Nicole Prause’s Unethical Harassment and Defamation of Gary Wilson and Others (Page 4)

Introduction (as it appears on Page #1)

Legal counsel advised us to create these pages, which document Nicole Prause’s extensive campaign targeting those who point out possible harms of porn use or issues in the porn industry. “Sunshine” protects the community Prause harasses by preserving facts and permitting visitors and journalists to understand the truth for themselves. Indeed, these pages have already been cited in a defamation case against Prause:

“An extremely detailed and well documented history of Defendant’s with accounts from dozens of her victims/targets dating from 2013 to present, which spans over two thousand pages of documents and evidence, is available at https://bit.ly/32KOa3q.”

Nicole Prause has engaged in a veritable avalanche of false claims, defamation, malicious reporting, targeted harassment, baseless lawsuits, and threats of lawsuits. These pages document many of her smear tactics, although some incidents are not included because the targets fear further retaliation by her (Page 1, Page 2, Page 3, Page 4, Page 5, Page 6).

I (Gary Wilson) am perhaps her favorite target, but she has also targeted researchers, medical doctors, therapists, psychologists, colleagues from her short stint at UCLA, a UK charity, men in recovery, a TIME magazine editor, several professors, IITAP, SASH, Fight The New Drug, TraffickingHub, Exodus Cry, the academic journal Behavioral Sciences, its parent company MDPI, US Navy medical doctors, the head of the academic journal CUREUS, and the journal Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity. These incidents are labeled “OTHERS.” The incidences documented are arranged roughly in chronological order.

With respect to me, early on she falsely claimed that I was the subject of a “no contact” order. She first falsely accused me of stalking in 2013 when she and David Ley began targeting my website with their PT blog post, “Your Brain on Porn – It’s NOT Addictive.” When I challenged some of their false claims, Prause tried to intimidate me to remove my response by accusing me of stalking.

Since then, she has routinely weaponized this accusation against multiple people, embellished with false accusations of “death threats,” apparently to suppress exposure of her bias and malicious activity. In other words, her narrative of victimhood has escalated over the years as has her harassment.

In late 2020, she suddenly began claiming that she had been sexually assaulted in 2019, and that I was mysteriously responsible. She falsely claims that I posted her address on YBOP and that it led to her being grabbed on the street by a young man with a skateboard. She has not provided any objective evidence of either my having posted her physical address or her having been grabbed.

The irony is that Prause didn’t mind disclosing her actual home address to me when she filed bankruptcy to avoid paying me some ~$40K in attorney fees after the SLAPP ruling the court awarded me (see “Legal matters” below). She was confident that I would never reveal it (and I have no interest in doing so) – which shows just how absurd are her claims that I want to put her at risk. Incidentally, in her bankruptcy filing she swore that she has lived at that same address for more than 3 years. Yet she has simultaneously repeatedly claimed (lied) that she has moved multiple times to elude her (nonexistent) stalkers. Anything to feed the myth of her fabricated persecution!

Just to clarify, I have never encouraged anyone to harass Prause. Nor have I seen any evidence that anyone I know has harassed her or placed her at risk. She has a habit of supplying fabricated “evidence” that does not, in fact, establish her claims. For example, she treats her false reports to law enforcement, her C&D letters accusing people of things they haven’t done, her irrelevant screenshots, and her confederates’ unsworn statements as proof, although none supply fact-based evidence to support her claims.

It’s worth noting that Canadian investigative journalist Diana Davison who authored The Post Millennial expose’ on Prause, talked with her on the record for almost a week. In public comments under a related video Davison commented, “Prause said many things to me but none of her “evidence” actually supported her claims. In every instance the evidence reversed who the aggressor was. She basically accuses others of the exact things she herself did. I emailed with her, on the record, for almost a week.” In a second comment Davison said, “When I said I spent two weeks researching this that means I read every court document and every related document and spent a week emailing with Prause herself who cut me off after I started asking for actual evidence of harassment.” Prause responded by threatening to sue both Davison and The Post Millennial, although she did not follow through.

Legal matters

Although Prause and her confederates work hard to paint her as the victim, she is, in fact, the aggressor, both on social media and in legal matters. In court, this hasn’t worked out well for her. This page documents various legal victories over Prause, two of which involved me. I’ll summarize them.

In early 2020, Prause tried to bolster her self-constructed victimhood campaign by filing a baseless restraining order request against me. In her lie-filled filings, Prause went so far as to defame and dox my son. The court denied her request in August, 2020. The judge also granted my SLAPP (“Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation”) motion. This means he decided that Prause’s frivolous legal proceeding was an illicit attempt to suppress my free speech rights.

In short, her claims of victimhood could not be proved. In fact, at the hearing most of her evidence was tossed out as “hearsay,” “conclusory,” “irrelevant” and so forth. One week prior to the hearing, Prause went on Twitter to announce falsely that she had a “protective order” against me, inciting her enraged followers to harass me. Shortly before the hearing, her own attorney tried to resign because she had threatened him with legal action when he wouldn’t engage in unethical conduct. Press release

Next, she filed a defamation suit against me in Oregon. In January, 2021, the court found Prause had not made her case, and awarded me costs and a penalty (which Prause has refused to pay). Press release.

Incidentally, Prause has not paid either of the judgments I won. Instead, she has chosen a public campaign of defaming and threatening me – as if I am the wrongdoer instead of herself. She has also publicly denied that she lost either of the above legal proceedings. Astonishing.

As an aside, in early 2019 Prause filed a false declaration with the US Trademark authorities when she applied to grab my common law trademarks, claiming that she knew of no one who had the right to use my URL and trademarks. By this scheme, she sought to gain exclusive legal rights to my well established URL. This was a transparent effort to censor my entire site. Details. Clearly, it’s absurd to portray Prause as a victim, given a malicious campaign like this one.

After many hours of attorney time, I received my formal trademark registrations as well as the associated infringing URL, RealYourBrainOnPorn.com. The associated Twitter account @BrainOnPorn meanwhile conducted a reign of terror for 18 months. @BrainOnPorn exercised its supposed “collective” voice to tweet more than 1,000 defamatory and malicious statements (up to 170 tweets a day!) about anyone with whom Prause disagreed. Prause has denied involvement, but simple observation, correspondence from RealYBOP’s personnel, WIPO’s report, and considerable evidence point to her management of RealYBOP’s social media accounts and URL (evidence here).

Three separate parties have filed defamation suits against Prause over her untruthful, life-wrecking campaigns: Donald L. Hilton, Jr. v. Nicole Prause, et al., United States District Court for the Western District of Texas San Antonio Division, Case No. 5: 19-CV-00755-OLG; Alexander Rhodes v. Nicole Prause, et al., United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, Case No. 2:19-cv-01366, and Aaron M. Minc, Esq v. Melissa A. Farmer and Nicole R. Prause, Case No: CV-20-937026 in Cuyahoga County, Ohio. (It appears that Farmer has agreed to a settlement, which will leave Prause as the sole defendant. No doubt the settlement involved a payout from Farmer’s insurance company. In an affidavit dated April 8, 2021, Farmer admitted her wrongdoing in retweeting Prause’s lies [PDF of retraction] Prause has stated that her own insurance company has declined to cover her for Minc’s suit against her, so she may be left directly responsible for any financial repercussions in that suit too. She still owes Wilson with respect to his victory against her.)

The first 2 cases settled in early 2021. Although the terms were not disclosed, it’s reasonable to speculate that the settlements were made possible by substantial payments from Prause’s insurance carrier (court documents reveal that funds were transferred to plaintiffs). The third and most recent defamation lawsuit suit is ongoing in Ohio. In that case, a colleague of Prause who republished Prause’s defamatory tweets was a co-defendant and was sadly exposed to liability for blindly joining in the rampage.

It’s worth noting that Prause herself has a growing record as a vexatious litigant. In the last year or so, she has filed more than half a dozen small claims suits, and, before that, some 40 malicious reports against dozens of people and organizations (yet, Prause has never prevailed in any lawsuit and all her fraudulent reports were dismissed). Prause has a long, well established history of trying to silence and disparage anyone she disagrees with by fabricating claims of her victimhood.

Multiple social media suspensions

In October, 2015 Prause’s original Twitter account @NicolePrause was permanently suspended for misconduct.

In March, 2018, Prause’s Quora account was banned for posting and misrepresenting, personal information.

In October, 2020 the @BrainOnPorn Twitter account, which Prause appears to have managed, was permanently suspended for targeted harassment and abuse.

In March, 2021, her second personal Twitter account, @NicoleRPrause was temporarily suspended for making “violent threats.”

I suspect that Prause was behind two more extinct Twitter accounts: @CorrectingWils1 and her first porn industry shill account @PornHelps.

Media outlets and others have been harmed by Prause’s lies

UK media outlet Scram News went out of business after it had to pay substantial damages because it had printed Prause’s defamatory lies. I’ve heard that VICE was subjected to a similar libel claim and had to remove false information provided to it by Prause, incurring substantial legal costs. I know first-hand that MEL magazine proposed a series of stories about her purported victim-hood. Yet, after further investigation, MEL declined to print Prause’s lies – and the magazine soon suspended publication entirely. Faced with legal action, The Daily Beast retracted Prause’s unproven allegations against specific individuals. Lastly, the University of Wisconsin-Lacrosse student newspaper was forced to remove an “investigative” article featuring Dr. Prause’s lies about me (U of W general counsel was involved).

Prause’s cozy relationship with the porn industry

Let’s start with the definition of a “shill”:

A shill…is a person who publicly helps or gives credibility to a person or organization without disclosing that they have a close relationship with the person or organization. … Shills may be employed by salespeople and professional marketing campaigns.

Keeping in mind the above definition, consider these many examples. Prause is unswervingly pro-porn, displaying a single mindedness that is remarkable in a scientist, given that scientists usually jealously guard their impartiality.

Three Twitter accounts – her own @NicoleRPrause account as well as the suspended @BrainOnPorn and @PornHelps (the latter 2 of which Prause appeared to manage) – consistently prop, or propped, up the porn industry and attacked its critics.

Prause also appears to have created 50+ Wikipedia sockpuppets (thus far) to bolster the industry’s interests and discredit critics with misleading edits, along with dozens of other aliases she uses to post on porn recovery forums.

Only a few years ago, Prause was promoting her connections with the porn industry, including serving on the board of a porn actors’ guild (APAG) and photos of her attendance at porn industry-insider events. Now, she’s trying to intimidate others not to mention any of those inconvenient facts because she has decided they harm her image.

In short, it’s not clear why any journalist (who is not shilling for the porn industry) would regard Prause as a credible source. Journalists have an obligation to readers to respect the conclusions of judges and other legal outcomes, and not to leave readers with the mistaken impression that the truth about Prause’s accusations is up for grabs or that her defamatory claims have validity. Having lost in the courts, she often attempts to rewrite history in the press and on Wikipedia with the help of biased editors.

It can be difficult for those she recruits to sift fact from fiction because her assertions are so “juicy” and her fabricated “evidence” so abundant. However, as my results in court demonstrate, I have gathered a lot of documentation and can refute her claims, if asked.

Not everyone who claims to be a victim is a victim. Some are simply engaged in attempts to manipulate their public image or to discredit and “no platform” (silence) anyone with whom they disagree. Think Trump. Journalists will want to reflect carefully before giving Prause a platform to amplify her fabrications and defamation.

Full Table of Contents (all 5 pages)

Prause Page #1

Prause Page #2

Prause Page #3

Prause Page #4

Prause Page #5

Prause Page #6

Others – July, 2020: RealYourBrainOnPorn (Prause) falsely accuses Gabe Deem of working with groups that threaten to kill and rape “us”. This is defamation per se. (section contains additional instances of defamation-cyberstalking by Prause)

RealYBOP (@BrainOnPorn) continues her obsessive cyberstalking of Gabe Deem, claiming he works with groups that commit crimes. Disgusting defamatory tweet:

Will this lead to another defamation lawsuit?

More cyberstalking of Deem. Again, lying about the 2007 study, as exposed here: Critique of claims surrounding “Sexual Responsivity and the Effects of Negative Mood on Sexual Arousal in Hypersexual Men Who Have Sex With Men” (2020)

Continued cyberstalking and falsehoods:

RealYBOP has falsified nothing. In fact, the debate is over on PIED as 7 studies have reported men recovering from PIED via quitting porn: This list contains over 40 studies linking porn use/porn addiction to sexual problems and lower arousal to sexual stimuli. The first 7 studies in the list demonstrate causation, as participants eliminated porn use and healed chronic sexual dysfunctions.

Continued cyberstalking: Link in tweet is NOT about shame-induced brain changes, only transient brain activity. Typical misrepresentation:

Later that day she tweets her silly infographic and misrepresents a 10-year old study, which did not ask about porn use:

————————

More defamation and cyberstalking of Gabe Deem:

FYI – Gabe went to college, so he could sue RealYBOP for defamation.

Same day, tweeting in Gabe’s thread (RealYBOP has blocked Gabe). RealYBOP tweets her nothing but lies Medium article targeting me:

Do tell RealYBOP, who is being sued for defamation by two people you falsely accused of stalking and sexual harassment. That’s you:

Also see – Nicole Prause’s fabrications of victim-hood exposed as groundless: she is the perpetrator, not the victim.

———————————–

For the 7^th day in a row, RealYBOP screenshots a Gabe Deem tweet, disparaging and defaming him. This time she went after Don Hilton, the doctor suing her for defamation. That will look good to a judge

—————————————————————

UPDATES:

Others – July, 2020: RealYBOP (Prause) falsely accuses Staci Sprout of stating that RealYourBrainOnPorn researchers molest children

TWEET#1: RealYBOP lies when she claims that Sprout said researchers molest children. In reality, Staci was discussing Table 34 of the 1948 Kinsey report, which contained data gathered from pedophiles who sexually abused children.

CONTEXT: Sprout was ONLY referring to the fact that Alfred Kinsey had collaborated with pedophiles to produce his landmark 1948 and 1952 books on human sexuality. Specifically, these data are recorded in Table 34 of this book published by the Kinsey Institute. In Table 34 the pedophiles used stopwatches to time what they call orgasms in children as young as a few months old to the early teens.

This is undisputed, as Table 34 from Kinsey’s famous treatise Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) clearly documents. See this Washington Post article from 1995: KINSEY REPORT, FAST AND LOOSE? and this video.

Table 34 – The legend beneath the table says, ‘timed with a second hand or stopwatch’

Important to note that Prause also mischaracterized Don Hilton’s discussion of Table 34, fabricating a story that Hilton called her a child molester, simply because he asked her about Table 34. Don Hilton responded in 2016 to Prause’s lies here: Prause falsely accuses Donald Hilton, MD. She then used her fabrication to justify filing malicious reports with his university and the Texas Medical Board, which resulted in Prause being sued by Hilton for defamation. Now we have Prause (RealYBOP) trying to pull the same trick with Staci Sprout.

Excerpt from this article addressing Table 34:

In Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (which was reprinted in 1998 and is widely available), the Institute published the notorious Table 34, which documents the “sexual responses” of children from infants through teens as recorded by their adult male abusers. These pedophiles conducted sexual experiments on hundreds of children by bringing them to what the experimenters called “orgasm” (screaming, weeping, fighting the sexual “partner”) and timing these responses with a stopwatch.
John Bancroft, M.D., former director of the Kinsey Institute, in his paper, “Alfred Kinsey and the Politics of Sex Research” said that Alfred Kinsey was, “particularly interested in the observation of adults who had been sexually involved with children.” It was Kinsey’s obsession with the sexual responses of children that led to the publication of the infamous Table 34 in Chapter 5 of Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, which documents the sexual abuse of several hundred children.
Kinsey proudly asserted, “We have now reported observation on such specifically sexual activities as erection, pelvic thrusts, and several other characteristics of true orgasm in a list of 317 pre-adolescent boys ranging between infants of five months and adolescence in age.” Table 34 in Kinsey’s book includes these data: an 11-month-old baby experienced an alleged “orgasm” ten times in one hour; a four-year-old child and a 13-year-old boy experienced 26 such alleged “orgasms” in a 24-hour period.

Is Dr. Prause appear defending Alfred Kinsey’s practices?

TWEET #2 : Once again, Staci Sprout was ONLY referring to Table 34 of the Kinsey report. Yet RealYBOP misrepresents Staci’s tweet, claiming she was referring to the RealYBOP “experts”.

TWEET #3: Again, Staci Sprout was ONLY referring to Table 34 and Alfred Kinsey, not a dismissed suit brought by Reisman:

Just the tip of RealYBOP/Prause defamation iceberg – see this page documenting RealYBOP’s ongoing defamation of Staci Sprout: BULLYING, HARASSMENT AND DEFAMATION FROM UNEXPECTED SOURCES AS A SEX ADDICTION RECOVERY ACTIVIST

UPDATES:

Others – July, 2020: @BrainOnPorn (Prause) urges followers to report Staci Sprout to the National Association of Social Workers and the State of Washington (illicitly posting Staci’s license number)

RealYBOP (Prause) harassing & defaming Staci Sprout, yet again. Prause reported Sprout 3 previous times. All were dismissed as groundless: January 24, 2018: Prause files groundless complaints with Washington State against therapist Sprout.

Keep in mind that the following RealYBOP tweets contain nothing but lies. I provide the links so you can see for yourself that RealYBOP’s claims don’t match the screenshots she posts.

TWEET #1: As you can see, none of what RealYBOP claimed is in the screenshots (the RealYBOP tweets constitute defamation per se, because RealYBOP falsely accuses Sprout of actual crimes).

As explained above, Sprout merely claimed that the Kinsey Institute gathered data from pedophiles. This is undisputed as Table 34 from his famous treatise Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) clearly documents. See Washington Post article from 1995: KINSEY REPORT, FAST AND LOOSE? and this video. Prause also mischaracterized Hilton’s mention of Table 34 as “calling her a child molester.” In 2016, Hilton responded to Prause’s lies here: Prause falsely accuses Donald Hilton, MD. She then used her fabrication to justify filing malicious reports with his university and the Texas Medical Board. That resulted in Prause being sued for defamation. Now we have RealYBOP/Prause pulling the same trick with Staci Sprout.

TWEET #2: RealYBOP posts Staci’s license number, urging followers to file false reports:

TWEET #3: Bizarre rambling pack of incoherent lies. The 2 Staci Sprout tweets RealYBOP posted were accurate and made no mention of any individual or of RealYBOP. The two other tweets have nothing to do with anything, and certainly nothing to do with Sprout.

