WARNING: This wiki contains discussions of sexual abuse, suicide, harassment, and other sensitive subjects in context of Jess Taylor and her work.
This page highlights, in chronological order, unethical, unprofessional, or concerning actions and behaviours from Jess.
1st January 2024
Jess advised women that "processing trauma" through hobbies like music and books is just as effective as therapy. There are certainly issues with the way therapy is delivered within the NHS, but much of this is down to a lack of resources or a mismatch of expectations rather than the therapy itself being the problem. What she's effectively saying here is, "you can do it yourself if you just try hard enough! By the way, buy my book!" Perhaps this is an indirect comeback to people pointing out that she isn't a clinical psychologist - saying that that doesn't matter, because therapy is useless anyway? She talks about therapists being in it to make money but then takes every opportunity to sell her books, flashcards, journals, etc. as an "alternative."
2nd January 2024
Jess posted the below on Facebook about how she conquered her panic attacks (which were so severe that she would have up to 10 a day) by somehow logically reasoning through them. Again, it is reductive and potentially very harmful to tell people that they can cure the problem themselves if they just work hard enough. Panic attacks can have a medical cause, in which case trying to rationalise one's way out of them won't help - as some people pointed out in the comments. She also criticises medication, and further stigmatises mental illness. If you were vulnerable and you believed Jess's advice that you should be able to stop your panic attacks just by thinking through it rationally, and then it didn't work, how might you feel?
12th January 2024
Jess published an article on her Substack, publicly naming Sally Ann and accusing her of stalking. She claimed that Sally Ann was under a Stalking Protection Order, which was not true. Sally Ann was under an interim order pending a court case to decide if the SPO should be granted, but it was not, and the case was dropped. See wiki page 2 regarding the allegations that Jess made against Sally Ann and so-called "feminists."
A Stalking Protection Order is the equivalent of a restraining order in some other countries. They do not magically guarantee protection for the victim - stalkers are often not deterred by the threat of prison, and provoking them can be very dangerous. Jess knows this as she is a self-professed expert in stalking and claims to have done a lot of "frontline work" with victims. If she had been granted an SPO she would almost certainly have been advised not to publicly name or discuss the stalker in case of escalation. She seems to have been very confident that she'd "won" and silenced Sally Ann.
Not only did Sally Ann never stalk her, but most of the women Jess reported to police were former employees she wanted to keep quiet, or people who (like Rachel) had simply said something she didn't like. Calling this stalking is a complete insult to victims, including those she professes to help. See this comment.
14th January 2024
Jess responded to a tweet about sudden onset psychosis and stated that there is no such thing; all psychosis is caused by underlying "trauma." This is objectively not true as there are a number of physical causes that can trigger psychosis (including childbirth, brain tumours, infections, Alzheimer's Disease, and more.) People discussed this in the comments, and Jess got into arguments about it; leading several of her followers to attack the OP and accuse her of shilling for drug companies.
1st February 2024
A bizarre and self-aggrandising rant from Jess about how all ideas are actually hers. This is deeply hypocritical given the way she does blatantly clout-chase and try to get attention from celebrities. And that former VF staff have alleged they had to sign an agreement for their work to be used and presented as if it were hers!
4th February 2024
Jess made some very strange criticisms of psychiatrists. It appears she's never worked with a psychiatrist at all! They do acknowledge the effect of trauma and will refer patients for trauma therapy where appropriate. ECT (Electro-Convulsive Therapy) is a last resort requiring extensive assessments. She suggested that psychiatrists had told her she "should be struck off", again giving the false impression that she is a clinician.
21st February 2024
Jess claimed that antidepressants only "work" because the patient believes they will; stating that antidepressants have no effect on brain chemistry and perform no better than placebos. She's conflating two different things here. Recent evidence suggests that depression isn't caused by reduced serotonin in the brain (as was previously believed); but studies consistently show antidepressants to outperform a placebo. Just one of many examples of Jess encouraging people to stop taking their antidepressants with no regard for the consequences.
7th March 2024
There was considerable public speculation about why the Princess of Wales had not returned to royal duties after surgery. (She later confirmed that she was being treated for cancer.) Jess complained that no one cared about Meghan Markle being harassed, and people were only trying to protect Kate because she's white. Rather than say that it's not acceptable to do this to either of them, Jess came across as suggesting that Kate does deserve to be harassed because she's part of the "toxic", "gaslighting" Royal Family. So it's OK to blame the victim when she is someone Jess doesn't like.
