Source : the age
One of the most salacious details to come to light since Sean “Diddy” Combs was arrested and charged with sex trafficking and racketeering has been his so-called “freak-offs”.
Reportedly taking place between Combs, his former partner, Cassie Ventura, and a rotation of sex workers, Ventura told a New York jury this week that she participated in hundreds of these events during her decade-long relationship with Combs, despite not wanting to.
Sean “Diddy” Combs and Casandra Ventura in 2018.Credit: AP
She said that during the “freak-offs”, which Combs would allegedly orchestrate and film, she was scared, felt coerced and only went along with it to please a man she was in love with. She said the days-long, drug-fuelled parties made her “feel worthless”.
Considering the “freak-offs” are pivotal to the charges brought against Combs, the interest in Ventura’s recent testimony is understandable. Over the past few days, much has been made of the length of their relationship, and messages Ventura sent to Combs expressing interest in these sexual acts.
But many of the questions being asked miss the point. As we’ve seen so many times before, Ventura is being asked why she stayed with Combs for eleven years if it was a bad relationship? Why didn’t she just leave? If she enjoyed the “freak-offs”, as some of her messages suggest, is she saying something different now simply to take him down?
In focussing on her decision-making and her behaviour, we ignore a few key things – namely, Ventura’s emotional and sexual vulnerability.
When they first met, Cassie was 19 years old. She was signed to his record label and was the face of his clothing brand, making Diddy her boss first and then her boyfriend. By contrast, Diddy was 17 years her senior, well established in the music industry, and enjoying a formidable presence and cultural capital. Where she was just emerging into adulthood with a limited relationship and sexual history, he was already a father to six children. The power differential and differences in knowledge and experience were stark.
Abuse of power is a hallmark of coercive relationships. As a psychologist, I work with both victims and perpetrators of intimate partner violence and sexual assault, and often find differentials in power that allow one person to control the other. Sometimes this power is gender-based or financial. Other times, it might be related to age differences, life experience, social capital, or linguistic and cultural differences. Often, it’s a blend of all.
There are many ways of exerting power, and it’s typical for people who have less to go along with the wishes and desires of a more powerful partner, especially if the partner also promises love and access to status in return. I have had victim-survivor clients tell me “it wasn’t always bad; sometimes he was very loving. I didn’t realise it was a problem at the time; I thought I just had to be better.”
This cycle of intense love and connection followed by devaluation or abuse can leave victims confused, desperate to find out what they did “wrong”, and locked in a cycle of trying to change their behaviour to keep the peace. Abuse followed by love can also lead to a trauma bond, where the victim feels attachment, love, fear and shame, and may form loyalty to their abuser.
As Ventura said this week when asked why she continued to participate in the “freak-offs”: “I wanted to make him happy”.
At 19, our brains and personalities are still forming, and people are more prone to risk-taking and high-intensity behaviours. To people with predatory aims, this can be weaponised (organised crime networks preying on young people in residential care, for example).
In her testimony, Ventura saying she needed to use substances to engage in “freak-offs” is telling. It suggests a level of needing to dissociate to manage or enjoy the events.
Based on her evidence, Cassie is not dissimilar to many women I have treated who have been abused in relationships. Most say they were initially drawn to features of the perpetrator which later became problematic, such as confidence, charm and power. They usually find it takes them years or decades to name the behaviours they experience and to leave.
Differentiating between safe and unsafe behaviours is a complex skill, and one most young women aren’t taught, especially against their bosses or in romantic relationships. If they were, young women would be less likely to be taken in by perpetrators who appear charming, but are dangerous. They would prioritise making themselves happy, not appeasing someone who hurts them.
Dr Ahona Guha is a clinical and forensic psychologist, trauma expert and author based in Melbourne.