TWEET #4: First lie – there is nothing about Seto in the tweets RealYBOP posted. Second lie – Staci did not tag university offices. Staci is wondering, as we all are, who will be legally culpable for RealYBOP’s defamation and harassment. RealYBOP is named in 3 lawsuits: the individuals posting RealYBOP tweets will be identified, and may have to cough up substantial damages.

See this section of page #1: @BrainOnPorn Twitter now named in two defamation lawsuits!

TWEET #5: (which was pinned to the RealYBOP page). RealYBOP is joined by her defamation partner, and man being compensated by porn giant xHamster, David Ley:

DARVO by Ley.

TWEET #6: RealYBOP members playing dumb, replying with disgusting nonsense in response to the simple question: “Who is liable for RealYBOP’s defamation?” Cyberstalker RealYBOP tweets Staci’s license number, in violation of Twitter rules.

Just the tip of RealYBOP/Prause defamation iceberg – see this page documenting RealYBOP’s ongoing defamation of Staci Sprout: BULLYING, HARASSMENT AND DEFAMATION FROM UNEXPECTED SOURCES AS A SEX ADDICTION RECOVERY ACTIVIST. Also see – Nicole Prause’s fabrications of victim-hood exposed as groundless: she is the perpetrator, not the victim.

—————————————————

Prause, using her RealYBOP (or now Anti-YBOP) account, continues her reign of cyber-stalking and defamation targeting Staci Sprout:

@BrainOnPorn attacks Staci Sprout for suggesting that choking women to get off might be problematic:

The omnipresence of choking in porn seems to be driving the dramatic rise of women being choked during sex. RealYBOP defend choking, thus throwing all those women under the porn bus.

Staci’s thread with studies and articles:

https://twitter.com/Stacisprout/status/1304545617419677698

—————————-

RealYBOP continues her cyberstalking of Staci. Really bizarre rantings:

—————————-

RealYBOP goes full defamation in the Toates thread. No one is filing reports, let alone police reports. What a liar.

RealYBOP (Prause) harassing Staci Sprout, yet again. See:

PDF’s of Sworn affidavits in two separate federal defamation suits filed against Prause

———————————————

Continues to cyberstalk Staci Sprout (who is testifying against Prause in 2 defamation suits). PDF’s of sworn affidavits in two separate federal defamation suits filed against Prause:

RealYBOP lies about what Staci and Liz walker actually said:

RealYBOP continues with her misrepresentations, lies, and nutty claims:

UPDATES:

————————-

July, 2020: RealYBOP (Prause) falsely accuses Gary Wilson of sending death threats in connection with ‘exchange’ of views about “Sexual Responsivity and the Effects of Negative Mood on Sexual Arousal in Hypersexual Men Who Have Sex With Men” (2020).

Context: Prause and 3 RealYBOP members published an unexceptional study. Then, Ley and Prause twisted its findings to falsely claim the study debunks porn-induced sexual problems: “Sexual Responsivity and the Effects of Negative Mood on Sexual Arousal in Hypersexual Men Who Have Sex With Men”. Nothing could be further from the truth, as I explained in this 5 tweet thread:

1/ How propaganda is manufactured: David Ley's new PT blog post.
Ley claims that new study on hypersexuals (sex addicts) provides evidence against porn-induced ED.
As we will see, the new study can tell us nothing about PIED. pic.twitter.com/GW1RkeFqES
— Your Brain on Porn (@YourBrainOnPorn) July 8, 2020

Predictably, RealYBOP and Ley went after me with various lies, and ultimately the crazy accusation that I threatened to kill anyone who disagrees with me. Anything to prop up the porn industry by disparaging those who challenge it. A few of their tweets:

More lies, saying I didn’t have access to the full study. Untrue, and you can see from the graph below, that I had the full study.

More ad hominem shrieking from RealYBOP:

Besides ad hominem attacks, Ley & RealYBOP lie, claiming a 2007 study “I liked” was identical to the current study. My 6-tweet thread exposing them as lying:

1/ Porn industry shills RealYBOP (Nicole Prause) & David Ley misrepresent an earlier study in their failed attempt to discredit my analysis of Ley's blog post.
They falsely claim a 2007 study & the current study were exactly the same. Let's expose this lie.
Ley & RealYBOP tweet: pic.twitter.com/RwmUi0JTFh
— Your Brain on Porn (@YourBrainOnPorn) July 9, 2020

Here’s our YBOP critique exposing their lies and explaining what the study can and can’t tell us: Critique of claims surrounding “Sexual Responsivity and the Effects of Negative Mood on Sexual Arousal in Hypersexual Men Who Have Sex With Men” (2020). Here’s a short version:

Porn industry shill and co-author of this paper Prause and her sidekick Ley mistakenly claim that this new paper is the same as experiments described in 2007 in a book chapter by Bancroft and Janssen (also a co-author of this new paper). “The Psychophysiology of Sex., Chapter: The Dual-Control Model: The role of sexual inhibition & excitation in sexual arousal and behavior.” Publisher: Indiana University Press, Editor: Erick Janssen, pp.197-222. Link to chapter
Yet this new paper is not the same as the earlier experiments, and here are some of the differences:
Difference#1 – The 2007 study interviewed the men who couldn’t get aroused by porn to assess the likely cause.
First, unlike the new 2020 study, the 2007 researchers interviewed the 50% of young men (average age 29) who mysteriously weren’t becoming aroused by test porn in the lab, and hypothesized that increasing exposure to porn was the likely cause. The scientists explained that the men frequented bars where porn had become omnipresent. Excerpt from the 2007 study:
When we applied this design (with the two types of sexual film, distraction and performance demand) to this new sample, however, we encountered another unanticipated, yet intriguing, phenomenon. Twelve men, or almost 50% of the first 25 subjects (mean age = 29 years), did not respond to the sexual stimuli (i.e., penile rigidity of less than 5% to the noncoercive film clips; 8 men had 0% rigidity). This is, to our knowledge, one of the few psychophysiological studies in which men participated who were recruited from the community–in our case, from bath houses, STD clinics, bars, and so on.
In some of these venues, sexual stimuli (including video screens) are omnipresent, and this, in combination with comments from participants about the lack of more interesting, specialized (“niche”), or more extreme or “kinky” stimuli, made us consider the possibility that the unusually high rate of nonresponders could be related to high levels of exposure to and experience with sexually explicit materials.
Difference #2 – the 2007 study determined porn use was cause!
The researchers also noted that, “Conversations with the subjects reinforced our idea that in some of them a high exposure to erotica seemed to have resulted in a lower responsivity to vanilla sex erotica and increased need for novelty, variation.”
Conversations with the subjects reinforced our idea that in some of them a high exposure to erotica seemed to have resulted in a lower responsivity to “vanilla sex” erotica and an increased need for novelty and variation, in some cases combined with a need for very specific types of stimuli in order to get aroused.
Difference#3 -2007 study added a 2nd experiment based on porn-induced low arousal.
The researchers even added a second experiment to take into account porn-induced low arousal. The second experiment included newer, longer, more varied clips, and allowed subjects to choose clips themselves. Still many didn’t respond!
We redesigned the study and decided to eliminate the distraction and performance demand manipulations and to include newer, more varied clips, as well as some longer film clips. Also, instead of presenting subjects with a set of preselected (“researcher-selected”) videos only, we let them choose two clips themselves from a set of 10, of which 10-second previews were shown and that included a wider range of sexual behaviors (e.g., group sex, interracial sex, S & M, etc.). We recruited an additional 51 subjects and found that with the improved design still 20 men, or approximately 25%, did not respond well to the sexual video clips (penile rigidity of less than 10% in response to the long self-selected film).
The 2007 experiments assessed “low responders” individually, and reported that: “the analyses suggested that as the number of erotic films seen within the past year increased a participant was more likely to be classified as a low responder.”
Difference#4 – 2007 study did not assess hypersexuality
The 2007 experiments did not assess hypersexuality. The 2020 study did, and compared a hypersexuality group to controls. (Yet there was no individual assessment of contributing factors to ED, as in 2007). That said, the 2020 hypersexual group had less genital response to porn than control group:
The authors then “controlled” for somewhat arbitrary factors – so as to artificially equalize the responses of the two groups and conclude that the groups did not respond differently from each other. Again predictable, given their pro-porn sympathies.

RealYBOP further “loses it” with numerous lies and defamatory tweets targeting me, Gabe Deem and Staci Sprout. Let’s go through RealYBOP’s barrage of nutty tweets:

I didn’t lie. I said that Ley omitted the graph that showed that hyepersexuals had less response than controls. That’s a fact. Sure thing – “controlling for” allowed the RealYBOP authors to claim the difference between subjects and controls was meaningless. But the paper didn’t provide data for us to check their work.

More of the same spin. Note: I know how statistical controls work and how they can be manipulated.

After I posted my challenges to their claims, RealYBOP went off on a 7-tweet defamatory tirade. Four of her tweets falsely said that I have threatened to kill scientists. She provides no evidence, because I have never made such threats. This constitutes defamation per se, as she is accusing me of actual crimes. I guess 2 defamation suits aren’t enough for her.

Defamatory tweet#1. I wasn’t disavowed by anyone (she counts on no one actually reading her “evidence”):

The ACLU letter is not what RealYBOP claims it is. See: Nicole Prause & David Ley commit perjury in defamation lawsuit (September, 2019).

Defamatory tweet#2: Falsely claims I posted the 2007 study over 100,000 times and threatened to kill anyone who disagreed with me. Evidence that she is losing her mind?

Here’s the 2007 study with all the relevant excerpts: The Dual Control Model – The Role Of Sexual Inhibition & Excitation In Sexual Arousal And Behavior (2007).

She is not telling the truth, as the authors said porn caused subjects’ low sexual responsiveness. In an experiment employing video porn, 50% of the young men couldn’t become aroused or achieve erections with porn (average age was 29). The shocked researchers discovered that the men’s erectile dysfunction was “related to high levels of exposure to and experience with sexually explicit materials.” The limp men had spent a whole of lot of time in bars and bathhouses where porn was “omnipresent,” and continuously playing. The men explained that “high exposure to erotica seemed to have resulted in a lower responsivity to “vanilla sex” erotica and an increased need for novelty and variation.”

Defamatory tweet#3: Besides falsely claiming I make death threats, her claims about stats are irrelevant. The 2007 study said porn use caused downregulation of sexual arousal.

Defamatory tweet#4: RealYBOP’s lies are exposed here: Critique of claims surrounding “Sexual Responsivity and the Effects of Negative Mood on Sexual Arousal in Hypersexual Men Who Have Sex With Men” (2020)

RealYBOP added this tweet, revealing that she doesn’t know the definition of erectile dysfunction:

This is not the first time Prause or her alias account (RealYBOP) has falsely accused me and others of sending death threats. However, Prause has never provided evidence of me or anyone I know sending her death threats. All fabrications by a serial harasser being sued for defamation in Federal courts See: Nicole Prause’s fabrications of victim-hood exposed as groundless: she is the perpetrator, not the victim.

UPDATES:

August, 2020: Gary Wilson (Your Brain on Porn) Wins Legal Victory Against Sexologist Nicole Prause’s Efforts to Silence Him

Prause’s attempted restraining order denied as frivolous: she owes substantial attorney fees in a anti-SLAPP ruling (Article – Prause’s efforts to silence Wilson foiled; her restraining order denied as frivolous & she owes substantial attorney fees in a SLAPP ruling).

ASHLAND, OREGON: August 16, 2020: Best-selling author and public health advocate Gary Wilson has won a legal victory against sexology researcher and pornography proponent Nicole Prause. On August 6, the Los Angeles County Superior Court ruled that Prause’s attempt to obtain a restraining order against Wilson constituted a frivolous and illegal “strategic lawsuit against public participation” (commonly called a “SLAPP suit”). In essence, the Court found that Prause abused the restraining order process to bully Wilson into silence and undercut his rights to free speech. By law, the SLAPP ruling obligates Prause to pay Wilson’s attorney fees.

Wilson is the author of the best selling book Your Brain On Porn: Internet Pornography and the Emerging Science of Addiction, presenter of the immensely popular TEDx talk “The Great Porn Experiment,” (13+ million views) and host of the website www.YourBrainOnPorn.com, a clearinghouse for the latest research, media, and self-reports on pornography’s effects and harms. Wilson has long critiqued Prause’s published research and public statements about pornography use.

“It is ironic that the porn industry cloaks itself in First Amendment protections while porn proponents like Nicole Prause attempt to limit and silence criticism about the well-documented risks of porn’s harm to its users and to the public,” Wilson said after the Court ruling. “This is another important victory over the defamation and harassment endured by advocates who dare to speak publicly about porn’s harms.“

The legal victory comes on the heels of a complaint against UK-based SCRAM Media for publishing a story falsely claiming that Prause had received “death threats” as the consequence of a crowdfunding campaign by NoFap host, Alex Rhodes. According to a UK press release, the SCRAM story falsely stated that NoFap and Rhodes affiliated themselves with right-wing extremists (including anti-Semites); incited extremists to harass Prause; conducted a crowdfund that led to Prause being stalked; and filed a frivolous lawsuit in US Federal Court in order to stymie Prause’s academic research. When presented with evidence disproving those claims, SCRAM retracted the article, paid Rhodes substantial damages and legal costs, and apologized publicly, before shutting down entirely.

Prause is being sued in two unrelated federal civil lawsuits accusing her of making knowingly false and damaging statements about people who have raised concerns about internet porn: Donald L. Hilton, Jr. v. Nicole Prause, et al., United States District Court for the Western District of Texas San Antonio Division, Case No. 5: 19-CV-00755-OLG; and Alexander Rhodes v. Nicole Prause, et al., United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, Case No. 2:19-cv-01366. In those cases, the plaintiffs allege Prause made untrue, defamatory statements accusing them of stalking, sexual harassment, and antisemitism, and claiming they were under investigation by law enforcement and professional licensing bodies. In each case, numerous men and women have come forward with sworn statements that Prause has also targeted them: affidavit #1, affidavit #2, affidavit #3, affidavit #4, affidavit #5, affidavit #6, affidavit #7, affidavit #8, affidavit #9, affidavit #10, affidavit #11, affidavit #12, affidavit #13, affidavit #14, affidavit #15, affidavit #16.

August, 2020: Right before my Anti-SLAPP hearing Nicole Prause’s lawyer tried to quit because she attempted to force him to behave unethically. He said Prause was hostile and threatening to sue him.

Anyone can file a restraining order without even paying a filing fee. In other words, it was a very cost-effective way to attempt to add credibility to the odious smear campaign that Prause and her chums have been pursuing. I believe it was, in part, an attempt to suppress my speech as she hoped I’d be unable to defend myself. She had initially told the judge I was indigent (“had nothing to lose”) in her TRO request. She may have assumed I was indigent because, despite having abundant good cause, I had never filed a defamation suit against her. I didn’t want to waste my time.

I believe her restraining order attempt was also an attempt to discredit me as a witness in the two defamation suits others have filed against Prause. It failed, and has now further discredited her instead. What goes around….

As stated above, the initial judge denied Prause a temporary restraining order in February, 2020, when she filed it without notice to me. This was a loud signal to her that she had a weak case. Denial of the TRO meant that Prause had to inform me about the restraining order, and it was set for an initial hearing (which led to a second hearing, as Prause still had not served me properly).

For the next 3 months, Prause could have dropped the restraining order with no repercussions to herself, and I would have been stuck with my attorney fees without much recourse. In June, partly to avoid being in Prause’s presence at the hearing scheduled for July, and partly in response to being unjustly accused of having threatened by her in order to suppress my voice, I filed an anti-SLAPP motion to have the restraining order dropped. At that point, she could only go forward. Court documents filed in my anti-SLAPP motion:

I filed my motion in part because Prause had begun slapping baseless small claims court ‘defamation’ suits on people, which require defendants to be served in CA. I was confident that she would serve me with one of her nuisance small claims court suits if I came to CA to testify for the restraining order hearing.

As it turns out, the judge combined the two matters, and both Prause and I were able to participate remotely (due to Covid 19). This spared me from going anywhere near her, thankfully. Perhaps its evident that, far from physically threatening her, I’ve been assiduously avoiding her presence. My August 5th court filings responding to Prause’s July 29 declaration:

Shortly before the August 6 hearing, her own attorney tried unsuccessfully to withdraw from representing her. One of his reasons, according to his Declaration, was that she was attempting to force him to behave unethically, that is, to do something he could not do in good faith. We know from his filed document seeking a continuance that she had tried to make him submit a lot of inadmissible “evidence” (likely in the form of letters from her friends, and unsupported accusations), so we suspect he was referring to this.

Her attorney also asked to withdraw because she was apparently threatening him with suit because he wouldn’t do her bidding. He stated that communications with Prause had irretrievably broken down. This occurred after he filed her reply to my anti-SLAPP motion (and there was no further legal work to be done short of the hearing itself).

The judge decided not to delay the hearing, and Prause was represented by the firm’s of-counsel attorney, who did an excellent job on her behalf – although he had little to work with by the time all the evidentiary objections were dealt with. (The judge in the Alex Rhodes defamation lawsuit recently chided Prause for her “dilatory conduct and obfuscation”).

One week prior to the Anti-SLAPP hearing, Prause went on Twitter to falsely announce that she had a “protective order” against me, inciting her devoted followers to cyber-stalk me:

Yet another lie of astonishing proportions. And not one that most judges would take kindly to.

Incidentally, in order to grant my anti-SLAPP motion, the judge had to find (1) that her restraining order was unlikely to succeed on its merits, and (2) that it was, in fact, an attempt to suppress my rights to speak out on a matter of public interest.

The bottom line is that Prause brought the anti-SLAPP motion loss upon herself by filing, and then not dropping, her baseless restraining order against me. She clinched it by threatening her own attorney and by announcing prematurely that she had won. Once again, she was the perpetrator not the victim.

The legal system is not social media, and the fabricated “evidence” and false accusations that she and her cronies disperse in the court of public opinion do not fly in real courts. This is why SCRAM lost when it printed her lies, and it does not bode well for her chances in either of the two defamation suits against her.

August, 2020: In Prause’s attempted restraining order (which was dismissed as meritless) she fabricated so-called “evidence,” which included doxxing and defaming my son.

In Prause’s request for the restraining order she perjured herself, saying I posted her address on YBOP and Twitter (perjury is nothing new with Prause). In the tallest of tales, Prause claimed I was dangerous because my adult son and I were “gun enthusiasts” who had “nothing to lose.”

She purported to “prove” this by including an old, posed photo of my son (taller man) and a young man of Asian decent posing with guns. Prause claimed the shorter, 20-something young man was me! Prause deliberately misled the court.