10th March 2024
Jess made this Facebook post for Mother's Day.
She has two children, one from an abusive relationship in her teens (which she has publicly discussed many times), and one with her ex-husband, to whom she was married until 2019. She has since repeatedly described him as abusive, homophobic, and a misogynist; but he has said on social media that the children lived with him for at least four years after the divorce, and suggested they may still live with him. Therefore, Jess's post raises several concerns:
She has stated many times in the past that her older son was born as a result of sexual assault. In this post, she suggests both children were - "circumstances that were not consensual." Her children may not want others to know this about them, especially as it was the first time she had said so about the younger child. Imagine being 13 years of age and having your mother announce on Facebook that you were conceived from rape?
It must be confusing and upsetting for the children to see their father/stepfather spoken about this way publicly. Only a month after this Facebook post, Jess published an article about co-parenting with an abuser. She advised that your child may be unable to see that the abuser has done anything wrong, and it's important to respect their feelings - pushing the matter can be harmful. Evidently, she didn't think anything she had said here might be harmful to her children.
Jess again indicates here that her ex was abusive. If she did not challenge him for custody, it would raise serious questions about her professional credibility, particularly as an expert witness in cases of domestic abuse. Is this why the post tries to give the impression that the marriage ended when the children were baby/toddler-aged, and that they have always lived with her?
The post was discussed on Tattle and on other sites, with people questioning why Jess suggested her first marriage ended earlier than it did. (Again, this was in 2019, and at the time she openly stated that she had left her husband to come out as a lesbian.) A day or two later, she posted the below "response."
What she's saying is true; so again, why is she trying to obscure how long her first marriage lasted and that her children stayed with her ex-husband (seemingly by choice) after the divorce? This is just one example of her trying to present a different version of events on the subject. Others include a Twitter thread where she implied she was a single mother while studying, and her book Underclass where she claims she had a "boyfriend" when she met Jaimi.
Jess has spoken extensively about trauma bonding between children and abusive parents, and why abusive men shouldn't be given custody of children. She has drawn on her own experiences of this and written about how she had to fight to keep her older son away from his biological father. It certainly impacts on her professional credibility if she agreed to her children living with a man she describes as an abuser.
12th March 2024
Jess launched the "Life Experiences Reflection Tool", an app designed to help women reflect on their mental health and traumatic life events. It functions like a magazine quiz - ironic, given that Jess often compares psychiatric diagnoses to a magazine quiz! After completing the questions, the user will receive links to VictimFocus resources and generic advice such as Googling for help; something anyone could do without having to give Jess their personal data. (See wiki page 2 about her using VF courses for data mining.) See this thread by someone who used the app and found the questions to be very triggering.
30th March 2024
Over several days Jess shared a number of extracts from her upcoming memoir Underclass, including this one about a boy who bullied her. She suggests he had a learning disability, and describes him in offensive, stereotypical terms. While it's understandable that Jess felt this way about him when she was a vulnerable teenager, as a supposedly "trauma-informed" adult professional she should realise that describing someone like this is very offensive.
7th April 2024
Jess shared a video addressing criticisms by "people who hate me", including "professionals in my field, fellow psychologists, academics, and feminists." As usual, much of this was her distorting legitimate criticisms as personal attacks (e.g. mentioning that she's not a qualified clinical or forensic psychologist becomes "I don't have a REAL PhD!") and presenting things that were said on Tattle, social media, or other sites as having been said by other people in her field ("undergraduate students write better than Jess" was an opinion expressed in an Amazon review - not by a psychologist, academic, or feminist.) Seemingly, no one ever has issue with her work for any good reason, they just "hate her."
30th April 2024
After Jess had stated yet again that mental illness doesn't exist, a Twitter user responded that mental illness denialism is harmful; referring to her brother who had recently died by suicide. She posted a screenshot because she didn't want to draw Jess' attention. Jess, who had evidently been searching her name, responded to the tweet and implied the poster was a coward for not replying to her directly. Jess often talks about "respecting people's boundaries!" on social media yet refused to respect that this person clearly did not want to talk to her! She also suggested that the poster did not really know, or did not have enough compassion for, her own brother. What a sensitive and appropriate way for a so-called "trauma-informed" psychologist to speak to a recently bereaved person!
