I want to piggy back on this thread to offer a little commentary on the various ways different people can experience an interaction with someone like Ron Jeremy — and why abuse and violations have to be defined on survivors’ terms, not in collective terms. https://twitter.com/kat_blaque/status/1275528738227122176

About six or seven years ago I was at AVN, hanging out at the Circle Bar with James Deen and Stoya. James told me he wanted to hit me in the chest. I said he could, he slammed his fist down right below my collarbone. Later I had a bruise.

For me, that experience was fun.

I have a high tolerance for pain, I find certain kinds of violence to be an adrenaline rush — back when I did roller derby, I loved the thrill of the occasional hit to the face. For me, that experience was just a funny story about crazy hijinks.

But when stories about James being violent with performers and partners, to the point of physical abuse and sexual assault, started to come out, the story took on a different cast for me. Not because I felt violated by it — I didn’t and I don’t — but I could see how someone could

And I could see how the charismatic personality that I found fun and charming could quickly be one that was manipulative and harmful, particularly for someone who *wasn’t* willing to say yes to whatever urge he happened to have at the moment.

The fact that I wasn’t traumatized by Deen doesn’t negate the experiences of the many people he harmed. Abusers often feel charming and fun *until* they get a no; if you never feel the desire to say no to them, you don’t see the bad side.

I don’t think anyone should have to apologize for the positive or even neutral experiences we’ve had with abusers. But we can’t position those experiences as proof that *other* people weren’t violated.

(Also feels worth noting that saying yes to everything is a pretty common response to being raped or abused — if you’re always saying yes, even to stuff you don’t really want to do — you maintain an illusion of control)