The above is one of three pictures of my son that Prause inserted into her lie-filled restraining order request. Prause searched through my son’s private Facebook to locate any picture she could misconstrue.

The truth: Neither I nor my son owned guns. The above picture is from 2014, and was taken at a peace-officer weapons locker by a Sacramento sheriff’s deputy (for the 2 young men to use as a meme generator). It was a joke. As explained in his affidavit (below) my son had spent several months working with the California Department of Justice, building new IT technology to assist the Gang Suppression Unit with its duties. As my son stated in his sworn affidavit, the other person was an intern at the tech company.

This gross misrepresentation, acquired by cyberstalking my son, is a perfect example of how Nicole Prause fabricates her so-called “evidence.”

August, 2020: The organizers of 5th International Conference on Behavioral Addictions expose Prause as committing perjury in her failed attempt at a restraining order (i.e. my Anti-SLAPP victory)

With the “evidence” in her original TRO exposed as fabrications, Prause’s July 2020 declaration (prepared for the August 6th hearing) spun a new tale surrounding my trip to Germany two years earlier (2018) to attend the 5th International Conference on Behavioral Addictions (ICBA). Prause committed perjury in her TRO declaration, falsely claiming she was a scheduled presenter for that ICBA conference, and that I traveled to Germany solely to “confront her.” Nonsense, and yet much of Prause’s opposition to my anti-SLAPP now hinged on this single false assertion.

Here is one of 5 excerpts from her July declaration referring to my trip to Germany:

The sentence following her Germany claim is very telling: “Whether that is true or not.” Let me help: It’s not true. Important to note that my Germany trip was “the basis of Prause’s current request for relief.” If any part of Prause’s Germany story is debunked, her entire case falls apart like Humpty-Dumpty. Again, this carefully worded suggestion is the only “evidence” Prause’s lawyer dared to supply:

Subsequently, Prause has encountered several incidents where she believed she was being surveilled at home or work by an unidentified man. Whether that is true or not, the basis of Prause’s current request for relief is the manifestation of the ongoing feud into the threat of physical confrontation.

I knew this was bunkum so I asked ICBA organizers to confirm that Prause was never asked to present and was never registered for the conference. Their letter confirming that Prause perjured herself:

Caught in yet another lie.

Just for the record, Prause has never attended or been invited to present at an ICBA conference. Prause doesn’t believe in behavioral addictions. Throughout her entire career Prause has waged a war against the concept of behavioral addiction, especially sex and porn addiction.

August, 2020: In response to my legal victory, @BrainOnPorn (Prause) goes on a cyberstalking & defamation rampage

In March of 2020, Prause sought a groundless temporary restraining order (TRO) against me using fabricated “evidence” and her usual lies (falsely accusing me of stalking). In Prause’s request for the restraining order she perjured herself, saying I posted her address on YBOP and Twitter (perjury is nothing new with Prause). I filed an lawsuit against Prause for misusing the legal system by forcing me to hire counsel in hopes of silencing and harassing me. On August 6, the Los Angeles County Superior Court ruled that Prause’s attempt to obtain a restraining order against me constituted a frivolous and illegal “strategic lawsuit against public participation” (commonly called a “SLAPP suit”). In essence, the Court found that Prause abused the restraining order process to try to bully me into silence and undercut my rights to free speech. By law, the SLAPP ruling obligates Prause to pay my attorney fees.

In response, RealYBOP trolled my thread where I expose her as doxxing and cyberstalking my son, and defaming him in her fraudulent restraining order (which the Court tossed as empty harassment). Unbelievably vile.

Over and over RealYBOP & Prause post lie-filled letters written by close pro-porn friends (usually RealYBOP members) at the behest of Prause. She tried to enter 4 of these letters into her fraudulent restraining order, but the judge saw right through them as fabrications (the letter-writers only regurgitated what Prause had told them – which were lies, without a shred of actual supporting evidence.

The 4 letters pictured in the above RYBOP tweet, which Prause has tweeted numerous times, did not say what she claims they said. None of the letter-writers said that I had stalked their authors. The unsworn letters contained zero actual evidence to support Prause’s claims. A brief overview of the 4 letters she misrepresents in many of her tweets:

By Kate Dawson of Ireland. Said nothing about me or Prause.
By Rebecca Sullivan of Canada. The 2-page letter had a single throwaway line about me, saying I supplied a brief for Canadian Motion 47. Nothing else.
By Madita Oeming. She never claimed that I stalked or threatened her in any way. Instead, Oeming whined because I posted these 3 tweets about her unsupported claims. Oeming’s letter did repeat Prause’s lies… but without any evidence.
The last letter was a lie-filled fairy tale by Daniel Burgess, who owns RealYBOP, has used aliases to cyberstalk me, and has himself engaged in numerous instances of defamation. The truth about Burgess and our interactions are thoroughly documented on this page. Legal actions continue with Mr. Burgess, including addressing very recent tweets (see below) that falsely accuse me of sending death threats and stalking 5 women. Both often-tweeted statements constitute defamation per se, which is the easiest kind of defamation to get relief for in defamation suits.

On to more of Prause’s defamation, spinelessly cowering behind her RealYBOP alias. More trolling:

This is unbelievably disgusting. RealYBOP tweeting defamation under Matt Fradd’s wife celebrating their wedding anniversary:

More defamation by Prause and Burgess.

RealYBOP continues her defamation storm falsely accusing me of an actual crime (stalking), saying YBOP is threatening to kill “us.” No evidence, just as Prause had no evidence of stalking or harassment for her fraudulent restraining order request against me. The Court ruled that Prause’s restraining order request constituted a frivolous and illegal “strategic lawsuit against public participation” (commonly called a “SLAPP suit”). Prause lied throughout her fraudulent TRO request, providing zero verifiable evidence to support her outlandish claims that I stalked or harassed her. Again, in essence, the Court found that Prause abused the restraining order process to try to bully me into silence and undercut my rights to free speech. By law, the SLAPP ruling obligates Prause to pay my attorney fees.

Terrified of RealYBOP’s “science!” LOL. I debunked the site’s irresponsible research page long ago – Porn Science Deniers Alliance (AKA: “RealYourBrainOnPorn.com” and “PornographyResearch.com”)

Sixth time? What is she talking about? Yes, we lost the WIPO decision (which was shocking), but it wasn’t a lawsuit. We successfully pursued legal actions related to her trademark infringement, and were ultimately granted the infringing URL. Another legal action involving Prause (my SLAPP suit victory) exposed her as a liar and stalker (even stalking my son). Prause’s efforts to silence Wilson foiled; her restraining order denied as frivolous & she owes substantial attorney fees in a SLAPP ruling.

More defamation and falsehoods. Again, I filed only one actual lawsuit motion against her, so far, and the Court found in my favor.

Legal actions continued successfully to stop RealYBOP’s and Daniel Burgess’s trademark infringement: ATTENTION: YBOP acquires www.RealYourBrainOnPorn.com in trademark infringement settlement

UPDATES:

August, 2020: LifeSite News publishes Gary Wilson interview; Prause harasses & defames author, threatens legal action (of course).

In the wake of my legal victories over Nicole Prause, LifeSite News published the following interview: Anti-porn crusader details legal victory against ‘porn prof’ who tried to use the court to shut him down: Gary Wilson was sued by Nicole Prause, who viciously smeared him in an attempt to discredit his ongoing research into how pornography is harmful. He won.

As occurred with Diana Davison’s Post Millennial expose’, Prause and her alias account (@BrainOnPorn) harassed the author, lied about what the article said, and threatened a lawsuit. Here’s Prause’s tweet under author Jonathan van Maren’s tweet of his article:

Prause’s tweet contains a screenshot of a lie-filled rambling letter (not really a true Cease & Desist) to SASH. Prause lists all sorts of wrongs inflicted upon her by me and others, but none of them occurred. Prause’s letter to SASH, and its pile of fabrications, was ignored as unsupported harassment, created so that Prause can post it on social media as if it were legitimate. Just more self-generated Prausian “evidence.” The SASH Board is well aware that Prause is a serial defamer spending her waking days harassing her many targets.

Prause also lied about the content of Van Maren’s article. There was no defamation, as everything in it was true. It contained none of the content she tweeted that it did.

As you can read, the LifeSite article said nothing about Prause sexually molesting children or being a criminal. Prause has falsely accused me, Don Hilton, Staci Sprout, and others of calling her a child molester. It’s one of her favorite tactics. Perjuring herself, Prause stated in court documents filed in my anti-SLAPP suit and in Hilton’s defamation lawsuit, that we called her a child molester. Prause provided no evidence to support this often-repeated lie (she even persuaded pals Jim Pfaus and Taylor Kohut to repeat this lie in letters submitted in the lawsuit that I won). Birds of a feather lie together.

Nor did the article say that Prause was a “criminal,” even though she has engaged in illicit behavior by (1) perjuring herself in court documents, (2) filing fraudulent police reports, and (3) filing fraudulent reports & complaints to governmental agencies. Prause is also guilty of defamation, menacing, harassment, and cyberstalking.

Nor did the article say that Prause “watched people have sex” in her laboratory, even though she claims she hooks subjects up to EEG sensors and monitors them while they are being masturbated (sometimes to orgasm). Is that “watching” people have sex?

What is true is that Prause was given a bucket-load of money to produce a hired-gun study on the heavily tainted and very commercial “Orgasmic Meditation” scheme (now apparently under investigation by the FBI). Orgasmic Meditation is an MLM pseudo-cult that charged big bucks to teach men how to stroke a partner’s clitoris. An ad for the Prause OM studies, shows the man masturbating a woman (also a video):

Whatever you want to call it, Prause is monitoring subjects while they are being masturbated (or, as she calls it, “partnered sex”).

Not satisfied, Prause used her @BrainOnPorn account to defame Jonathon Van Maren with insane allegations that he threatens women and supports death threats. She also threatened LifeSite News with a lawsuit:

The above was the last of ten tweets by RealYBOP under Van Maren’s tweet of Gabe Deem’s excellent video calling out Prause and Ley for their unethical tactics taken right from the Big Tobacco playbook. Using @BrainOnPorn, Prause posted 22 tweets disparaging and defaming Gabe, lying that Gabe sent her, and other women, death and rape threats (another defamation suit in the offing?).

This video by @gabedeem , on how a handful of academics are gaslighting the public on behalf of the PornHub, is a must-watch: https://t.co/9NDaU30sCJ
— Jonathon Van Maren (@JVanMaren) August 25, 2020

As mentioned, Prause and her alias (RealYBOP) did the same thing to Diana Davison after Davison’s expose’ of Prause, with ~20 tweets in Diana’s threads containing threats, defamation, and a lie-filled C&D letter. Prause failed to follow up her groundless C&D with any legal action, eventually deleting all her tweets. All bark, all defamation, all of the time.

Prause sends out C&D letters like other folks send out holiday cards. She has sent me and my web-host 7 C&D’s – all of which went nowhere. Many are on the Prause pages linked to in Van Maren’s article (see links to sections below documenting the many C&D’s to which we all chose not to react). She has sent baseless C&D’s to Gabe Deem, Staci Sprout, Rob Weiss, Stefanie Carnes, Linda Hatch, Alex Rhodes, my web-host, my wife, The Post Millennial, and Diana Davison, to name a few. All were ignored as nuisance threats. Prause doesn’t file defamation lawsuits; it seems her liability insurance only covers defense, not her intentional torts.

Here’s her long history of spurious C&D’s, which she hasn’t acted upon:

Most of Prause’s recent C&D’s have been signed by Wayne B. Giampietro. In my view, Prause writes the C&D’s and Giampietro signs his name. Here’s the kicker: Giampietro was one of the primary lawyers defending Backpage.com. Backpage was shut down by the federal government “for its willful facilitation of human trafficking and prostitution.” (See this USA Today article: 93-count indictment on sex trafficking charges revealed against Backpage founders). For details on Giampietro’s involvement see: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/illinois/ilndce/1:2017cv05081/341956. In an odd turn of events, Backpage.com assets were seized by Arizona, with Prause’s lawyer Wayne B. Giampietro LLC listed as forfeiting $100,000. Is Giampietro a sex-industry lawyer? Why would he be representing Prause?

Here’s Prause commenting as TruthWinsOut under the LifeSiteNews article. Nothing but lies and defamation (another defamation suit in the offing?)

The courts determined that Prause had zero evidence of me stalking her (judge tossed her bogus restraining order & granted my SLAPP motion). Prause loses, but claims victory on the interwebs. LOL.

UPDATES:

Others – August, 2020: In response to Gabe Deem’s video “The Porn Playbook,”@BrainOnPorn posts over 20 defamatory and disparaging tweets (falsely claiming Gabe sent death & rape threats)

Gabe Deem posted excellent video comparing the tactics that Big Tobacco employed with the tactics the allies of the porn industry employ (e.g., David Ley and Nicole Prause).

Gabe’s video resulted in porn-industry shill RealYBOP attacking and defaming Gabe. Get this – RealYBOP posted twenty-two tweets in a 24-hour period, targeting Gabe. Some tweets were posted in threads that were 2-3 months old. Many contained defamation per se, with RealYBOP falsely stating that Gabe had sent death and rape threats. RealYBOP behaved like a true sociopath. Gabe has one year to decide if he wants to sue.

Know that everything RealYBOP tweets is a lie. It start with crazy… and gets crazier.

Tweet #1

Tweet #2 targeting Gabe:

Tweet #3 targeting Gabe:

Tweet #4 targeting Gabe:

Tweet #5 targeting Gabe (a 5-month old thread!):

Tweet #6 targeting Gabe and me:

Tweet #7 targeting Gabe and me:

Tweet #8 targeting Gabe (a 10-month old thread!):

Tweet #9 targeting Gabe (a 2-month old thread!):

Tweet #10 targeting Gabe:

Tweet #11 targeting Gabe:

Tweet #12 targeting Gabe:

Tweet #13 targeting Gabe:

Tweet #14 targeting Gabe. She tweets 4 letters: none say a word about Gabe stalking anyone. One of the four letters has Madita Oeming repeating Prause’s lies that I stalked Prause. But a judge already ruled that Prause was lying, and awarded me a SLAPP victory: Prause’s efforts to silence Wilson foiled; her restraining order denied as frivolous & she owes substantial attorney fees in a SLAPP ruling.

Tweet #15 targeting Gabe (Gabe never raised funds for anyone);

Tweet #16 targeting Gabe:

There is no group sending death threats. More of her lies.

Tweet #17 targeting Gabe:

The lowdown: RealYBOP member Alan Mckee, disparaging nofap, inserted a lie by Prause into his new book. Mckee claims that Nofap vitriolically attacks “female scientist” (this comes from Prause), yet it is Prause who is the perpetrator, attacking and defaming Alex Rhodes of nofap. So, RealYBOP is citing herself, yet a court has already ruled that her claims of stalking were meritless. Prause’s efforts to silence Wilson foiled; her restraining order denied as frivolous & she owes substantial attorney fees in a SLAPP ruling.)

Tweet #18 targeting Gabe (Jonathon Van Maren pointing out that none of RealYBOP’s screenshots support anything she tweeted):

Tweet #19 targeting Gabe. Now that Van Maren exposed RealYBOP as lying, she goes after him personally (he’s anti-abortion):

Tweet #20 targeting Gabe.

Tweet #21 targeting Gabe, Van Maren and me:

Tweet #22 targeting Gabe.

Tweet #23 targeting Gabe.

UPDATES:

August, 2020: To avoid permanent suspension for trademark infringement, Prause renames the RealYBOP Twitter account. Its new bio falsely states I filed 7 lawsuits to take down the RealYBOP Twitter account.

It took a while, but I now own U.S. Trademark Registration Nos. 6098839, 6098840, and 6038579 for “Your Brain On Porn,” “YourBrainOnPorn.com” and “YBOP.” To avoid being permanently suspended by Twitter, RealYBOP changed its name to “Really Still Your Brain On Porn”:

Prause changed the RealYBOP bio, adding this lie:

Real Scientists. Real Data. Your Brain On Porn hates actual science so much he filed 7 lawsuits to take down our commentary.

Now it’s 7 lawsuits?? In reality, I have only filed one lawsuit (in response to Prause’s bogus restraining order request, and I won: –Prause’s efforts to silence Wilson foiled; her restraining order denied as frivolous & she owes substantial attorney fees in a SLAPP ruling. That said, I have sent a few cease and desist letters related to the trademark infringing website www.realyourbrainonporn.com (not the Twitter account):

On May 1, 2019 I sent a C&D to all of those who appeared to be behind the RealYBOP (the RealYBOP “Experts”). PDF of the Cease & Desist letter to Nicole Prause (May 1, 2019. in fact, Daniel Burgess was the site owner of record.
Once my trademark ownership was finalized, my attorneys sent a C&D to Daniel Burgess (September 2, 2020). PDF of the C&D letter.

No lawsuits have yet been filed involving either RealYBOP website or the Twitter account. Prause is thus caught in another blatant lie.

RealYBOP’s whining about having to change its name:

Legal actions forthcoming.

UPDATES:

August, 2020: RealYourBrainOnPorn (Prause) posts lies from Brian Watson’s error-filled hit-piece, then edits them into the Nofap Wikipedia page

Kinsey grad, librarian, and close Prause ally, Brian Watson published an error-filled hit piece, which RealYBOP excerpted as if it were true. RealYBOP (Prause) also created a few new Wikipedia sockpuppets to edit Watson’s lies into the Nofap Wikipedia page.

Introducing Watson’s paper:

Watson defames me, lies about YBOP, and the research presented there (just as RealYBOP has):

REALITY: I’ll focus primarily on the article’s misinformation about me and my website www.yourbrainonporn.com (YBOP), but I believe a wider-reaching correction is in order (a retraction, actually).

Watson does not mention that I am the author and co-author, respectively of two peer-reviewed articles, nor that I taught anatomy & physiology for two decades. Nor does Watson mention that I am the author of a best-selling book brimming with peer-reviewed research, and endorsed by experts: Your Brain On Porn: Internet pornography and the emerging science of addiction. Incidentally, all of my book proceeds go to a registered charity, undercutting Watson’s claim that everyone he names is sharing information about the potential risks of digital porn in order to profit.

In lieu of the above information about me, Watson indulges in ad hominem remarks purportedly supporting them with four citations – three lay articles and a short commentary. Not one of the four articles contains a word about me, my website YBOP, or the extensive research gathered there. Revealing Watson’s extreme bias, two of the four articles are written by pornography advocate David Ley who is currently collaborating with porn giant xHamster to promote its “Stripchat” website and services.