3rd May 2024
Jess reported a negative review of Underclass on Amazon, and had the review removed as supposedly "fake." She then posted on Facebook mocking the author of the review. Saying it was clearly fake because the book doesn't mention Jess getting married. The book does, however, describe her having a relationship and child with a man who had asked her to marry him - so she was just splitting hairs to get an unfavourable review removed. Given that Underclass also discusses how she faced classism and was denied an education, it's hypocritical for her to make fun of someone's spelling.
She also suggests that she's being deliberately targeted by trolls, and encourages her followers to help her by leaving positive reviews. This is manipulating the review system, and she did the same thing when the ITIM was released.
Jess also claimed her book was "a #1 Bestseller on Audible." It was - in the somewhat niche "Cultural History Biographies" section. This is a good example of how Jess twists words to make herself sound good while leaving room for plausible deniability - "I never said my book was the overall #1 ..." Again notice how she talks about classism and being made fun of for having a working-class accent, yet openly mocked someone for their spelling!
6th May 2024
In a Facebook post promoting Underclass, Jess again made false claims about Sally Ann and others. See this post and wiki page 2 for more about what actually happened. While Jess did not name Sally Ann here, a previous article on her Substack explicitly gave Sally Ann's full name and falsely stated that Sally Ann was under a Stalking Protection Order. Jess's followers know this and some of them had attacked Sally Ann on social media over it.
She also stated that she had been a victim of unspecified offences from another person (not Sally Ann) in the lead-up to the release of Underclass. Somehow, Jess always seems to have a crisis going on at the time she has a book coming out. With Why Women Are Blamed For Everything it was being attacked by incels/MRAs; with Sexy But Psycho it was academics and psychiatrists trying to silence her; and with the ITIM it was health issues and more vague references to courts and trolls. It's intended to make readers feel like they're supporting the underdog, and that what she says is so real and important that others are trying to keep her from speaking out about it. It's not a coincidence that Jess has a number of conspiracy theorists among her followers.
18th May 2024
Jess attacked British feminists and women working in VAWG, implying they are anti-Black and consciously choosing to support an abuser by not speaking out about violence against famous African-American women. Why would British feminists be talking about R Kelly any more than American feminists are talking about, say, Russell Brand or Noel Clarke?
The UK VAWG sector is vastly under-resourced and is largely charitable. It's no surprise that women who work long hours for minimum wage (or as volunteers) to protect victims of abuse aren't tweeting about celebrities very much! Not everyone is as fixated on fame and clout-chasing as Jess. What she's doing here is using Black women as a "gotcha" and to prop up her own ego.
4th June 2024
In a Substack article, Jess gave advice on "trauma-informed" parenting. She speaks as if she has always been the main custodial parent of her children, which is not true; they lived with her ex-husband for at least four years and may still be living with him. It would be more honest and authentic to write about co-parenting, or how to help children deal with the impact of separation/divorce.
7th June 2024
Another anti-academia rant by Jess. There's some irony in a woman who has repeatedly published others' stories without consent, and whose company allegedly requires staff to sign an agreement allowing her to put her name on anything they create, trying to get others punished for plagiarism! It's not clear what universities she worked with, as none of them are on her CV (see wiki page 1) - the only university we know she has lectured at for sure is Derby. Working across multiple universities is typical for a post-doc experience but Jess knows it will sound impressive to someone who is not familiar with academia.
There is also a vast difference between "kicking a student off the course" vs advising that she take a break from study during difficult personal circumstances - which is what it sounds like happened here. Someone going through violence or abuse is highly likely to experience emotional stress and burnout, no matter how good their grades are. Even if the student felt able to continue without a break, the "trauma informed" thing to do would be to listen and support her, not to try to demand that she continue no matter what.
It's slightly confusing that Jess encourages working class people, women, and people of colour to go into academia because "we need your voices!" but then makes posts like these. See this comment from a working academic regarding Jess's claims in this post.
10th June 2024
This kind of talk is extremely irresponsible when your audience is comprised of vulnerable people; it can encourage despairing or suicidal thoughts. See this comment (by a Tattler who works in mental health services.)
3rd July 2024
Jess once again posted about how she never attacks or criticises individuals and only focuses on systemic issues. Saying "I don't name people I disagree with" (yet she gave Sally Ann's full name and accused her of stalking), "I don't mock celebrities I don't agree with" (yet mocks Johnny Depp), and "I don't tag people I don't agree with or don't like" (see above for how she directly cut in and responded to someone that did not want to speak to her.)
