness to find that but it’spossible.

*Recentevents make me feel as though I should stress that this dependsheavily on your definition of ‘success’. The enslaved people ofBrazil did not drive their colonial oppressors out of the country asHaiti did. But the establishment of Palmares and the dozens, hundredsof other towns and cities as separate states within states stands asits own form of success.

Disclaimer

#tw torture #torture apologia #forced labour #torture does not work #torture and obedience #torture and compliance #tw slavery #tw rape #tw genocide #haiti #brazil #palmares #resistance #writing victims #etc-please

49 notes · View notes