Watson appears to be referring to both Fight The New Drug (FTND) and YBOP when asserting:

Anything more than a cursory examination, however, reveals that the groups are playing into the general public’s perceived information illiteracy. The claims and studies cited are, more often than not, poorly designed, suspiciously funded, misleading, incorrectly derived, or just outright false (Ley 2018; Oeming 2018; Bradley et al. 2016; Mialon et al. 2012; Wéry et al. 2016; Wilt et al. 2016). The problems with the sources would be immediately clear to any librarian trained in resource evaluation: many of the referenced journals are suspiciously titled, no longer active, or were funded by the organizations mentioned in this article.

Yet neither Watson nor the supporting citations provide a single example “suspicious or “misleading” studies posted on either FTND or YBOP. As above, none of Watson’s six citations say anything about me or YBOP. Typical of Watson’s careless scholarship, four of the 6 citations are not even remotely related to Watson’s claims. This is academic fraud.

The practice of citing papers that are irrelevant or do not support assertions is misleading and does not advance scientific or public understanding. Other papers have been retracted for less.

In fact, my site contains over 1,000 studies directly related to porn use. This page organizes many of the studies into relevant categories: Relevant Research. For example, this list contains 270 studies on adolescents and porn use (along with 16 reviews of the literature) – all reporting negative outcomes related to porn use. Watson’s unsupported assertions would have the reader believe that all 270 are “fraudulent studies,” when in fact the list represents the preponderance of the research in the field by widely respected authors.

Also, consider YBOP’s list of every neurological study ever published on porn users. While all 53 studies report findings consistent with the addiction model, Watson’s inaptly sourced statements would have the reader believe that all 53 are flawed or highly suspicious. At what point does sloppy scholarship cross over into disquieting propaganda?

Consider YBOP’s list of over 110 studies linking porn use or porn use or porn addiction to sexual dysfunctions and poorer sexual and relationship satisfaction. Several of the studies are longitudinal or experimental. Watson, who implies that it is “pseudoscience” for YBOP to warn its visitors that today’s internet porn is apparently causing erectile dysfunction in some users, fails to inform the readers that nearly every quantitative study on males’ reports that greater porn use in related to poorer sexual or relationship satisfaction. Multiple peer-reviewed papers and outspoken experts have raised concerns about excessive internet porn use and sexual dysfunction. More examples could be provided.

Skimming the balance of Watson’s article, knowledgable readers will notice various other misleading or false statements. For example, Watson stated in error that Fight The New Drug owns Nofap LLC. Might such a false statement expose this reckless journal to legal action for defamation or other legal action by these two businesses? Might the journal consider a retraction of what appears to be an inadequately supported article and thinly veiled smear of groups and people with whom Watson disagrees on ideological grounds?

Using an alias, Prause then edited Brian Watson‘s nascent propaganda into the Wikipedia page for NoFap (I am not affiliated with NoFap):

Citation #9 is Brian Watson’s article. The 2 most recent Prause sockpuppets then inserted Watson’s garbage:

Prause aliases (one presumes) inserted into the Nofap Wikipedia page the same lies which RealYBOP/Prause tweeted 5 times last week. (Wikipedia visitors will also see “Tgeorgescu,” who is a longtime editor who vigorously, shamelessly protects malicious edits by Prause’s sockpuppets):

RealYBOP here creates a slide quoting Brian Watson, tweeting it several times:

For example:

Logic slapped back? You be the judge. Here’s my tweet commenting on RealYBOP member Sam Perry’s study:

Another tweet featuring Brian Watson’s defamation:

And another:

Hilarious. NoFap and YBOP are “well-funded”…. just like the porn industry, right? LOL. Anti-speech you say?

Courts disagree. The Los Angeles County Superior Court ruled that Prause’s maliciously attempt to obtain a restraining order against me constituted a frivolous and illegal “strategic lawsuit against public participation” (commonly called a “SLAPP suit”). The Court found that Prause abused the restraining order process to bully me into silence and undercut his rights to free speech. By law, the SLAPP ruling obligates Prause to pay my attorney fees.

RealYBOP posts more of Brian Watson’s propaganda and falsehoods:

August 7, 2020: Another tweet, with a serious lie, that could form the basis of well founded lawsuits by either Alex Rhodes or FightTheNewDrug. Among other inaccuracies, Watson falsely states that Nofap.com is owned by FightTheNewDrug:

——————————————————————

I emailed the following to the editor of journal. Brian Watson is engaging in academic fraud (as described in this email):

Dear Editor,
I am deeply concerned about the many inaccuracies in this recent article, some of which are listed below. Unfortunately, the field of pornography study is disturbingly polarized, and it is easy for both authors and reviewers to allow bias to overtake reason. I’m not sure who reviewed this submission for your journal, but given the many errors and inapt citations in the piece, I fear this polarization has colored the authorship and review process here.
I’ll focus primarily on the article’s misinformation about me and my website www.yourbrainonporn.com (YBOP), but I believe a wider-reaching correction is in order.
Watson does not mention that I am the author and co-author, respectively of two peer-reviewed articles, or that I taught anatomy & physiology for two decades. Nor does Watson mention that I am the author of a best-selling book brimming with peer-reviewed research: Your Brain On Porn: Internet pornography and the emerging science of addiction. Incidentally, all of my book proceeds go to a registered charity, undercutting Watson’s claim that everyone he names is sharing information about the potential risks of digital porn in order to profit.
In lieu of the above information about me, Watson indulges in ad hominem remarks purportedly supporting them with four citations – three lay articles and a short commentary. Not one of the four articles contains a word about me, my website YBOP, or the extensive research gathered there. Revealing Watson’s extreme bias, two of the four articles are written by pornography advocate David Ley who is currently collaborating with porn giant xHamster to promotes its “Stripchat” website and services.
Watson appears to be referring to both Fight The New Drug (FTND) and YBOP when asserting:
Anything more than a cursory examination, however, reveals that the groups are playing into the general public’s perceived information illiteracy. The claims and studies cited are, more often than not, poorly designed, suspiciously funded, misleading, incorrectly derived, or just outright false (Ley 2018; Oeming 2018; Bradley et al. 2016; Mialon et al. 2012; Wéry et al. 2016; Wilt et al. 2016). The problems with the sources would be immediately clear to any librarian trained in resource evaluation: many of the referenced journals are suspiciously titled, no longer active, or were funded by the organizations mentioned in this article.
Yet neither Watson nor the supporting citations provide a single example “suspicious or “misleading” studies posted on either FTND or YBOP. As above, none of Watson’s six citations say anything about me or YBOP. Typical of Watson’s careless scholarship, four of the 6 citations are not even remotely related to Watson’s claims.
The practice of citing papers that are irrelevant or do not support assertions is worrisome, misleading and does not advance scientific or public understanding.
In fact, my site contains over 1,000 studies directly related to porn use. This page organizes many of the studies into relevant categories: Relevant Research. For example, this list contains 270 studies on adolescents and porn use (along with 16 reviews of the literature) – all reporting negative outcomes related to porn use. Watson’s unsupported assertions would have the reader believe that all 270 are “fraudulent studies,” when in fact the list represents the preponderance of the research in the field by widely respected authors.
Also, consider YBOP’s list of every neurological study ever published on porn users. While all 52 studies report findings consistent with the addiction model, Watson’s inaptly sourced statements would have the reader believe that all 52 are flawed or highly suspicious. At what point does sloppy scholarship cross over into disquieting propaganda?
Consider YBOP’s list of over 110 studies linking porn use or porn use or porn addiction to sexual dysfunctions and poorer sexual and relationship satisfaction. Several of the studies are longitudinal or experimental. Watson, who implies that it is “pseudoscience” for YBOP to warn its visitors that today’s internet porn is causing erectile dysfunction in some users, fails to inform the readers that nearly every quantitative study on males’ reports that greater porn use in related to poorer sexual or relationship satisfaction. Multiple peer-reviewed papers and outspoken experts have raised concerns about excessive internet porn use and sexual dysfunction. More examples could be provided.
Skimming the balance of Watson’s article, I notice various other misleading or false statements. For example, Watson stated in error that Fight The New Drug owns Nofap LLC. Might such a false statement expose your journal to legal action for defamation or other legal action by these two businesses?
Please be aware that Watson’s article is already being employed as a propaganda tool by the pro-porn Realyourbrainonporn Twitter account.
Might you consider retraction of what appears to be an inadequately supported article and thinly veiled smear of groups and people with whom Watson disagrees on ideological grounds? At the very least, I hope you will insist that Dr. Watson contact all of those mentioned in the article with a view to correcting the many errors for the benefit of your readers.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Best regards,

——————————————————————————

UPDATES:

August, 2020, onward: Six brand new accounts (likely Prause sockpuppets) edit the Nofap Wikipedia page, entering numerous falsehoods recently tweeted by Prause & RealYBOP (now Anti-YBOP).

Prause has a long history of creating sockpuppets to insert propaganda and falsehoods into Wikipedia pages related to pornography (Fight The New Drug, NoFap, Pornography addiction, Effects of pornography, MDPI, and others). The tip of the Prause Wikipedia shenanigan-iceberg:

An encyclopedia would be needed to document the heinous activity by Prause’s numerous Wikipedia aliases (sockpuppets):

The 6 bolded aliases in the above list appear to be Prause’s most recent sockpuppets inserting the following edits into Nofap’s Wikipedia page. The sockpuppets’ edits are in yellow. Keypoint: I’ve underlined Wikipedia editor Tgeorgescu as he is the prime one protecting Nicole Prause’s edits from deletion. They work as a team to defame and insert false and misleading information into several Wikipedia pages (Nofap, FTND, Pornography Addiction, Effects of Pornography, Sexual Addiction, etc.).

Below I provide a few examples of her sockpuppets’ edits on the Nofap page:

—————————-

Sociologist author selected a handful of YouTube videos that came up in a brief “nofap” search. Not kidding. Then she excerpted a few lines to support her agenda. She did NOT assess Nofap or its members. Worthless drivel:

If you have any doubt, here’s RealYBOP tweeting about the paper that no one else could find:

——————————-

Three big lies by Prauses’ sockpuppets:

1) Roland Imhoff’s apology letter said nothing about any legal threats – because there were none. Here’s Imhoff’s’ apology letter – Men’s Reasons to Abstain from Masturbation May Not Reflect the Conviction of reboot Websites – which says that none of the subjects were members of NoFap (Imhoff incorrectly gave the impression in his original study that the subjects were from NoFap):

Just as she did on Wikipedia, Prause falsely claims the Imhoff study gathered subjects from NoFap. To this day Prause/RealYBOP continues to tweet that Imhoff’s study was on NoFap members.

2) Scram News: All lies by Prause. First, Scram was backed by big money and had a law firm representing it. Second, Prause is leaving out that she fed ScramNews a pack of lies about Alex and Nofap, which led to the lawsuit. Third, the big news is that Prause’s lies resulted in ScramNews going out of business. Full story here: Media outlet ScramNews forced to apologize & pay substantial damages for publishing Nicole Prause’s lies about Alex Rhodes & NoFap.

3) She claims there were lawsuit threats by Nofap, but the link doesn’t say that. It only contains a few tweets by NoFap complaining about agenda-driven editors controlling Wikipedia.

——————————-

Lie: No one was threatened and there is no evidence for this in the link cited.

—————————–

The citation and quote is from RealYBOP member Alan Mckee’s new book. Mckee claims, without legitimate support, that Nofap vitriolically attacks “female scientists.” This clearly came from Prause, yet it is Prause who is the perpetrator, attacking and defaming Alex Rhodes of NoFap, and so many others.

A few days earlier RealYBOP tweeted the lies she fed to Alan Mckee (and later placed on Wikipedia).

How propaganda is manufactured.

——————————————-

Citing the paper whose author listened to a few random YouTube videos mentioning NoFap and drew vast conclusions about those quitting porn.

Again, Prause as RealYBOP tweeting the paper she later edited into Wikipedia. The tweet is all lies. There was nothing in the paper about misogyny or homosexuality. She mentioned my TEDx talk in passing. That’s it.

Anyhow, the paper was a rambling mess from an agenda-driven sociologist who carefully selected a few reddit comments and YouTube videos to support her pre-selected goal of disparaging men in recovery.

—————————

Here someone cites the lie-filled VICE article featuring Prause, David Ley, PornHub and Xhamster representatives. (Note: David Ley is now collaborating with XHamster to promotes its websites and Pornhub was the first account to retweet RealYBOP’s initial tweet.)

Very cozy. See Is Nicole Prause Influenced by the Porn Industry?

—————————————-

The error-filled Brian Watson hit-piece was discussed in this section: August, 2020: RealYourBrainOnPorn (Prause) posts lies from Brian Watson’s error-filled hit-piece. Prause then edits Watson’s falsehoods into the Nofap Wikipedia page.

RealYBOP tweeted this defamatory quote at least 20 times in a 3-week period.

————————–

Cites Kinsey grad Brian Watson again, but it is a lie. NoFap has never solicited or received funding from “religious groups.”

Watson’s article is full of fabrications and his citations do not say what he claims they do. This is a case of academic fraud, plain and simple.

—————————

More lies from Brian Watson’s error-filled rant. In this whopper, Watson falsely claims that the Alex Rhodes’s defamation suit against Nicole Prause is largely funded by NCOSE and the Mormon Church.

———————-

More lies. Prause’s sockpuppet claims that NoFap threatened to sue The Spectator. While The Spectator repeated lies manufactured by Prause, NoFap never threatened to sue. Here you can read NoFap’s letter and the editor agreeing to rectify the authors’ mistakes: https://web.archive.org/web/20210104022332/https://spectator.us/nofap-proud-boys/

Prause and RealYBOP have tweeted multiple times that Alex Rhodes and Nofap have associations (or Nofap is supported by the Proud Boys). This is one of the instances of defamation described in Rhodes’s suit against Prause: NoFap founder Alexander Rhodes defamation lawsuit against Nicole Prause / Liberos.

While her vile @BrainOnPorn account was suspended a week for harassment, Nikky created a new sockpuppet to insert falsehoods – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Faustinecliffwalker

————————-

Right after Prause’s porn industry shill twitter account (@BrainOnPorn) was permanently suspend for targeted harassment and abuse, she created a 5th sockpuppet to insert more propaganda – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:NeTAbygO

——————————

December 10, 2020: Another likely Prause sockpuppet edits Nofap – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/JackReacher2018.

The edit inserts an out of context quote:

————————-

The above is just the tip of Prause icberg when it comes to misinformation about Alex Rhodes and Nofap: Nicole Prause, David Ley & @BrainOnPorn’s long history of harassing & defaming Alexander Rhodes of NoFap

Others – August, 2020: RealYBOP says DJ Burr’s fundraiser for his incarcerated 14-year old brother constitutes fraud. Falsely accuses Burr of stalking, says he should join his brother in jail.

Prause has harassed and threatened therapist D.J. Burr in the past – even maliciously reporting him to the State of Washington Department of Health for daring to stand up to her on Twitter. But Prause’s latest attack is beyond vile.

RealYBOP says that DJ Burr’s attempt to support his 14-year old brother who is being harshly treated by authorities, constitutes fraud. She is such a liar – no one threatened anyone. Inserting NCOSE is bizarre as DJ has nothing to do with NCOSE (never spoke there, nothing… ever).

The back story from DJ. One of several tweets:

DJ set up a fundraiser for his brothers legal defense:

Cowardly hiding be her alias, Prause escalated, defaming DJ, claiming he is involved with physical stalking and death threats. She then threatens DJ.

Vile, just vile.

RealYBOP has falsely accused many of us of stalking or sending death threats. It’s her go-to lie, repeated ad nauseum.

Here’s the thing: Prause accused me of stalking, so I filed a lawsuit against her – and won, establishing through the courts that Prause is the perpetrator, not a victim – Prause’s efforts to silence Wilson foiled; her restraining order denied as frivolous & she owes substantial attorney fees in a SLAPP ruling.

Note: This is another example of Prause engaging in witness intimidation as DJ Burr provided a sworn affidavit for Alex Rhodes’s defamation suit against her –Exhibit #6: D.J. Burr, LHMC affidavit (2 pages).

UPDATES:

August, 2020: Prause files bankruptcy to escape liability for 3 yet-to-be-tried defamation suits (Hilton, Rhodes, Minc), and avoid paying me the attorney-fee debt she had incurred (in my Anti-SLAPP victory)

As stated elsewhere, on August 6, 2020 the California Superior Court dismissed Prause’s malicious restraining order request against me and granted my anti-SLAPP motion. By statute, the loss meant Prause would have to pay my attorney fees (some $40,000) as soon as the judge blessed the documentation of the exact amount of the debt. A week or so later, Prause and her colleague Greg Siegle were scheduled to give their depositions in the defamation case Alex Rhodes filed against Prause. Also, Twitter had been subpoenaed, and was about to turn over to Rhodes the identity of the @BrainOnPorn Twitter account (apparent home of Prause’s most vicious defamation).

Then, on August 18, 2020 – the day before the first deposition was to take place – Prause filed bankruptcy. She did this to avoid paying me the attorney-fee debt she had incurred, and to try to escape liability for all three of the defamation suits against her: Donald L. Hilton Jr v. Nicole Prause and Liberos LLC, Case No: SA: 19-CV-00755-OLG; Alexander Rhodes v. Nicole Prause and Liberos LLC, Case No. 2:19-CV-01366-MPK; and Aaron M. Minc, Esq v. Melissa A. Farmer and Nicole R. Prause, Case No: CV-20-937026.

NOTE: I created this section in December of 2020, four months after Prause filed for bankruptcy. Prause left me no choice, as she claimed on twitter that wiggling out of her attorney-fee debt with a dubious bankruptcy somehow meant my anti-SLAPP victory had been “thrown out.” On December 4th, she replied to a 2-month old thread appearing to falsely claim that (1) the Hilton and Rhodes defamation suits had been tossed, and that (2) my anti-SLAP victory had been rescinded (both are false):

My legal victory stands. Nothing was reversed: Prause’s fraudulent request for a restraining order remains thrown out (having no merit), as does my Anti-SLAPP ruling. Prause was handed a ringing legal defeat, and nothing has changed that.

Mind you, Prause was not remotely insolvent. She had simply squirreled away most of her assets into her retirement accounts (more than quarter of a million dollars), and listed a tiny bit of consumer debt (under $3,000). Her claim of insolvency was almost entirely based on potential liabilities from the above defamation suits (which may have never gone to trial), plus some $40K she was going to owe me once the judge blessed the amount.