7th July 2024
In response to someone suggesting it's hypocritical for Angela Rayner to wear a lot of designer clothes while professing to be a socialist, Jess accused the OP of expecting working class people to "look like shit" and never own anything nice or expensive. That's a total straw man, and Jess is white so she shouldn't use AAVE ("stay in their dusty ass lane.")
See this post on her Substack (it's paywalled, but the free version shows enough to indicate what it's about.) In the post Jess tries to give the impression that her PhD makes her equally as qualified to do the same job as someone with a DClinPsy or DForenPsy, but she is dismissed and told to "stay in her lane" because she's a working class woman. By using the same lines about Angela Rayner, i.e. "you're telling her to stay in her lane because you can't stand to see a working class mum be successful", Jess is trying to make herself look more credible when she misrepresents her qualifications and experience.
18th July 2024
Jess spoke on her social media and in a Substack post (paywalled for subscribers) about re-evaluating her life after a personal tragedy. She said that there was an active police investigation and she could not yet speak out, and that whatever happened led to her almost dying - heavily implying that someone had tried to kill her. Again, it's far from the first time she's described things like this happening. It is unclear whether this was related to her post earlier in the year about a "serious crime" against her and Jaimi and a man being arrested. This is on top of her allegations of stalking by Sally Ann and endless harassment by various feminists, incels, academics, etc.
To say the least, Jess must be extremely unlucky for this to be repeatedly happening to her. Especially when she's not a celebrity or public figure; she is an influencer, but has comparatively low engagement, and is little known outside of certain circles. Jess speaks a lot about how the police are corrupt, misogynistic, and fail to protect women, but seems to have multiple ongoing police investigations at any given time. Again see this comment about why it's not wise for her to talk about things like parallel timelines and reality-warping to an audience of vulnerable people.
27th July 2024
Jess explicitly made the claim that there is no such thing as schizophrenia; it's just "abuse of marginalised groups." Obviously, schizophrenia does exist, and it can have physical/medical causes. Jess's claim that schizophrenia is not real and is just "pathologising trauma" is harmful, stigmatising, and can prevent people getting the help they need.
The Twitter account @BadMedicalTakes, which has almost 300,000 followers and highlights uninformed medical opinions stated as fact, shared Jess's tweet. A psychiatrist based in the USA (Dr M.) retweeted it, expressing the opinion that Jess is a grifter and misrepresents her qualifications. Dr M. has had conflict in the past with Jess, as he has criticised her on Twitter and made fun of her in a TikTok skit.
Jess named Dr M. on her public social media, and named his employer and the state where he works, encouraging others to report him. Saying "You know I don’t normally ever do this", which is clearly false; she has repeatedly made personal attacks and named people as having harassed or stalked her, including Sally Ann and Rachel! She stated that Dr M. was portraying her as a "bimbo" (a word he never used) and that he had been "dressing up as (her)" and "pretending to be (her)" for over a year. In reality he had posted one TikTok video, in which he wore a wig and mimicked Jess, more than a year previously. She suggested that he'd been continually harassing her ever since the video was posted, which is not true.
Many people have said she's wrong without referring to her appearance or making fun of her, and every time, Jess shouts them down and insists it's a personal attack. She undoubtedly does get trolls and inappropriate comments, but most criticism of her is not about her looks, "tits", or being a "bimbo." There were multiple tweets in the last couple of days alone where she had mocked and personally attacked Dr M! Among other things, she said that he had neglected his wife and newborn child because he was too busy cyberbullying Jess; and suggested he has a sexual fetish for dressing up as her. He was wearing a wig and glasses in the video, which he does in a lot of his videos to portray different, mostly male, characters. Jess claimed he was wearing makeup (he wasn't), trying to make it sound more like drag or something sexual.
Jess's followers repeated her false claim that Dr M. was "stalking", impersonating, and harassing her. He subsequently stated on Twitter that her fans had dogpiled him, left negative reviews online, and were contacting his employer to try to demand he be fired.
(Jess's follower)
(Dr M.)
Meanwhile, someone who has severe bipolar disorder, and felt that Jess was stigmatising the condition, responded to her with "fuck you, in the arse, with a barbed pole." Another person, who works in the NHS, retweeted it. It was wrong for the OP to say this and for the second person to share it on an account he uses for work - for which he should face consequences. But Jess presented it that both of them were threatening her with rape. In context, it's pretty clear the OP meant it as "fuck off."
