Day one of our Police and P*nises week #PAP - taking a look at two adult grooming 'case studies'.

The Santa Fe Case

CAAGe has been working for a while with someone connected to the Santa Fe Institute (where there is a strong Epstein academic connection that I am not going into here).

Her groomer, an academic also associated with Santa Fe (whose academics have received large sums from Epstein over the years) had a micropenis, a condition that is said to occur in around 0.6% of males.

As background, microp*nises rarely respond well to testosterone treatment, and for the man it can be distressing – instead of being viewed as simply the luck of the draw (we all deviate from the supposed ‘norm’ in some way), it is seen as an undesirable characteristic. It is a medically hotly contested condition, with many doctors asking parents to choose ‘boy or girl’, and in the 70s some medics used to suggest sex reassignment.

In this particular case, the man concerned had chosen to respond to his own distress  by treating women as objects of sexual humiliation, getting our victim to perform acts that have left her feeling bad about herself. At the time she ‘consented’, she was unaware of the truth about the man, his general sexual behaviour with other women, or his connection to other groomers, hidden in plain sight.

Her information, for the police, could have been incredibly valuable information. And would have been corroborated by the claim that he had a microp*nis.

However, like many victims, she was disregarded and was the one hounded and forced to leave her home behind.

Epstein

In the Epstein case, witnesses had described Epstein’s p*nis as broad at the base and tapering.

This was easily verifiable, had the police chosen to get him to drop his trousers and take a photo as proof. It is as distinguishing a mark as a birthmark or ‘outy belly button’. Not conclusive evidence, of course, but just a verifiable fact that gave credence to witness accounts (and of course could be used to filter out false reports, satisfying the ‘women lie about abuse’ brigade).

Instead, there is video of him being questioned about it and refusing to answer. It is, of course, possible that, as in the Weinstein case which we'll look at in a blog later this week, evidence would have been produced.

Epstein escaped justice.

But the message is clear - we have to get over this viewing a p*nis as something sacred and untouchable – including both the police and the judiciary. A p*nis is a part of a body - just like a tattoo, or facial characteristics, and if it’s evidence that can verify, support or refute a victims statement,  it needs to be presented as such without such police sensitivity.

For as long as we hold views about the ‘normal’ shape and size, people with unusual penis shapes seem to me to be more likely to feel abhorred, and therefore behave abhorrently. And men with microp*nises who have accepted their lot in life will find themselves shamed.

If you've been groomed, please complete our research questionnaire which is entirely anonymous.

Contact CAAGe for support

This blog has, ironically, been amended to change the ‘P’ word to p*nis, as the website was being hit for ‘Adult content’.