To achieve “insolvency,” Prause’s bankruptcy documents falsely claimed that she owed me $100,000 (rather than $40,000), and that the Hilton and Rhodes lawsuit liability amounted to $150,000 in debt (when she owed them nothing yet). But what about Prause’s legal costs, you ask? Wouldn’t they help bankrupt her? There appear to be none, as her insurance company covers all legal costs in the defamation suits!

The defamation suits have cost Prause nothing, while Alex Rhodes Don Hilton have spent big bucks persuing legal remedies to Prause’s relentless defamation and harassment. In sum, Prause’s actual debt, including what she owed me, was less than $50K, while her financial assets were well over $250K. Unchallenged, bankruptcy allows Prause to evade justice, to bleed her victims of money via legal costs, and to keep on defaming and harassing them without any limits or consequences.

With her expenses covered, Prause has been dragging the suits out, while Rhodes, Hilton & Minc spent big $$$. Here, one judge admonishes Prause for obfuscation and dilatory behavior:

Adding to their ever increasing costs, Rhodes, Hilton and Minc are opposing Prause discharging their defamation suits. Normally, intentional and malicious actions (like Prause’s reckless “reign of terror” destroying people’s lives with defamation and groundless reports) are non-dischargeable. However, judges can get the wrong end of the stick sometimes. I guess that’s why there’s an appeal process.

Again, Prause delayed discovery and misled everyone up until the night before she was to be deposed, then she filed bankruptcy. The following legal filings by Hilton & Rhodes state that Prause filed bankruptcy to avoid being deposed and handing over documents. What is she hiding?

Excerpt from Alex Rhodes opposition filing:

Excerpt from Don Hilton’s oppposition filing:

You would think that going bankrupt would have slowed Prause’s onslaught of defamation and harassment. Quite the opposite, as the defamation and harassment by her @BrainOnPorn alias exploded exponentially, targeting Hilton, Rhodes, Wilson and others who had filed affidavits in the Hilton & Rhodes defamation suits. @BrainOnPorn targeted parties in the defamation suits with up to 170 libelous and disparaging tweets per day!

Relevent pages:

August, 2020: Prause’s bankruptcy documents falsify her often-repeated fiction that she has relocated her home “multiple times” due to being stalked (primarily by Gary Wilson, of course).

In tweets, interviews, articles, and court documents, Prause has repeatedly claimed that she constantly moves due to numerous stalkers breathing down her neck (mainly me). All of these statements are lies. For almost 8 years Prause has been spouting this claim, yet she’s not provided one iota of documentation supporting this. At last, she herself has filed a public statement (below) wholly contradicting her past false statements about moving.

Her calling Alex Rhodes a stalker is one reason why he is suing her for defamation: NoFap founder Alexander Rhodes defamation lawsuit against Nicole Prause / Liberos LLC.

As for me, Prause has posted hundreds of comments and tweets falsely claiming that I have physically stalked her (summarized in the first section of page #1). (I live in another state, hundreds of miles away and am not a stalker.) As usual, Prause provided no evidence to support this lie. Who needs evidence when you can lie under oath, as she did in her court filings in the Hilton defamation suit against her? In her August, 2019 filing, Prause claimed to have moved on July 1, 2019 “out of fear of Wilson’s stalking” (note the date):

In the same August, 2019 court filing, David Ley repeated Prause’s nonsense in a sworn affidavit (note – “multiple times”):

In her failed attempt at a frivolous restraining order, Prause falsely stated that “as a result of Gary Wilson’s actions, I have relocated many times”.

As with the Hilton court filings, Prause’s memorandum for a restraining order contained no evidence that she had ever relocated her residence, let alone moved because of me. It would be very easy to provide receipts or leases, yet Prause failed to do so. No surprise, as she never provides objective evidence to support her claims. No wonder the judge ruled “inadmissible” most of her declaration in support of her restraining order request.

Finally she revealed the truth in her August, 2020 bankruptcy petition. She filed it to escape liability for 3 yet-to-be-tried defamation suits (Hilton, Rhodes, Minc), and avoid paying me the attorney-fee debt she had incurred (Prause was not actually insolvent, as she reported ~$270,000 in savings). This screenshot of her bankruptcy filing reveals Prause has not moved in the last 3 years:

Why is Prause finally disclosing the truth in her bankruptcy filings that she hasn’t, in fact, been moving her residence or business due to stalking? Well, in the filings she must provide all sorts of verifiable financial and personal documents to the bankruptcy court. If her fairytale of constantly moving didn’t match her documents, she could be charged with perjury. In contrast, there was no system in place to fact-check Prause in the Hilton suit or in my anti-SLAPP suit, so she was able to lie with impunity.

September, 2020: To circumvent trademark infringement “Really Still Your Brain On Porn” changed its name to “Anti-Your Brain On Porn.” Prause officially operates a stalker account (defaming harassing & stalking me and my family, but saying nothing about YBOP).

After obtaining USPTO trademarks for YBOP and YourBrainOnPorn we informed twitter that @BrainOnPorn was engaged in illegal trademark infringement. @BrainOnPorn responded with several nutty tweets claiming victimhood, while changing its name in an attempt to comply with the law. Example:

Soon after, @BrainOnPorn (Prause’s alter-ego Twitter account) attemped to rebrand itself a commentary-on-YBOP account, but without commentting on the content of YBOP! Instead, Prause used Anti-Your Brain On Porn (@BrainOnPorn) solely to defame and lie about various individuals and organizations (approximately 1,000 such tweets in the first 16 months of its existence). It supplied no actual commentary or analysis.

In line with its new purpose, the @BrainOnPorn bio deleted “real scientists” & “real data.” RealYBOP also lies in its bio, falsely claiming I threatened to sue “us” 7 times:

The truth? I sent only one straightforward, well justified cease and desist letter to Prause and the other RealYBOP experts (May, 2019). After legal actions revealed Daniel Burgess as the owner of the realyourbrainonporn.com URL, I sent him a separate C&D letter (July, 2019). All the letters were ignored and/or ridiculed. After I finalized my possession of the USPTO trademarks (YBOP, yourbrainonporn, yourbrainonporn.com) my attorneys sent Burgess a second C&D letter on September 2, 2020 (PDF of C&D letter). In sum, I have only sent Burgess 2 official cease and desist letters, which related to the trademark-infringing URL realyourbrainonporn.com (which Burgess owns), not directly to the associated Twitter account @BrainOnPorn.

Interestingly, a few days after this second C&D, www.realyourbrainonporn.com suddenly disappeared from the web. Anti-YBOP Twitter account (@BrainOnPorn) removed the link to the abandoned site, replacing it with a link to www.scienceofarousal.com.

Important to note that the person who manages the @BrainOnPorn account (Nicole Prause) was permanently suspended from Twitter for harassment in October, 2015 (@NicolePrause). Since then, she has been allowed to create two new accounts in violation of Twitter’s ban-evasion rules: @NicoleRPrause and @BrainOnPorn. Why hasn’t Twitter enforced its own rules with respect to this person?

In addition, I recently won an anti-SLAPP lawsuit against Nicole Prause, establishing that she is harassing me and my family. In order for the judge to rule in my favor the judge had to determine that Prause’s frivolous restraining order request was (1) unsupported and (2) an illicit attempt to suppress my right to speak out about a matter of public interest. Nicole Prause (whose initial account was permanently banned for harassment) then used her @BrainOnPorn account to stalk me and my family (as well as others). We are all concerned about our safety.

Before being disciplined by Twitter (see below), @BrainOnPorn averaged 10-20 tweets per day defaming and harassing me, my family, friends and others. In total, @BrainOnPorn posted about 1,oo0 tweets targeting me (most were defamation, all were ad hominem). Far too many tweets to document on this page. More importantly, I refuse to paint my friends, family and supports in a false light by republishing Prause’s malicious lies. That said, I’ll provide a few examples to give you a taste of Prause’s abhorrent tactics.

As stated above, after I finalized my registration of the USPTO trademarks (YBOP, yourbrainonporn, yourbrainonporn.com) my attorneys sent Burgess a second C&D letter on September 2, 2020 (PDF of C&D letter). Anti-YBOP completely lied about the events, falsely claiming I “physically stalked” Burgess and his family (who live in Utah). Yet the C&D to Burgess pertained to the RealYBOP website, which he immediately removed, not the Twitter account. Law enforcemnt was not alerted. My wife is not rich and has no inheritance. Vile:

———————–

Prause (@BrainOnPorn) doxing my son and his mother (which Prause continued to do in ~80 subsequent tweets), including their names, private photos, addresses, places of work, and financial information. For example, disgustingly Prause smears my son’s mother as “Wilson’s baby momma.” This tweet is full of lies:

She does not deal pot, but created a successful business in medical CBD and THC products for chronic pain, cancer, MS, and myriad other conditions (this has been legal to do for 2 decades in Oregon). She started the business long after we went our separate ways. I have not received a dime from her (why would I?). Even if we were married, it would still not constitute a conflict of interest for me to write about the effects of porn use. It’s insane for Prause to claim that I created YBOP to hide the fact that my ex has a very successful business. But that’s Nikky for you.

————————–

All lies. You can tell because she provides no screenshots of me posting photos, or anything else.

The 4 letters described above were written for Prause’s fraudulent attempt at a restraining that was tossed as frivoulus and without merit, and in connection with which I was awarded a SLAPP victory: Prause’s efforts to silence Wilson foiled; her restraining order denied as frivolous & she owes substantial attorney fees in a SLAPP ruling.

The 4 authors are close friends of Prause and equally agenda-driven. Three of the four were advertised on with RealYBOP website. None of the letter-writers said that I had stalked them. The unsworn letters contained zero actual evidence to support her claims. A brief overview of the 4 letters Prause posted and misrepresented in her many tweets:

By RealYBOP member Kate Dawson of Ireland. Said nothing about me or Prause.
By Rebecca Sullivan of Canada. The 2-page letter had a single throwaway line about me, saying I supplied a brief for Canadian Motion 47. Nothing else.
By RealYBOP member Madita Oeming. She never claimed that I stalked or threatened her in any way. Instead, Oeming whined because I posted these 3 tweets about her unsupported claims. Oeming’s letter did repeat Prause’s lies… but without any evidence.
The last letter was a lie-filled fairy tale by Daniel Burgess, who owned the RealYBOP URL, has used aliases to cyberstalk me, and has himself engaged in numerous instances of defamation. The truth about Burgess and our interactions is thoroughly documented on this page. Legal actions continue with Mr. Burgess, including addressing very recent tweets (see below) that falsely accuse me of sending death threats and stalking 5 women. Both often-tweeted statements constitute defamation per se, which is the easiest kind of defamation to get relief for in defamation suits.

Another disgusting tweet accompanying the same letters, which her own lawyer refused to enter into evidence in connection with her failed restraining order (her attorney asked to withdraw because she was apparently threatening him with suit because he wouldn’t do her bidding):

None of the letters said anything about seeking law enforcement for any reason. I don’t have a “group” – I simply wrote a highly regarded book. I never tried to get anyone fired. Prause is a pathological liar. There are hundreds more just like these (often worse), with many now targeting my son, his mother, and my wife. Too vile to re-post here.

Bottom line – Prause stopped hiding behind the illusion that @BrainOnPorn Twitter was ever anything other than a porn-industry shill account, created to fool the public, and to cyberstalk me and anyone else who speaks about the harms of porn or unsavory aspects of the porn industry (such as underage performers, exploitation of rape victims, and trafficking). By any objective measure, Nicole Prause and her @BrainOnPorn account have violated multiple Twitter policies.

UPDATES:

Others – September, 2020: Aaron Minc, JD announces his defamation suit against Prause (Minc owns the law firm representing Alex Rhodes).

On September 9, 2020 Aaron Minc, JD filed a defamation suit against Melissa Farmer for retweeting defamatory tweets authored by Nicole Prause. In her retweets, Farmer “directly messaged and/or shared them with the Ohio State Bar Association, Cleveland Metropolitan Bar Association, and the Ohio Supreme Court’s twitter accounts.” Farmer claimed that Aaron Minc was “engaging in ethics violations that endanger [a] third party (Ohio Rules of Prof. Conduct Rule 4.4.).”

In his court filing, Minc said he would add Prause into the Melissa Farmer defamation suit if and when the Bankruptcy Court allowed it (“relief from stay”):

Nicole R. Prause is a California resident. Prause operates an account on Twitter with the username “Liberos” and/or “@NieoleRPrause.” Prause filed for bankruptcy on August 18, 2020 under Chapter 7 of the United States Bankruptcy Code in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California, Case No. 2:20-bk-17828-NB. Plaintiff is in the process of obtaining leave from the Bankruptcy Court to include her as a defendant in this lawsuit.

The two filings by Aaron Minc:

Let’s begin with the 2 Prause tweets that earned her a third defamation suit in less than 2 years. The 2nd tweet (which is now deleted), states that Aaron Minc (@RepLawyer) sent Prause’s location to some unnamed group that she claims is out to kill her. Her eager followers lap up her unsupported assertions (she never provides screenshots):

Once again she claims that “threats” forced her to relocate both her residence and “lab.” That doesn’t match her August, 2020 bankruptcy documents where she states, under penalty of perjury, that she has remained in one location for that past 3 years.

Her carefully crafted mythology of always desperately moving around due to ‘stalking” shattered into pieces.

Here is a portion of the original Prause thread and some of Minc’s replies:

The email Prause tweeted was a private correspondence from Alex Rhodes lawyer (Andrew Stebbins of Minc Law) to Prause’s lawyer (Phillip J. Sbrolla):

This email was never public, and was never sent to any “group.” Typical Prause tactic of tweeting screenshots having nothing to do with her claims.

With her sycophants piling on, Prause appears to saying she is suing Aaron Minc (she’s not):

She continues the hyperbole, saying LAPD detectives “think this may do it.” Notice how Prause followers fully buy into Prause’s false narrative.

She contiunes claiming the “detective is optomistic” that he can act on these. What “these” are no one knows, as she has provided no examples of anything, except for an 8-month old private email between lawyers.

If only I had a dollar for every time Prause claimed the FBI or the LADP were about to make an arrest – and never did.

Prause’s tweets inspire others to go after Aaron Minc:

Finally, Melissa Farmer, presumably taken in by Prause’s fabricated drama, was incited to tweet. She even tagged various bar associations and accused Minc of engaging in “ethics violations that endanger a third party” (taken from Minc’s filing):

It never ceases to amaze me how recklessly people retweet Prause’s outlandish claims without bothering to check the facts or ask for supporting evidence.

Below are screenshots of pages 1 through 5 of Aaron Minc’s complaint for defamation and false light:

Page #1

Page #2

Page #3

Page #4

Page #5

Add this to Prause’s long list of attempting to destroy careers: The Numerous Victims of Nicole Prause’s Malicious Reporting and Malicious Use of Process.

September, 2020: Anti-YBOP/@BrainOnPorn (Prause) disciplined by Twitter for abuse and harassment of me and others

Nicole Prause’s @BrainOnPorn account claimed to be “commentary” on Your Brain On Porn. Instead, it goes after me (and others) personally, and never comments on Your Brain On Porn (website or book). It is not, in fact, “Anti-YourBrainOnPorn,” and is thus using my trademarks without justification to pose as a commentary on Your Brain On Porn.

While posing as “commentary,” @BrainOnPorn is actually engaging in targeted harassment of me and my family (and extended family), and friends. Twitter’s rules and details say the following:

Abuse/harassment: You may not engage in the targeted harassment of someone, or incite other people to do so. This includes wishing or hoping that someone experiences physical harm. Learn more.
Twitter Rules: You may not engage in the targeted harassment of someone, or incite other people to do so. We consider abusive behavior an attempt to harass, intimidate, or silence someone else’s voice. …
We prohibit behavior that harasses or intimidates, or is otherwise intended to shame or degrade others.

Since changing direction in an attempt to avoid trademark infringement, @BrainOnPorn has been harassing, abusing, shaming and degrading me, my wife, my son, and the mother of my son. The latter two people have never commented on anything to do with porn or @BrainOnPorn. One is employed in the tech field. The other runs a business that she developed after she and we split up, in which I holds no interest. Such targeted harassment is compromising both of them professionally and maliciously. Both are in fear for their safety.

To conduct this reign of terror, @BrainOnPorn puts up unauthorized photos, documents, and other fabricated “evidence,” and then mischaracterizes or lies outright about these items and the people named. @BrainOnPorn also makes degrading, false accusations intended to harass and humiliate. I reported a number of defamatory and abusive tweets, Finally. Twitter eventually responded by banning Anti-YBOP for one day and confirming via a notice that Prause violated twitter rules on abuse and harassment

The one-day ban:

Twitter confirms that Anti-YBOP violated twitter rules for abuse and harassment:

Prause’s alias account is nothing more than a stalker account.

UPDATES:

Ongoing: Prause uses @BrainOnPorn and @NicoleRPrause to harass & defame Laila Mickelwait after she initiates the TraffickingHub campaign to hold Pornhub responsible for hosting child porn and videos of trafficked females (over 100 tweets). Prause falsely accuses Laila of supporting or sending death threats, and other illegal activities.

Laila Mickelwait was a regular target of Prause and her pro-porn alias @BrainOnPorn. (Laila supplied an affidavit in the defamation suits against Prause.) In fact, RealYBOP Twitter (Prause) attacked Laila Mickelwait in its defense of Pornhub’s under-age looking porn and absence of age-verification.

Mickelwait’s petition to hold PornHub accountable for unconscionable and illegal content posted to its site has garnered over 2 million signatures, and eventually led the NY Times to publish an investigative article fully affirming the claims put forth by TraffickingHub & Laila: The Children of Pornhub – Why does Canada allow this company to profit off videos of exploitation and assault?.

The TraffickingHub campaign caused @BrainOnPorn to escalate into full on cyberstalking, lies and defamation – all in support of PornHub’s agenda. A few examples (of over 100 tweets) are below.

Laila wrote an op-ed hinting at the coordinated campaign to discredit her and Exodus Cry, and to harass and defame her. A few bits from her article:

This overt public disinformation campaign is only the tip of the iceberg. For the last year, Mindgeek and its surrogates have simultaneously conducted a very dark, secret campaign to discredit, harass, and intimidate those who have sought to reveal the truth…
During this period, my family and I have also been threatened, harassed, defamed, and doxxed by a group of operatives, many of whom we can connect directly to Mindgeek and its consultants. Close family members had their emails, bank accounts, and cloud storage hacked. Private family photos were emailed to them in an obvious effort to threaten and intimidate them and myself….