Again: no one "dressed up as her" in a sexual manner or threatened to rape her. Remember, this started because Jess made the false and harmful claim that schizophrenia doesn't exist. Yet she deflected and obscured this, portraying herself as a victim of misogynistic trolling and personal attacks, and making out a man living with serious mental illness to be a sex offender because he objected to her ignorant comments.
5th August 2024
Jess announced the launch of The Amethyst Programme, a new VictimFocus self-help programme and book for people dealing with any kind of trauma or abuse. She describes the programme as "trauma-informed and anti-pathologising" like all her other material. But if trauma is natural and doesn't need treatment, why does she see a need for what is effectively a treatment programme? Isn't it "pathologising" of her to sell this? When someone asked her if the book is suitable for those in relationships with a person who has Narcissistic Personality Disorder, Jess replied it is. But she's repeatedly said that belief in personality disorders or narcissism is pathologisation and misogyny. Evidently, that doesn't bother her when she can use it to sell something.
11th August 2024
Jess put out a call on social media for followers to nominate schools to receive free VF materials aimed at children (such as books, journals, and flashcards.)
Let's look at the many ways in which this is unethical:
She's publicly claiming to be able to support vulnerable children with "self-help" materials that haven't been trialled in studies or peer reviewed. All these materials are written by someone (herself) who is not clinically trained, nor an expert in child psychology/development, nor a teacher.
These materials normally retail for around £15 each - what you'd expect to pay for any other self-help book/journal/etc., not for a professional resource. Since she couldn't sell them, she's now giving them away but asking for the price of postage. If she wants to help, why not pay for the postage herself (at £5 for around 300 materials, that's £1500 - not much for what's seemingly a very successful business) and send new, current stock?
See "Promoting unsuitable products" on wiki page 1 - some of these materials contain potentially triggering prompts and questions, and are intended to be completed without the support of a professional. Jess is happy for children to use these by themselves or with untrained adults. That includes very vulnerable children; some people were asking her to donate materials to (for example) schools in areas affected by child trafficking, or to a support unit for abused children.
It is not clear whether parents would be asked for consent or have the opportunity to look at the materials before they're given to children.
This is all while Jess claims to operate to the highest ethical standards and always work in a "trauma-informed" manner. Meanwhile, she criticises practitioner psychologists for supposedly not understanding trauma-informed practice.
23rd August 2024
Leaked WhatsApp messages between Andrew Tate and his brother showed them talking in extremely misogynistic, dehumanising terms about women they had allegedly trafficked. Jess criticised Tate and said that she would never talk this way about another woman. It's the height of hypocrisy for her to complain about abusive WhatsApp messages, when she herself exchanged messages with her staff attacking Sally Ann and Rachel. (See wiki page 2.) Jess justifies this behaviour by saying that they both harassed, doxxed, and "stalked" her and were arrested or "warned" by police - all of which is false.
Jess and Jaimi had previously thought it was appropriate to retweet a post by Tate encouraging violence (by "strap" he means gun) and make a joke about their sex life. This was on their public accounts that they use for work, and which are followed by many women who have been abused.
Also on the 23rd August, Jess's ex-husband alleged that a former partner had made a malicious false report to police, saying he had a gun. He in fact legally owned a CO2 pellet gun. He stated in subsequent tweets that this led to him being arrested and undergoing a drug test (his ex had falsely claimed he used steroids.)
This fits with Jess posting on August 1st that a man had been arrested by police over threats made to her and Jaimi, and that "a gun was seized."
She gives the impression that the man in question was plotting to kill her and Jaimi, but doesn't explicitly say so, nor does she say the gun was his. This leaves room for plausible deniability i.e. "I didn't say he was charged with anything!" Jess lives in England where possession of an illegal firearm carries a minimum 5-year prison sentence. If this man had been found to have a gun, he would be detained, and she wouldn't need a court order.
She also mentions "an ongoing stalking case", again implying without explicitly saying that Sally Ann was involved. Her followers will certainly think so, as Jess publicly named Sally Ann as having stalked her and being under a Stalking Protection Order. Again, this is false and Sally Ann has never stalked Jess nor been under any order. She has nothing to do with Jess's ex-husband, and it is reprehensible if Jess has told the police that Sally Ann is involved.