We don’t know if @BrainOnPorn communicated with Mindgeek operatives, but this malicious Twitter account became one of the primary entities harassing and defaming Laila and Exodus Cry (before the account was banned in late October, 2020).

Here, RealYBOP directly supports Mindgeek, owner of PornHub by targeting the following tweet by Laila Mickelwait.

Here is RealYBOP attacking Laila, while defending Mindgeek’s CEO. Note: RealYBOP lies when asserting the account isn’t that of Mindgeek’s CEO.

———————

RealYBOP attacks TraffickingHub, which is the campaign to hold Pornhub responsible for hosting child porn and sexual abuse videos (initiated by Laila Mickelwait).

———————

Here RealYBOP goes wacko to disparage Exodus Cry:

RealYBOP trolls Traffickinghub supporter:

More support of Pornhub (no comments about how much money Mindgeek takes in from exploiting others):

Trolling threads of Traffickinghub supporters, posting EC budget, as if the budget has anything to do with Pornhub.

RealYBOP tweeted that Laila did not attend USC. Merritt calls out RealYBOP for her lie:

RealYBOP posts financials, falsely implying something shady is occurring. RealYBOP says the Traffickinghub petition does nothing. How wrong could RealYBOP have been: https://traffickinghub.com/

Merritt posts protest against Pornhub and RealYBOP goes on the attack:

RealYBOP engages in defamation per se, falsely stating Laila asks men to threaten and stalk females. The 4 screenshots says nothing about anyone being stalked, let alone being told so by Laila.

More defamation, falsely claims Laila threatened numerous female scholars. The screenshots are of anonymous internet comments. Nothing related to Laila.

RealYBOP goes absolutely bonkers, with multiple instances of defamation per se:

RealYBOP says the petition will do nothing, yet it caused Pornhub to delete over half of its videos, put new regulations in place, and caused lawmakers to initiate bills and investigations. What happened to RealYBOP? The website was taken down for trademark infringement, while the associated Twitter account was permanently banned for harassment!

More insane assertions. No wonder Prause is being sued by multiple parties.

RealYBOP keeps doing Pornhub’s bidding:

Obsessive cyberstalking continues:

After 10 tweets on September 30 targeting Laila and her Traffickinghub campaign, RealYBOP starts up again on October 1 with more lies:

More defamation per se:

More lies by RealYBOP. In the tweet RealYBOP links to WIPO, which was about the trademark infringement of YBOP. News flash – WIPO doesn’t matter as Wilson now owns the URL for RealYBOP: ATTENTION: YBOP acquires www.RealYourBrainOnPorn.com in trademark infringement settlement.

RealYBOP’s insanity continues:

Same, more lies. Screenshots have nothing to do with anyone, just random internet comments.

No wonder Prause is being sued for defamation:

More lies and cyberstalking: Laila is not fundraising for other groups. (Prause is being sued for libeling NoFap.)

LOL – Now RealYBOP is falsely stating Gary Wilson committed perjury. Funny how her screenshots contain no examples, yet this website documents dozens of example of Prause perjuring herself: Nicole Prause & David Ley commit perjury in defamation lawsuit (September, 2019). Hmm…how did RealYBOP obtain screenshots of Prause’s FBI online complaints – which named no one, including me? Oh yeah, RealYBOP is Prause.

YBOP’s Twitter thread debunking Prause’s lies: https://twitter.com/YourBrainOnPorn/status/1313947340554690562

The respons just gets nuttier:

More Prause perjury exposed in Wilson’s legal victory, where the courts ruled that he was not a stalker, and that Prause was the perpetrator – Prause’s efforts to silence Wilson foiled; her restraining order denied as frivolous & she owes substantial attorney fees in a SLAPP ruling.

RealYBOP (morphed into “Anti-YBOP,” but still @BrainOnPorn) questioning a victim of Pornhub, Avri Sapir

Avri Sapir responds to RealYBOP’s disgusting smear:

RealYBOP tries again to incite her followers to report Exodus Cry to the state of Missouri (just as Prause did a year earlier – February, 2019: Prause falsely accuses Exodus Cry of fraud. Asks Twitter followers to report the non-profit to the Missouri attorney general (for spurious reasons), Appears to have edited the CEO’s Wikipedia page.). No one knows, including RealYBOP, what violation Exodus Cry supposedly committed.

Direct support of PornHub:

Finally, Prause no longer hides behind her alias account:

She immediately goes back to her alias, pointing out obvious: EC wants to end sex trafficking.

More hit-pieces loaded with falsehoods:

More cyberstalking in support of Pornhub:

More cyberstalking of Traffickinghub supporters:

Entering threads of Traffickinghub supporters, spreading misinformation:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On October 23, 2020 Prause’s porn-industry shill Twitter account (@BrainOnPorn) was permanently banned for targeted harassment and abuse. This meant that Prause was forced to use her @NicoleRPrause account to tweet the same lies, propaganda and defamation. You can see below that NicoleRPrause’s tweets are nearly identical to the garbage spewed by @BrainOnPorn

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

However, Prause now uses her personal account to continue her obsessive cyberstalking and defamation of Laila – and her support of Pornhub. In many RealYBOP and now Prause tweets, she openly states or alludes to me placing her address on YBOP or twitter. She is lying and never provides any evidence that this occurred. Nor did Prause provide any evidence in the 2 lawsuits I won proving Prause was lying her address being on YBOP or anywhere else (twitter thread exposing Prause as lying):

When people go after Pornhub, Prause enters their threads, posting defamation.

——————

She defames Laila when Laila goes after Pornhub. Laila did not write a letter to support the dissemination of Prause’s address. No one did. All BS.

(twitter thread exposing Prause as lying about her address being posted by anyone):

—————————-

Defaming Laila & supporting Pornhub. She posts lies under Kristoff’s tweet linking to Laila’s article describing harrasment by allies of pornhub, like Prause:

—————————-

Lies that Laila is supporting sexual violence (What a joke – as Prause supports PornHub!).

————————

Here Prause lies that Laila was involved in claimed death threats. Prause also lies that I put her address on YBOP (twitter thread exposing Prause as lying):

——————-

More of the same lies (twitter thread exposing Prause as lying):

—————————

Lying that Laila was involved in claimed death threats. Why is Prause harassing Kristof, who exposed Pornhub’s illegal and vile activities?

How disgusting is it that Prause tweets lies under a video by a victim of Pornhub?

—————————-

Continued cyberstalking and falsehoods. Laila never said Prause was paid by porn.

Notice how Prause is defaming Laila in threads where Pornhub is fiercely criticized. Is this her way of supporting Pornhub?

————————-

More nonsense in yet another thread where Pornhub is fiercely criticized.

——————

With her @BrainOnPorn account banned for harassment, Prause must use he own account to defame those critiquing pornhub:

———————-

More defamation.

—————–

Prause posts her own tweet, mischaracterizing the settlements:

Another:

TRUTH:

The settlement is under a non-disclosure agreement, which Prause appears to be violating.
No one said “big fees,” but Prause’s insurance company clearly paid out settlements to Rhodes and Hilton.
“Withdrawn with prejudice” To settle a lawsuit means the plaintiff (Rhodes, Hilton) has accepted the defendant’s “deal,” and is therefore willing to dismiss the original suit. “With prejudice” only means that the plaintiff will not sue the defendant again for the original claims. The plaintiff is free to sue again for new claims, such as breach of the settlement agreement terms.
“I paid nothing.” Perhaps, but Prause’s insurance company apparently did!
“No defamation finding was ever made.” Prause settled each suit to avoid having to comply with discovery and a jury trial. Prause was not exonerated. Nor were there any “findings.”
A third defamation lawsuit continues, and I won 2 lawsuits against Prause, exposing her as the perpetrator, not the victim (suit #1, suit #2).

————————-

Again, tweeting under criticism of Pornhub, with #incitement:

——————-

More defamation, while supporting Pornhub’s campaign against Laila.

There are no Laila Haddad online anti-pornography groups.

———————

Disgusting. Prause says NCOSE & Laila incited the Atlanta massage parlor killings. Another hit-piece by EJ Dickson, featuring one “expert’: David Ley

More obsessive cyberstalking, posting the Rolling Stone hit-piece (notice how Prause posts under tweets disparaging Pornhub)

More of the same, on the same day:

And more on same day. What a joke: Laila is “inciting violence against women”, but Pornhub is just fine (Prause always seems to enter threads where Pornhub is being disparaged or exposed)

—————————-

Same day. Wow. Joining XBIZ to smear Laila. Porn industry is scared.

Same day, same lies.

The 9th tweet from March 25th.

No, she wasn’t assaulted outside the “office posted by her group”. As explained, Prause calls anyone she doesn’t like “a group”. I am not part of any “group”, but Nikky is referring to me, and lying that I put her address on YBOP: February, 2021: Prause posts 70 tweets in 5 days falsely stating that I placed her address on YBOP – and she was grabbed on the street in 2019 as a consequence. Yet in 2020 Prause tweeted that no one, including me, has her real address. Her lies don’t match (documents tweets beyond the 5 days).

——————–

She’s lying as twitter does not reveal who has reported an account.

Same lie. She doesn’t know who reported her account. But is should be reported, as its engaged in targeted harassment, defamation and cyberstalking. As for Laila’s comments about her husband, she has actual death threats all the time having taken on a billion dollar business. See – The end of Pornhub’s campaign of intimidation.

——————-

Obsessive cyberstalker:

Same day. Prause cyberstalking another victim of Pornhub

Same day. Under a tweet going after Pornhub.

Another on the same day, tweeting wherever pornhub is disparaged

Again, wherever Pornhub is in trouble, she’s to the rescue.

—————————-

Cyberstalking a tweet disparaging Pornhub. Surprise.

RE: Following tweets – I never said Prause was lying about her assault (even though she’s a pathological liar, serial defamer, cyberstalker). I said she was lying about the assault occurring at an address placed on YBOP: February, 2021: Prause posts 70 tweets in 5 days falsely stating that I placed her address on YBOP – and she was grabbed on the street in 2019 as a consequence. Yet in 2020 Prause tweeted that no one, including me, has her real address. Her lies don’t match (documents tweets beyond the 5 days).

Cyberstalking for Pornhub, again. This time collaborating with Communications Director of the FSC (@FSCArmy), Mike Stabile.

Not the 1st time she has collaborated with the FSC:

Cyberstalking a tweet disparaging Pornhub. Falsely accusing Laila of making a “criminal threat complaint”.

Prause appears to be referring to her twitter ban, in which someone reported her for making violent threats – March, 2021: Nicole Prause’s Twitter account (@NicoleRPrause) temporarily suspended for “posting violent threats”. She is lying, because twitter never reveals who did the reporting. She just can’t help lying, even when all of twitter knows.

————————

Supporting pornhub via cyberstalking.

I said – February, 2021: Prause posts 70 tweets in 5 days falsely stating that I placed her address on YBOP – and she was grabbed on the street in 2019 as a consequence. Yet in 2020 Prause tweeted that no one, including me, has her real address. Her lies don’t match (documents tweets beyond the 5 days).

Same day. Same lies.

Incites cyberstalking.

Prause retweets another shills defamation.

Second retweet.

———————–

More support for Mindgeek via libeling Laila and Staci Sprout.

Same day “inciting violence” by challenging Pornhub. Huh?

—————

Next day (April 14, 2021). 3 defamatory tweets in a row:

Same day – 3 in a row libeling Staci Sprout and Laila. Same tired lies.

Same day. Out defending Pornhub.

Same day, continued cyberstalking.

Same day, posting VICE hit piece, again, wherever Pornhub is mentioned.

She is questioned about her cyberstalking. She responds with a screenshot of an April, 2019 police report for an anonymous comment she did not like.

The report:

I would be living at the police station if I filed a report for every vitriolic or threatening comment about me (many by Prause herself).

She has a long history of filing false police reports:

She has an extensive history of filing false and malicious reports – Numerous Victims of Nicole Prause’s Malicious Reporting and Malicious Use of Process.

Same day. Just gets nuttier.

Same day, another nutty tweet. Screenhots have nothing to with what Prause is claiming. Again, in support of pornhub:

Same day. How many is that?

Same day.

15 or so defamatory tweets in a single day targeting Laila – all in support of the porn industry agenda.

————————-

The next day (April 15, 2021), posting under Gabe, who has blocked her. Upset that Pornhub is about to lose serious cash:

Same day. says laila thretend to have pepole killed. What a nutter.

Same day. Upset that Pornhub is about to lose serious cash

Same day, supporting Mindgeek. Note – Prause is lying about the tweet which was referring to Pornhub, not her, when it said “There’s a special place in hell for these kind of people who preys on the weak and poor”

Prause’s manipulated screenshot, with the top tweet omitted, and my tweet inappropriately placed below “special place in hell”.

Here’s the real order of tweets. Prause posted under Aamir’s 9-month-old tweet, and I replied exposing her as lying and cyberstalking:

This is what she does… all the time.

This time under Laila, asking that Laila be investigated.

Pornhub must love her.

————————–

Next day (April 16, 2021) – Working with XBIZ (Gustavo Turner) to attack Laila Mickelwait:

———————

Tweets podcast with VICE’s Samantha Cole, author of the hit-piece. Pornhub was exposed for complicity in mass child sexual abuse & trafficking. Visa, Mastercard & Discover cut off card processing. Grant Thornton, Heinz/Unilever & PayPal cut ties. Pornhub deleted 80% of its site (10 million videos) 5 lawsuits filed. Brought before the Canadian Parliament – and yet we have Prause tweeting in support PornHub’s executives!

——————–

Cyberstalking Exodus Cry on a Friday night.

——————

Wow. Accuses Laila of arson:

———————————————————————————

Finally, a 2021 Op-ed in Washington Times by Laila Mickelwait describing the disgusting activities of Pornhub and its operatives (such as RealYBOP) – The end of Pornhub’s campaign of intimidation.

Updates:

Ongoing: Prause uses @BrainOnPorn and @NicoleRPrause to falsely accuse Matt Fradd of fraud, threatening physical violence, and supporting “death threats” and “stalking of women”.

This is one of many sections documenting Prause’s ongoing campaign in which she falsely accuses her chosen targets of sending death threats, or supporting death threats, or causing others to send death threats. Of course, she offers no evidence to support these falsehoods. Here’s some background:

YBOP condemns threatening, vicious remarks on social media, and so does everyone we know. That said, the internet is the Wild West. Most public figures – of every sex and gender – tell us they regularly receive threatening comments from the ill-mannered denizens of the internet. The handful of anonymous comments Prause claims have targeted her pale in comparison.

It appears that she scours the internet for evidence that she is being victimized, even employing a special Reddit app to gather anonymous, troll-generated remarks that forum moderators had already promptly and routinely deleted. She then accuses people she wishes to defame of authoring or encouraging the comments – without a shred of evidence.

It’s telling that she has dredged up relatively few examples of her purported victimhood. It seems that people rarely care enough about Prause’s activities to bother trolling her.

Ignoring her good fortune at being seldom targeted, she regularly sounds the alarm about her victimhood using her scant collection. Disturbingly, in the last couple of months she has taken to enhancing this campaign. She has added astonishing assertions that events online are responsible for an instance of unwanted touching (which she describes as a “sexual assault”). She alleges that the unfortunate incident occurred on the streets of Santa Monica in October of 2019.

Where is the evidence that this event was in any way connected with events online? Of the online comments she points to, only a handful can be considered threats. There’s no evidence tying any of her prized collection of “threats” to people who are even remotely associated with the many people she regularly accuses on Twitter of generating, supporting, or promoting death threats. There’s also very little evidence to support her claims that the comments she points to had anything to do with efforts to suppress women scientists. Nor is there any evidence to suggest that commenting trolls were headed her way (imminent threats).

Prause chronically tweets that he has filed police or FBI reports on those named in her defamatory in her tweets. Funny, how law enforcement never gets around to contacting any of us.

YBOP does not condone vicious, threatening posts…by anyone. It’s surprising that Prause finds these few posts so disturbing when she posts so many vicious, defamatory, threatening posts of her own.

Now to her anti-Fradd campaign. This is unbelievably disgusting. RealYBOP tweeting defamation under Matt Fradd’s wife celebrating their wedding anniversary:

Over and over @BrainOnPorn & @NicoleRPrause have tweeted lie-filled letters written by her close pro-porn friends (usually other RealYBOP members) at the behest of Prause. She tried to enter 4 of these letters into her fraudulent restraining order case, but the judge saw right through them as empty (the letter-writers only regurgitated what Prause had told them – which were falsehoods, without a shred of actual supporting evidence).

Even so, these 4 letters, which she has tweeted numerous times, did not say what Prause claims they said. None of the letter-writers said that I had stalked them. The unsworn letters contained zero actual evidence to support Prause’s stalking claims. A brief overview of the 4 letters Prause posted and misrepresented in her many tweets:

By Kate Dawson of Ireland. Said nothing about me or Prause.
By Rebecca Sullivan of Canada. The 2-page letter had a single throwaway line about me, saying I supplied a brief for Canadian Motion 47. Nothing else.
By Madita Oeming of Germany. She never claimed that I stalked or threatened her in any way. Instead, the thin-skinned Oeming whined because I posted these 3 tweets concerning her unsupported claims, and retweeted Gabe Deem’s demolition of her February, 2020 article. Oeming’s letter did repeat Prause’s untruths…but without any supporting evidence.
The last letter was a lie-filled fairy tale by Daniel Burgess, who owned RealYBOP, has used aliases to cyberstalk me, and has himself engaged in numerous instances of defamation. The truth about Burgess and our interactions are thoroughly documented on this page. Legal actions continued with Mr. Burgess, including addressing more recent tweets (see below) that falsely accused me of sending death threats and stalking 5 women. (Update, January, 2021: Gary Wilson now owns the RealYBOP URL).

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On October 23, 2020 Prause’s porn-industry shill Twitter account (@BrainOnPorn) was permanently banned for targeted harassment and abuse. This meant that Prause was forced to use her @NicoleRPrause account to tweet the same lies, propaganda and defamation. You can see below that NicoleRPrause’s tweets are nearly identical to the garbage spewed by @BrainOnPorn

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Out of nowhere Prause posts several defamatory tweets in threads mention Fradd. Even though she is blocked by Gabe Deem she enters his thread with her usual defamatory spate of “death threat” accusations.