It's very worrying if a so-called expert in VAWG and advocate for abused women has repeatedly made false allegations to police about people and malicious applications for court orders. The fact she so freely talks about this is very telling; she evidently isn't worried that she's provoking the alleged offender or that they are likely to break the order.
29th August 2024
Jess posted a rant about how modern feminism is just privileged white women attacking other women and threatening to sue people. Given how frequently she threatens to sue people, and that she is a privileged white woman herself, the lack of self-awareness here is laughable. As always, she scaremongered about drugs and doctors - no, GPs generally won't tell a distressed woman that she needs to be on medication for life.
2nd September 2024
Jess's ex-husband again alleged on social media (without naming her) that the mother of his children had made false accusations about him to police. This included allegations about the children, and him supposedly conspiring to kill someone. As a result, he was arrested and investigated, but released without charge.
Shortly afterwards, he deleted this, and Jess made a seemingly innocuous post about men who kill their own children to get back at an ex.
As anyone in child protection will be aware, there would have to be very serious accusations for police to take this kind of action. Sally Ann has previously said that Jess made extreme, exaggerated allegations against her in an effort to get a Stalking Protection Order against her.
If it is true that Jess has repeatedly made false allegations to police, she is not fit to be an expert witness in family court or advise vulnerable women who are experiencing domestic abuse. But as a research psychologist, she's not required to register with any regulatory body, so there is no oversight into her actions.
8th September 2024
Even her son's birthday is all about her! Predictably, Jess ignored a lot of replies from women talking about their own experiences of abuse or teenage Pregnancy, but responded to the comments praising her.
10th September 2024
Jess encouraging women to stop taking their prescribed medication and telling them they can get mental health diagnoses removed from their medical records. This is false, and you usually can't get a clinical opinion removed (although can ask for a note to be added saying that you disagree with the diagnosis.) Even a misdiagnosis doesn't get removed, as it's an accurate record of the fact the patient was diagnosed incorrectly. Also notice how she suggests that whatever her followers have achieved is all thanks to her!
11th September 2024
In response to another mental illness denialist claiming there's no such thing as schizophrenia, Jess got into an argument with someone, yet again.
Jess's argument here is a strawman. No one in the thread suggested that psychosis presents only in hospitals or prisons. Saying that someone doesn't have practical experience of dealing with psychosis, therefore is uninformed about it, is a valid criticism of their position - it is not ad hominem (a personal attack.) See wiki page 1 for more about Jess's views on psychosis, which are very inaccurate. Among other things she thinks that psychosis is "a social construct", that it never has physical causes, and equates it to religious belief or "hearing voices."
She also suggests here (and has said before) that hallucinations are completely normal, natural, and harmless. While psychotic symptoms should not be stigmatised, they are a sign that something could be wrong medically, including a physical illness or infection. Jess is ignorantly taking the risk of causing someone who could be very ill not to seek medical help.
It's not clear from her CV when she would have worked with homeless people for years (see "Career history" on wiki page 1.) She is likely referring to her time at The Eaton Foundation, a men's mental health charity that she co-founded with her ex-husband. It offered a weekly drop-in session that would signpost users to other resources, since The Eaton Foundation couldn't offer these services itself. Seeing people once a week, who may or may not be homeless, doesn't give her extensive experience with psychosis - as evidenced by how misinformed her view of the condition is.
Furthermore, she tries to give the impression that she's a qualified practitioner psychologist. Jess hasn't "trained" or "practiced" in her living room or anywhere else!
22nd September 2024
Another addition to the list of Jess's ever-expanding experience, now saying she worked with human trafficking and child exploitation charities and worked directly on cases of child trafficking. There is no indication on her CV that she has ever worked with such an organisation - if she did, it must have involved short-term research or consulting. Before she set up VictimFocus in 2018 she studied for an undergraduate degree and then a PhD, while working in various jobs, and (or so she claims) raising two children as a single mother the whole time. Is she now saying she did extensive work with victims of CSE on top of this?
She brings up conspiracy theories around child trafficking, including that Avicii ended his life or was murdered because he knew too much about powerful people involved in trafficking. Yet again, see above about why it is harmful and irresponsible to talk about conspiracies to an audience of mostly vulnerable people. Not content with this, she posted a whole article on her Substack about how the entire entertainment industry is involved in organised sexual abuse, and anyone telling you it's a conspiracy is lying to you. All with absolutely no concern as to how this kind of talk might affect her audience. Over the next week or so she continued to regularly post this kind of content, implying that almost all famous/powerful people (presumably excluding the celebrity women she wants to notice her) are involved in mass sexual abuse.