Prause’s claims surround a 6-minute talk asking others to support Alex Rhodes’s defamation suit against Prause. Here’s what she misrepresents:

Matt in fact never referred to her by name.
Matt did mention a particular “nasty individual” (not “nasty woman”).
Matt never said “Prause was involved in the porn industry.”
Matt did not say “taking her out.” Instead, he said, “I would not be surprised if we see the porn industry begin to crumble in a significant way, because of who this individual is,” which is still out of context.
There is zero evidence connecting Fradd’s appeal to support Rhodes with any of the comments Prause/RealYBOP regularly tweet as “death threats.”

————————-

Trolling another thread, she blames Fradd for death threats. No evidence, only a screenshot of purported anonymous comments gathered over the years.

———————-

More of the same. Nothing to do with the porn industry? Explain away the evidence on this page: Is Nicole Prause Influenced by the Porn Industry?

———————–

Trolling another thread (she’s called bizarre):

Matt never said anything about “shutting her up.”

———————–

Prause starts in the next day with additional lies. Prause falsely stated that Fradd told “them to kick my ass.”

In fact, Matt told Alex to “Kick ass.” Typical Prause maneuver. Lie about what someone said, hoping your sycophants fail to look at the screenshots. Here’s the screenshot:

She’s likely smearing Fradd because he donated $1,000 and asked his followers to donate what they could.

——————–

Wow, she trolls Fradd’s post about his young son!

Stalking? I do know she has lied for years about me stalking her (and the court agreed). She also lied about having to constantly relocate due to stalking. She also falsely accused many people I know of stalking her and/or female scientists.

It’s worth noting that Canadian investigative journalist Diana Davison who authored The Post Millennial expose’ on Dr. Prause, talked with her on the record for almost a week. In public comments under a related video Davison commented, “Prause said many things to me but none of her “evidence” actually supported her claims. In every instance the evidence reversed who the aggressor was. She basically accuses others of the exact things she herself did. I emailed with her, on the record, for almost a week.” In a second comment Davison said, “When I said I spent two weeks researching this that means I read every court document and every related document and spent a week emailing with Prause herself who cut me off after I started asking for actual evidence of harassment.”

Two days later the cyberstalking of Fradd continues. This time falsely accusing Fradd of directly threatening physical violence.

—————–

More cyberstalking and deception.

The funds are not “gone”. Every dollar raised went to pay legal costs in Alex Rhodes’s defamation suit. Nothing to do with the porn industry? Explain away the evidence on this page: Is Nicole Prause Influenced by the Porn Industry?

She continues:

———————

Accusses Fradd of commiting Fraud.

Prause is lying that “nothing ever happened”. She filed bankruptcy to escape liability for 3 yet-to-be tried defamation suits (Hilton, Rhodes, Minc) and avoid paying me the attorney-fee debt she had incurred (in my Anti-SLAPP victory). Mind you, Prause was not remotely insolvent. She had simply squirreled away most of her assets into her retirement accounts (more than quarter of a million dollars), and listed a tiny bit of consumer debt (under $3,000). Her claim of insolvency was almost entirely based on potential liabilities from the above defamation suits (which may have never gone to trial), plus some $40K she was going to owe me once the judge blessed the amount. The Bankruptcy judge then ordered all 3 defamation suits to try mediation. Prause & her insurance company settled with Don Hilton and Alex Rhodes. The terms are undisclosed, but the insurance company offered big bucks to settle leading up to the mediation. I suspect Prause had to sign a non-disparagement clause, which she has not observed.

——————–

She starts in the next day. Now she claims that Matt incited violence. Yet she never provides any evidence of violence, yet alone it being incited by Matt.

Saying “the money is gone” is accurate – all of the donated money went into the lawsuit. The donations failed to cover all of Alex’s legal expenses.

——————

More of the same.

“Gone”? The donations failed to cover all of Alex’s legal expenses.

———————-

More defamation, falsely accusing Fradd of inciting violence.

————–

Falsely claims Fradd incited violence.

The money paid legal fees. Prause’s insurance company paid her legal fees and the payout to Alex.

———-

5 tweets the same day defaming Matt, and lying about the lawsuits.

Tweet #2

Tweet #3. Matt is now inciting Mass murder!

Tweet #4: Is she blaming Matt for the Atlanta massage parlor shooting? What a nutter.

Tweet #5: Accountability? Prause has been held accountable in numerous legal venues and defamation lawsuits: Legal victories over serial harasser/defamer Nicole Prause: She’s the perpetrator, not the victim!

—————-

Screenshot of same donations. Defames Fradd by accusing him of threatening women.

———————

More of the same false claims. What a cyberstalker.

————————-

May 5th, 20201 – continued cyberstalking. Evidently Josh Duggar used Covenant Eyes software and Fradd was one of Covenant Eyes speakers. Gives her an excuse to libel Fradd.

Another.

Yet another. Lying that Fradd raised $197K for Alex Rhodes lawsuit.

Another, of course.

Two days later. Fradd never urged his follwers to attack Prause.

————————–

On March 26, 2020 Nicole Prause’s Twitter account (@NicoleRPrause) was temporarily banned for targeted harassment and “posting violent threats”

Others – Ongoing: @BrainOnPorn (Prause) falsely accuses Gail Dines of “being in a group” that sends death threats, stalks female scientists, and views women as expendable & worthy of violence.

This has to register as one of Prause’s most laughable lies ever. Using her @BrainOnPorn account, Prause escalated her attacks against anti-porn feminist Gail Dines PhD. (For previous instances of her disparagement and defamation against Dines see this section – April, 2017: Prause insults Professor Gail Dines, PhD, perhaps for joining the “Op-ed: Who exactly is misrepresenting the science on pornography?”).

Before we get to the defamation, check out this bizarre tweet where @BrainOnPorn attacks Dines for criticizing “waterboard porn.” RealYBOP’s tweet has nothing to do with Dine’s comment, but RealYBOP is all about supporting the porn industry.

Just one of hundreds of @BrainOnPorn tweets in support of the porn industry agenda.

————————

@BrainOnPorn next resorts to defamation, falsely stating that Dines’s “group” is sending death threats and stalking female scientists who study porn

@BrainOnPorn’s evidence? Screenshots of two of the four letters Prause misrepresents in her many tweets:

The first by Kate Dawson of Ireland. Said nothing about being stalked by Gail Dines or Dines’s “group.”
The second by Madita Oeming of Germany. Said nothing about being stalked by Gail Dines or Dines’s “group.” Instead, the thin-skinned Oeming whined about me because I posted these 3 tweets concerning her unsupported claims, and retweeted Gabe Deem’s demolition of her February, 2020 article. Oeming’s letter did repeat Prause’s untruths…but without any supporting evidence (there is none).

—————————

A few days later @BrainOnPorn continues her defamation, falsely stating that Dines, and ardent feminist, is supporting threats to kill female scientists(!). @BrainOnPorn provides no evidence to support its absurd claim. Instead @BrainOnPorn posts a list of most frequently mentioned individuals in recent articles about porn. The author of this list does not refer to those listed as pseudoscientists, or anything else.

———————

Continued defamation, stating that Gail Dines is involved in “efforts that threaten to kill female scientists.” Same irrelevant screenshots.

—————————-

Same 2 irrelevant screenshots, plus 2 derogatory comments from the internet. Why would Dines, or anyone else, need to denounce random comments by internet trolls?

Disgusting.

—————-

Falsely accusing Fradd of threatening women.

Updates:

Others – Ongoing: @BrainOnPorn (Prause) falsely accuses Liz Walker of encouraging death threats against women, supporting death threats, being anti-LGBTQ, and a hatemonger.

Liz Walker is an Australian anti-porn activist and feminist who creates education programs for young people and worked with Gail Dines. @BrainOnPorn (Prause) often defamed and disparaged Liz because she supports the TraffickingHub campaign and is unapologetically anti-porn.

She starts with @BrainOnPorn saying Liz Walker, Gabe Deem, Lalia Mickelwait and I are all violent. Provides no evidence, of course.

——————-

Here’s another lie-filled tweet. Neither Liz nor Don Hilton is anti-LGBT (Hilton is suing Prause for defamation). @BrainOnPorn’s “evidence” is a screenshot of Liz tweeting this academic review of the literature: Sex Addiction as a Disease: Evidence for Assessment, Diagnosis, and Response to Critics (Phillips et al., 2015).

The other 3 screenshots are of anonymous comments by internet trolls, not by Liz Walker. Theyare the same false comments Prause always tweets.

——————-

Multiple lies in a single tweet: The WHO [World Health Organization] never asked Liz Walker or anyone else to do anything; Liz is not encouraging death threats; and security was never hired to protect anyone from Hilton, Walker or anyone else whom Prause has falsely accused of stalking.

As usual, the screenshots are of 2 of the 4 same lie-filled letters Prause gathered for the lawsuits she lost to me. The 4 letters:

By RealYBOP member Kate Dawson of Ireland. Said nothing about me.
By Rebecca Sullivan of Canada. The 2-page letter had a single throwaway line about me, saying I supplied a brief for Canadian Motion 47. Nothing else.
By RealYBOP member Madita Oeming. She never claimed that I stalked or threatened her in any way. Instead, Oeming whined because I posted these 3 tweets about her unsupported claims. Oeming’s letter did repeat Prause’s lies… but without any evidence.
The last letter was a lie-filled fairy tale by Daniel Burgess, who owned the RealYBOP URL, has used aliases to cyberstalk me, and has himself engaged in numerous instances of defamatory remarks. The truth about Burgess and our interactions is thoroughly documented on this page.

———————–

More of the same lies by the cyberstalker. Calls Liz Walker a ‘hatemonger’.

———————-

The lies continue:

——————-

Posts the same anonymous comment, then tags many of us, saying we must denounce comments we have never seen. (How could we? @BrainOnPorn has blocked all of us so she can troll our Twitter threads without us knowing.) Prause fails to mention all the many threats and hateful/false comments we receive on a daily basis – which @BrainOnPorn and Prause have yet to denounce. Why haven’t you done so Dr. Prause?

In a self-own, @BrainOnPorn posts 3 comments under the defamatory SCRAM News article in which Prause lied. Those very lies led to SCRAM being sued, the article being pulled, and SCRAM going out of business! Media outlet ScramNews forced to apologize & pay substantial damages for publishing Nicole Prause’s lies about Alex Rhodes & NoFap

——————

Again, @BrainOnPorn posts about the defamatory SCRAM News article, in which her lies led to the demise of SCRAM and an apology to Alex Rhodes. Liz Walker never talked to ScramNews and was not mentioned in its article.

Liz Walker did produce a short blog about @BrainOnPorn’s harassment and defamation: Real Your Brain on Porn false accusations. Guess Prause can’t bear to have her fake persona marred by truth.

Updates:

Others – Ongoing: Prause uses @BrainOnPorn and @NicoleRPrause to falsely accuse therapist DJ Burr of “being in a group” that sends death threats, incites violence, prevents women from getting protection, etc.

This is one of many sections documenting Prause’s ongoing campaign in which she falsely accuses her chosen targets of sending death threats, supporting death threats, or causing others to send death threats. Of course, she offers no evidence to support these falsehoods. Prause chronically tweets that he has filed police or FBI reports on those named in her defamatory in her tweets. Funny, how law enforcement never gets around to contacting any of us.

Prause has a long history of defaming, harassing and cyberstalking therapist DJ Burr with defamatory tweets. For example, in 2019: Prause threatened therapist Burr for standing up to her, then maliciously reported him to the State of Washington Department of Health. The illegitimate report was summarily dismissed, but caused considerable stress.

Burr provided a sworn affidavit for Alex Rhodes’s defamation suit against Prause, which resulted in Prause escalating her harassment and defamation (yet another example of Prause engaging in witness intimidation). In one of her most vile actions, Prause (BrainOnPorn) tweeted that Burr’s attempt to support his 14-year old brother, who as a young black male was being harshly treated by authorities, constituted fraud(!). Prause (@BrainOnPorn) went after Burr’s fundraiser for his incarcerated 14-year old brother, falsely accusing Burr of stalking, saying he should join his brother in jail.

Prause continued to cyberstalk and defame Burr using @BrainOnPorn. After this alias was permanently banned, she switched to @NicoleRPrause to do her dirty work, posting tweets nearly identical to those that had appeared on the now defunct @BrainOnPorn. She falsely accuses her targets of being in a “group” that is sending death threats. She’s lying.

Her tweets are redundant: screenshots of anonymous comments by internet trolls and 3 comments taken from under the defamatory SCRAM News article in which Prause lied. Those very lies led to SCRAM being sued, the article being pulled, and SCRAM going out of business! Media outlet ScramNews forced to apologize & pay substantial damages for publishing Nicole Prause’s lies about Alex Rhodes & NoFap.

The now-deleted SCRAM article contained blatant, defamatory misinformation supplied by Prause, and zero evidence to back her claims. SCRAM made the astonishing argument that because Prause claims she has no ties to the porn industry (despite images and other extensive evidence to the contrary), Rhodes’s Donor Box campaign to fund his lawsuit against Prause was fraudulent. On top of this blatant misuse of their journalistic pen, the SCRAM team deleted comments under the article when readers attempted to counter Prause’s/SCRAM’s untruthful and misleading statements with actual evidence. It is these 3 comments which Prause chronically tweets and mischaracterizes. All 3 comments are factually accurate, truthfully stating the article provided no actual evidence to support Prause’s claims.

So much for responsible journalism.

———————–

She tags Burr, and many others, suggesting all are responsible for anonymous “death threats” (many of the comments she points to are not threats, let alone death threats).

———————–

@BrainOnPorn names the 3 individuals who commented under the defamatory, evidence-free, now deleted ScramNews article.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On October 23, 2020 Prause’s porn-industry shill Twitter account (@BrainOnPorn) was permanently banned for targeted harassment and abuse. This meant that Prause was forced to use her @NicoleRPrause account to tweet the same lies, propaganda and defamation. You can see below that NicoleRPrause’s tweets are nearly identical to the garbage spewed by @BrainOnPorn

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Below, even though I have blocked her, she trolls my thread accusing DJ of being in a “group” responsible for her alleged assault.

The 2,000 pages of so-called “defamation” are, in fact, the 4 main Prause pages. Ahh, the irony of Prause tweeting that I defamed her in the thread announcing my victory in a defamation suit (she still owes me courts costs and a judgement).

—————————

Prause explains why she needed to make a collage of uncivil internet remarks: anonymous trolls would sue her if she posted screenshots of the actual comments. Really? Where’s the evidence?

Nope, the CSATs claimed the ScramNews article provided no evidence to support its claims. Since ScramNews was sued out of existence, it seems ScramNews was never provided any evidence by Prause to support its/her claims.

Again, tweeting the ScramNews comments, including Burr’s. She mentions me, but is lying. I have incited nothing.

———————

There are so many lies to expose in these next 2 tweets. Apparently, she relies on her follwers not reading the screenshots – because none remotely support the claims in her tweets.

If you want the truth, see Burr’s 2-page affidavit, filed in the Alex Rhodes defamation lawsuit – D.J. Burr, LHMC affidavit.

Lie #1 by Prause: Burr did not accuse Prause of racist language, he stated that she accused him of using racist language. Two excerpts from Burr’s short affidavit make this clear:

Lie #2 by Prause: She states that Gabe Deem and Gary Wilson accused her of using racist language. As you can see Deem’s tweet says nothing about Prause. Instead, Deem describes the strategy of pro-porn sexologists generally, who label men who quit porn as racists.

She employs her usual tactic, falsely claiming we said she has been convicted of X, Y, or Z. All DJ said was that slander is a crime. Again she posts the SCRAM comments (Media outlet ScramNews forced to apologize & pay substantial damages for publishing Nicole Prause’s lies about Alex Rhodes & NoFap).

———–

She enters my thread lying about FBI reports, and lying that her address was ever on YBOP.

Debunking FBI claims: (1) FBI confirmed that Prause lied about filing an FBI report on Gary Wilson, (2) FBI confirms that Nicole Prause lied about filing a report on Alexander Rhodes.

Debunking her claim that her address was ever on YBOP: https://twitter.com/YourBrainOnPorn/status/1360385094159003648.

————————

WOW. Here, Burr asks for assistance with his depression and licensed psychologist Prause cyberstalks him with her usual spate of disgusting defamation. Is this a violation of psychology ethics?

The usual screenshots: a fancy slide of comments by trolls, and the comments under the SCRAM article.

Notice that she is upset that DJ tweeted support for shutting down Pornhub.

———————-

In response to being cyberstalked and defamed, Burr posted this thread, ending it with a link to Prause page #1 (he did not link to the lawsuits). As you can, see no one said that Prause had been convicted of defamation (which really isn’t a thing, as the 3 defamation suits against her were civil, not criminal).

As for the lawsuits, Staci Sprout published this (3-17-21): Prause Forced to Settle Two of Three Lawsuits Against Her for Defamation.

————

More of the same lies. Look closely at the screenshot; Staci names PornHub, not Prause.

—————————-

More of the same defamation – falsely stating that Burr incited violence.

————-

Another tweet ina DJ thread:

————————

Related sections:

Others – Ongoing: Prause uses @BrainOnPorn and @NicoleRPrause to falsely accuse therapist Staci Sprout of “advocating for murdering women,” “supporting death threats,” “inciting violence,” “threatening women,” sending “death threats,” misogyny, etc.

This is one of many sections documenting Prause’s ongoing campaign in which she falsely accuses her chosen targets of sending death threats, or supporting death threats, or causing others to send death threats. Of course, she offers no evidence to support these falsehoods.

Nicole Prause continues to obsessively cyberstalk and defame therapist Staci Sprout. Prause’s preoccupation with Sprout began in 2018, when Sprout dared to stand up to Prause’s online bullying. Prause has filed three groundless complaints with Washington State against therapist Sprout (all summarily dismissed). Prause’s attacks intensified after Sprout appeared in a fundraising video for Alex Rhodes’s defamation suit against Prause, and provided affidavits in both the Hilton and Rhodes defamation suits. Up until it was permanently banned, Prause used @BrainOnPorn Twitter for most of her defamation. She then reverted to @NicolRPrause to do her dirty work. Numerous examples are in these sections:

This section concerns itself with Prause obsessively posting tweets (usually in Staci’s threads) falsely accusing her of sending death threats, inciting violence, supporting death threats, and the like. As with previous sections, Prause offers no evidence to support these falsehoods. Prause chronically tweets that she has filed police or FBI reports on those named in her defamatory in her tweets. Funny, how law enforcement never gets around to contacting any of us.

As with hundreds of her other tweets, Prause posts a few random anonymous comments by internet trolls, refers to each as a “death threat,” and accuses her usual targets ofsending or supporting these “death threats.”