Ultimately, it's actions that matter, not words. Jess claims she supports victims yet attacked and tried to discredit Sally Ann and Rosie, who have both experienced CSE.
27th September 2024
Jess published an article in which she talks about "protest psychosis." This term was coined by the psychiatrist Jonathan Metzl (whom Jess cites) in a 2010 book. It focuses on how, at a major psychiatric hospital in the 1960s, changes to the DSM's diagnostic criteria for schizophrenia led to a disproportionate number of diagnoses of African-Americans - particularly men who were involved in the civil rights movement. Jess makes it sound as if "protest psychosis" is a recognised psychiatric disorder you can be diagnosed with for being involved in activism. This is not true. As always, in the article she speaks over Black people, and explicitly claims that mental illness does not exist.
It's also strange that she promoted this on Facebook with a series of screenshots of the article, all of which contain the address of her blog - but then asked followers to DM her for the link. She often asks people to DM her for links to her articles even though they're all on the blog! This is very similar to scammy marketing tactics used on Instagram ("leave THIS word in the comments and I'll DM you") which is used to sell to people. It is also concerning given Jess's questionable use of others' personal information, and encouraging followers to join her private Facebook group where she can say what she likes with no oversight.
29th September 2024
So, people shouldn't go to psychiatrists because it's all just a money-making scam. Instead, they should be buying Jess's courses, books, flashcards, journals, etc. and giving their money to her, even though she does not have the appropriate qualifications or experience to be telling anyone how to "process their trauma." As evidenced by the fact she advises them to do it without appropriate professional support.
1st October 2024
Jess advised that, before getting pregnant, a woman should consider whether her partner is likely to become abusive if they ever split up.
This advice is exactly the kind of thing Jess calls victim blaming. She's been in abusive relationships herself and is a self-professed expert in VAWG, so she should understand why it's not fair or reasonable to expect a woman to carry out a risk assessment on her partner. In fact, only the previous day, she'd posted saying "don't blame yourself if you couldn't see the warning signs of abuse!"
She also charges high fees for her services as an expert witness in family court. You might expect her not to overlook the fact that in England and Wales, a mother may only legally omit her child's father from the birth certificate if they are not married - even then, he can petition a family court to be added.
Jess got some criticism on social media over her comments so, a few hours later, she posted about her commitment to eradicating victim blaming. She shared this extract from one of her books.
So, telling a woman not to get drunk is victim blaming, but telling her not to have a baby without first trying to predict whether her partner might abuse her in the next 18 years isn't? A "VAWG expert" giving advice like this is validating misogynistic attitudes that women choose to have children with unsuitable men and it's their own fault if they are abused.
This post may have been aimed at her ex-husband, who had recently posted about her making false allegations against him to police, and who she has repeatedly described as manipulative and abusive. She's often said that when both her children's fathers abused her, people would tell her she should have chosen a better father for her children. So, how does she think other women in that situation will feel when they read her "advice?"
3rd October 2024
In a blog post Jess criticised the UK version of Married at First Sight, saying that two contestants who didn't find their assigned wives attractive were being sexually coerced. Both men had been very harsh about the women's looks and made it clear that the "problem" was that they thought the women were fat. Jess often criticises men for "body shaming" women, but in this article doesn't mention it, apart from a vague "I'm curvy myself and I know it can be hurtful when someone doesn't find you attractive!" Why is she suddenly so sympathetic to these men? The show playing up the angle of one man being paired with a woman who looks like his sister is an indicator that it is all heavily staged for TV!
She talked a lot about the importance of ongoing consent - something she evidently thinks applies only to sex, and not to consent to publish someone's personal experiences. She said it is irresponsible that the "experts" on the show have no qualifications in psychology or safeguarding. Jess has repeatedly lied about/misrepresented her qualifications in psychology, and shown a blatant lack of concern for safeguarding, so she has absolutely no moral authority to criticise anyone else! The contestants are assessed by clinical psychologists more qualified than Jess, and have little to do with the "experts", who are mostly there for show. Decisions about who is paired with who and what situations they will be placed in are up to the producers. If Jess was hoping to get TV jobs through writing this, she's only further demonstrated that she doesn't know much about how it actually works.
16th October 2024
Jess sneering at cancer research and saying a study into thyroid cancer was "money & time pissed up the wall", based on a clickbaity headline. No one's saying that cancer is a good thing! What the article actually says is that the study found thyroid cancer to be just as physically and psychologically detrimental to patients as any other type, despite the tendency among physicians to emphasise its comparatively good prognosis. Research like this is a good thing if it leads to better outcomes for patients! Jess is even more ignorant about cancer than she is about mental health and thankfully it's not up to her to decide how funding for cancer research should be allocated. This is one of many examples of her presenting clickbait or blatantly false claims as fact, without bothering to read the source.
17th October 2024
This was Jess's response to Elon Musk announcing that Twitter/X would now allow people to see posts from accounts that have blocked them.
No one threatened to rape and murder her. See 17th July above - Jess made ignorant comments saying schizophrenia doesn't exist, and someone who has severe bipolar disorder replied "fuck you, in the arse, with a barbed pole." He later apologised and deleted the tweet. Although offensive, it wasn't intended as a threat of rape, and there was no mention of murder or cutting her up. This is an outright lie, but Jess knows people can't check it easily because the original tweet was deleted. This man may well be a survivor of sexual assault himself; rates of sexual abuse among men with severe mental illness are far higher than among the general population. Regardless, Jess deliberately stigmatised a man she knew to be mentally ill, and portrayed him as a predator, further enforcing stereotypes that people who have bipolar disorder and related conditions are dangerous.
No one is under a court order either (see wiki page 2 for how she tried to get an order against Sally Ann for "stalking"), nor did anyone wear makeup and dress up as her (she's referring to Dr M., again see 17th July.) Someone said in a comment that removing the block function will allow Jess to see what people are saying about her and Jess replied that she never reads it. That's another lie, as she has repeatedly replied to people who didn't tag her, indicating that she searches for her name. See 30th April above for one example of this; another is when someone criticised her on Facebook (not on her own page) and she found it, searched for them on Twitter, then sent them aggressive messages.
18th November 2024
If Jess thinks psychiatrists are narcissistic because they brag about their credentials, why then does she constantly flaunt hers at every turn (including professional memberships that she has because she paid for them?) She also complains that "psychiatry isn't medicine!" while sneering at the field of medicine as well, as evidenced in her post about the cancer study.
29th November 2024
After British MPs voted in favour of an assisted dying bill, Jess published a Substack article stating her objection to the proposed bill. She made the claim that "so far, all young women who have died by euthanasia and whose cases have been reported in the media were subjected to sexual abuse and significant trauma", and their deaths are a result of misogyny and the evils of psychiatry. Jess cites three cases in the Netherlands as examples.
Firstly, all three of these cases were reported on because they involved young female victims of sexual abuse. One of these women had to (as Jess acknowledges!) repeatedly plead her case for euthanasia because her doctors wouldn't approve it. Another of the cases Jess refers to involved a young woman who had anorexia and chose not to be force-fed or undergo further treatment. Subsequently, her death was falsely reported as euthanasia. While it can be seen as a form of assisted dying, no request was made for euthanasia, and many countries including the UK already allow a patient to choose to discontinue treatment.
Furthermore, news reports alone do not give an accurate picture of who requests euthanasia and why, or if and how it differs by country. If Jess does not speak Dutch or the languages of some of the other countries where euthanasia is legal (Germany, Spain, Portugal, etc.) then she will only have access to a limited number of news reports relating to those countries. In most places where euthanasia is legal, it is considered part of healthcare, and most cases are not reported on in the press unless they are somehow noteworthy - the deceased was well known, a legal appeal was involved, etc. Once again, Jess is manufacturing outrage, and misrepresenting facts while failing to research.
4th December 2024
Jess claimed that Facebook had "punished" her for posting about Conor McGregor's abuse case, that she had been made to remove a post about Nikita Hand, and others could no longer see her posts or search her name to find her page. But Tattlers who don't follow her were able to search for her, and there have been plenty of posts about McGregor on Facebook (including about Nikita Hand winning her case.) Why, then, is Jess seemingly the only one being silenced? Did she make this up to try to improve her engagement? It's common for people in MLMs to lie about being "shadowbanned" and then encourage followers to help them by liking and sharing posts.