In this tweet she accuses Stef Carnes, Linda Hatch and Staci Sprout of supporting death threats. What do all 3 have in common? They filed affidavits in defamation suits against Prause!

Affidavits:

Same day, same defamation.

Same day. This time Prause tweets in 3rd person. @BrainOnPorn claims an email is from Sprout, but it’s not. @BrainOnPorn also lies about content of the email.

Again, on October 1, 2020. Again, the screenshots don’t match @BrainOnPorn’s tweet about them. Laila tweeted an actual death threat for lobbying to have an investigation into Pornhub, and Sprout tweeted her concern and support.

Keep in mind that PornHub was the first account to retweet @BrainOnPorn’s maiden tweet! This provides clear evidence of behind the scenes collaboration between RealYBOP and the porn industry (Mindgeek). While nearly every @BrainOnPorn tweet supported the porn industry agenda, the tweets here leave no doubt concerning RealYBOP’s true allegiance – directly supporting the porn industry – especially PornHub.

Same day, same lies by @BrainOnPorn, same irrelevant troll comments.

Besides screenshots of anonymous comments by internet trolls, Prause’s redundant tweets often contain 3 comments taken from under the defamatory SCRAM News article in which Prause lied. Those very lies led to SCRAM being sued, the article being pulled, and SCRAM going out of business! Media outlet ScramNews forced to apologize & pay substantial damages for publishing Nicole Prause’s lies about Alex Rhodes & NoFap.

The now-deleted SCRAM article contained blatant, defamatory misinformation supplied by Prause, and zero evidence to back her claims. SCRAM made the astonishing argument that because Prause claims she has no ties to the porn industry (despite images and other extensive evidence to the contrary), Rhodes’s Donor Box campaign to fund his lawsuit against Prause was fraudulent. On top of this blatant misuse of their journalistic pen, the SCRAM team deleted comments under the article when readers attempted to counter Prause’s/SCRAM’s untruthful and misleading statements with actual evidence. It is these 3 comments which Prause chronically tweets and mischaracterizes. All 3 comments are factually accurate, truthfully stating that SCRAM’s article provided no actual evidence to support Prause’s claims.

Again, Staci, Jan and DJ correctly said the article contained no evidence to support its claims.

More from October 1, 2020: @BrainOnPorn tweets her foul lies under one of Staci’s business partners: 1) Sprout was not kicked out of SASH, 2) Sprout never said anything about “masturbating to porn,” 3) Staci never lied about “death threats.”

——————–

Few days later. Same fasehoods and screenshots. Prause i’s upset over SCRAMNews. Tags NASW suggesting Sprout should lose her license.

Same day, same fasehoods. This time under announcement of a summit for recovering female porn addicts.

Notice the bizarre wording “to prevent a female scientist from getting support.” So, a comment, under the evidence-free, lie-filled SCRAM article, which was deleted within a few hours, prevented Prause from getting support? Nah.

Same day, same anonymous PT comments, additional falsehoods, and tagging SASH. Truth – Sprout did not possess “copies of death threats.” Nor did anyone admit to deleting comments.

——————–

Same falsehoods.

———————

Cyberstalking continues next day, posting whereever Staci’s name appears

Same day, under announcement of a summit for female porn addicts, where Sprout was a presenter. Truly hideous harassment.

Same day.

———————–

Same lies, same meaningless screenshots. Again, under a tweet promoting the summit featuring Sprout.

Same day, same lies and same meaningless screenshots. Again, under a tweet promoting the summit featuring Sprout.

———————–

Next day, same lies and same meaningless screenshots.

—————————

Again, under a tweet promoting the summit featuring Sprout.

———————

Murder? Crazy. Truly psychopathic malice.

It’s 6 months later and the predicted “national news” has yet to appear.

——————

Piling up the lies in one tweet. Cyberstalking in Sprout’s thread.

Same day.

Same day.

Same day, continued cyberstalking. No evdience to support Prause’s lies.

Same day (10/12/20), same screenshots.

——————–

Insane claim by Prause.

Sprout didn’t know, because there was nothing to know.

——————–

On October 13, @BrainOnPorn posted 15 tweets defaming Sprout. We’ll start with one of the kookiest. Prause says Sprout advocates for murdering women. Gets crazier with each day.

Same day. Prause asks followers to report Alex’s fundraiser to Pennsylvania.

All the money went to legal fees. See- Prause Forced to Settle Two of Three Lawsuits Against Her for Defamation

Irrelevant internet comments:

Same day. Says Sprout should be removed from patient care.

The only person who perjured herself was Prause. Multiple instances documented:

Continues:

Now including Stefanie Carnes. The so-called “collusion” was sworn affidvaits

Calling Sprout horrific and Hilton a sexual harasser. Says Sprout “will see you dead.” OFFS.

Pro-harassment and death threats. The screenshots are of Hilton’s defamation suit. Nothing there about Prause’s sex life, of course.

Tags Sprout:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On October 23, 2020 Prause’s porn-industry shill Twitter account (@BrainOnPorn) was permanently banned for targeted harassment and abuse. This meant that Prause was forced to use her @NicoleRPrause account to tweet the same lies, propaganda and defamation. You can see below that NicoleRPrause’s tweets are nearly identical to the garbage spewed by @BrainOnPorn

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Lies by Prause: (1) Sprout never circulated Prause’s address. (2) Prause’s new fabrication is that I posted her address on YBOP, and she was assaulted there. Her address was never on YBOP. In fact she admitted that her address has never been posted anywhere. Oops.

——————–

Sprout was not referring to Prause, and has never said that Prause was not assaulted.

Same day. Same lies.

——————-

I did not circulate her address, and she has provied no evdience that I have.

Same day (2/9/21), same lies:

Same day, same old.

In the same thread, Prause claims YBOP has 2,ooo pages of “defamation.” YBOP has 4 main Prause pages and 5 RealYBOP pages containing Prause’s defamation of multiple targets.

In Sprout’s thread. Darling’s not buying her lies:

———————-

Doesn’t make any sense.

—————-

I have blocked Prause, yet she trolls my thread, defaming Sprout and me. Proof Prause is lying.

——————

Even though Sprout has blocked her, Prause enters Sprout’s thread under another tweet.

—————-

There is no DJ Burr group. All BS.

The posted screenshot says Pornhub, not Prause. That said, Prause has many connections to those in the porn industry – Is Nicole Prause Influenced by the Porn Industry?

—————-

——————–

In a Staci thread

——————

Chatting with all the other porn industry shills, falsely claiming I was responsible for Prause’s account being temporarily banned.

Prause is lying, as here is what I said about her assault:

In late 2020, she suddenly began claiming that she had been sexually assaulted in 2019, and that I was mysteriously responsible. She falsely claims that I posted her address on YBOP and that it led to her being grabbed on the street by a young man with a skateboard. She has not provided any objective evidence of either my having posted her physical address or her having been grabbed.

As documented in the this section and elsewhere, Prause’s favorite lie is that I posted her address on YBOP. She recently added to her fairy tale, falsely asserting that a young man grabbed her “at the address on YBOP.” Knowing this is a lie, I have consistently demanded that she produce a screenshot proving her address was on YBOP. Since she cannot, Prause resorted to posting a screenshot of her exhibit list from the 2^nd lawsuit she lost to me. Unfortunately for her, court rules required Prause to provide all her exhibits to me before the hearing (just as I had to provide her with all my documents). See: February, 2021: Prause posts 70 tweets in 5 days falsely stating that I placed her address on YBOP – and she was grabbed on the street in 2019 as a consequence. Yet in 2020 Prause tweeted that no one, including me, has her real address. Her lies don’t match (documents tweets beyond the 5 days).

—————————-

3 tweets retweeting her false allegations towards Staci as she cyberstalks tweets disparaging Pornhub.

RE: Following tweets – I never said Prause was lying about her assault (even though she’s a pathological liar, serial defamer, cyberstalker). I said she was lying about the assault occurring at an address placed on YBOP: February, 2021: Prause posts 70 tweets in 5 days falsely stating that I placed her address on YBOP – and she was grabbed on the street in 2019 as a consequence. Yet in 2020 Prause tweeted that no one, including me, has her real address. Her lies don’t match (documents tweets beyond the 5 days).

Cyberstalking for Pornhub, again. This time collaborating with Communications Director of the FSC (@FSCArmy), Mike Stabile.

Not the 1st time she has collaborated with the FSC:

Cyberstalking a tweet disparaging Pornhub. Falsely accusing Laila of making a “criminal threat complaint”.

Prause appears to be referring to her twitter ban, in which someone reported her for making violent threats – March, 2021: Nicole Prause’s Twitter account (@NicoleRPrause) temporarily suspended for “posting violent threats”. She is lying, because twitter never reveals who did the reporting. She just can’t help lying, even when all of twitter knows.

—————————

Retweets defamatory Staci tweet

————————

Supporting pornhub via cyberstalking. Retweeting Staci tweet.

I said – February, 2021: Prause posts 70 tweets in 5 days falsely stating that I placed her address on YBOP – and she was grabbed on the street in 2019 as a consequence. Yet in 2020 Prause tweeted that no one, including me, has her real address. Her lies don’t match (documents tweets beyond the 5 days).

More support for Mindgeek via libeling Laila and Staci Sprout (retweeting her tweet targeting Staci).

Libel, retweeting Sprout liefilled tweet.

Same day – 3 in a row libeling Staci. Same tired lies.

——————————–

Other relevant links:

October 23, 2020: Prause’s porn-industry shill Twitter account (@BrainOnPorn) is permanently banned for targeted harassment and abuse.
Sprout’s own article – BULLYING, HARASSMENT AND DEFAMATION FROM UNEXPECTED SOURCES AS A SEX ADDICTION RECOVERY ACTIVIST
Sprout’s affidavit in Alex Rhodes’s defamation suit – Exhibit #10: Staci Sprout, LCSW affidavit (15 pages).
On March 26, 2020 Nicole Prause’s Twitter account (@NicoleRPrause) was temporarily banned for targeted harassment and “posting violent threats”

Others – Prause (@BrainOnPorn) falsely accuses therapist Staci Sprout of being anti-LGBTQ, supporting eugenics, saying “trans are not people,” saying marriage “should only be between a man & woman”

As explained in previous sections, Prause is obsessively cyberstalking and defaming Sprout because (1) Sprout filed affidavits in the Hilton and Rhodes defamation suit, (2) Sprout promoted Alex Rhodes’s crowdfunding for the suit, (3) Sprout defended other victims against Prause’s attacks. As with previous sections Prause’s tweets are filled with lies and zero actual evdience. In reality, Sprout is politically progressive and highly supportive of the LGBTQ community.

Like many of Prause/@BrainOnPorn tweets, they link to a Prause-produced video of spliced together, partial comments by Don Hilton. Prause’s tweets don’t match the content of the video, and the video doesn’t reflect what Hilton actually said or the context of his remarks.

—————–

Nothing in the screenshots supports Prause’s defamatory tweet. Vile.

———————-

Vile lies continue.

—————–

Praus is lying. Hilton does not advocate for eugenics.

———————-

More vile lies.

————

No, Sprout never testified on behalf of eugenics. What’s next, Sprout was responsible for the Holocaust?

Same day. Prause upset that Sprout believes Hilton. We all believe Hilton.

Again on October 12th. Again, tagging The National Association of Social Workers (NASW). Hilton did not say these things.

——————–

Lies. Never claimed Prause was in porn (notice there’s no screenshot, of course). Hilton never said those things.

On March 26, 2020 Nicole Prause’s Twitter account (@NicoleRPrause) was temorarily banned for targeted harassment and “posting violent threats”

————————-

Ongoing: Prause uses @BrainOnPorn and @NicoleRPrause to falsely accuse therapist Linda Hatch, PhD of “threatening to kill her,” “supporting & inciting death threats,” committing perjury, “silencing scientists” and in part responsible for the Atlanta massage parlor shootings.

This is one of many sections documenting Prause’s ongoing campaign in which she falsely accuses her chosen targets of sending death threats, or supporting death threats, or causing others to send death threats. Of course, she offers no evidence to support these falsehoods.

Prause’s defamation and harassment of Linda Hatch started in 2013, in response to Hatch’s blog post debunking Prause’s falsehoods surrounding her flawed EEG study (Steele et al., 2013): Misinformed Media Touts Bogus Sex Addiction Study. Hatch was ahead of the curve as 8 peer-reviewed papers eventually exposed similar aspects of the study: Peer-reviewed critiques of Steele et al., 2013. Hatch followed this up with two more excellent articles mentioning Steele et al., 2013: Don’t Call it Hypersexuality: Why we Need the Term Sex Addiction and The Bogus Sex Addiction “Controversy” and the Purveyors of Ignorance.

In retaliation for Hatch exposing Prause as misrepresenting the research and the findings of Steele et al., Prause got a storefront lawyer to send Hatch a lie-filled cease and desist letter. See – Prause silencing people with fake “no contact” demands and spurious Cease & Desist letters (Linda Hatch, Rob Weiss, Gabe Deem, Gary Wilson, Marnia Robinson, Alex Rhodes, etc.). Prause sends out C&Ds as others send out birthday cards (I have been targeted by about ten bogus C&Ds from Prause).

Prause’s C&D letters go to anyone who doubts her claims. She generates them with the collaboration of her lawyer. They are not from a court. They seem intended to stifle criticism and honest debate. She then misuses these C&Ds to create the illusion of “official” letters to “prove” to her allies that evil people are harassing her (even though the letters’ claims are proof of nothing and merely made up). In short, her C&Ds are part of a sophisticated smear campaign. She also sends copies of them to journalists to discourage them from contacting Prause’s victims.

Eventually Prause filed a spurious complaint against Hatch with the California Psychology Board. It was dismissed. All this is described in Hatch’s sworn affidavit – July, 2019: Linda Hatch, PhD affidavit: Donald Hilton defamation lawsuit against Nicole R Prause.

We begin with @BrainOnPorn (Prause) tweeting that IITAP, Stefanie Carnes, Staci Sprout and Linda Hatch (@saresource) all “support death threats.” Tweets contain the same handful of irrelevant anonymous comments from internet trolls unrelated to Hatch in any way.

“Science shows”? She links to an opinion paper by fellow RealYBOP “experts.”

—————-

Falsely accuses Hatch of “threatening to kill her” and lying to the Society for Personality and Social Psychology.

Again, she links to an opinion paper by fellow RealYBOP “experts.” Hatch’s factually-accurate 2015 email to the Society for Personality and Social Psychology expressed valid concerns about Prause’s work (remember, Prause misrepresented her 2013 study to the press).

——————-

More cyberstalking, same defamation.

—————–

“Supported death threats” is likely defamation per se as it suggests criminal wrongdoing.

———————

States that Hatch threatened to kill people. Falsely accusing someone of a crime is defamation per se. The screenshots are of the same internet comments Prause always posts.

———————

“Supporting threats to kill them?” Just nuts.

———————

Nothing but lies. I did not publish anything by Linda Hatch. No one commited perjury except for Prause. See – Stephanie Carnes, PhD (affidavit #7)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On October 23, 2020 Prause’s porn-industry shill Twitter account (@BrainOnPorn) was permanently banned for targeted harassment and abuse. This meant that Prause was forced to use her @NicoleRPrause account to tweet the same lies, propaganda and defamation. You can see below that NicoleRPrause’s tweets are nearly identical to the garbage spewed by @BrainOnPorn

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Nope, I did not publish claims “yesterday” by Linda Hatch.

——————-

There was no perjury – July, 2019: Linda Hatch, PhD affidavit: Donald Hilton defamation lawsuit against Nicole R Prause.

——————-

Falsely claims Hatch incited death threats, but with a twist: blaming the Atlanta massage parlor shootings on Hatch. How vile is that?

On March 26, 2020 Nicole Prause’s Twitter account (@NicoleRPrause) was banned for targeted harassment and “posting violent threats”

Ongoing: Prause uses @BrainOnPorn and @NicoleRPrause to falsely accuse NCOSE of “supporting eugenics,” “supporting violence & inciting death threats,” “being a hate group,” being Anti-LGBT, and inciting the Atlanta massage parlor shootings.

This is one of many sections documenting Prause’s ongoing campaign in which she falsely accuses her chosen targets of sending death threats, or supporting death threats, or causing others to send death threats. Of course, she offers no evidence to support these falsehoods.

The National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE) is yet another regular target for Prause and her aliases. This section highlights the inflammatory and defamatory tweets by Prause accusing NCOSE of sending or promoting death threats, stalking and murders.

Let’s start with the lie that @BrainOnPorn says NCOSE funded extremists who threatened to kill whomever (Prause is going after Alex Rhodes).

———————–

Under NCOSE Vice President Haley McNamara’s tweet about a Pornhub protest (@BrainOnPorn is always there to defame those speaking unfavorably of the porn industry). Falsely states that that NCOSE supports death threats.

——————–

Insane claim that NCOSE supports eugenics. (Prause spliced together a few out of context comments by Don Hilton – but he never said anything like @BrainOnPorn describes.)

——————–

Two more lie-filled tweets falsely claiming that board members state that LGBT individuals should be bred out of existence. Oh please.

Same BS

————————–

More defamation – “supporting violence.”

———————

Tags NCOSE, saying they and everyone else should magically be aware of random online comments, and should denounce these random troll comments. Actually, it’s Prause who needs to denounce her own vile, defamatory online comments.

———————–

More lies and pure vileness. Staci Sprout is not a spokesperson for any group, including NCOSE.

——————–

Posts a 48-tweet thread. “Leaving Nofap, NCOSE, YBOP.” What does that even mean? More defamatory accusations.

——————–

Bored with posting its usual defamatory claims, @BrainOnPorn audits our Twitter accounts. As if we control followers.

———————

Same vile lies.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On October 23, 2020 Prause’s porn-industry shill Twitter account (@BrainOnPorn) was permanently banned for targeted harassment and abuse. This meant that Prause was forced to use her @NicoleRPrause account to tweet the same lies, propaganda and defamation. You can see below that NicoleRPrause’s tweets are nearly identical to the garbage spewed by @BrainOnPorn

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Disgusting tweet. Prause says NCOSE and Laila incited the March, 2021 Atlanta massage parlor killings. Another hit-piece by EJ Dickson, featuring one “expert”: David Ley.

————————

Accuses Laila of inciting violence and criminal threats. Still waiting for evidence.

———————-

Same old falsehoods. She’s obsessed with organizations taking on pornhub.

—————-

Tweeting under Haley Halverson of NCOSE. Prause is upset at being criticized for misrepresenting the state of the research in the Peterson video. Prause accuses Haley of inciting death threats. BS

———————-

Joins The Free Speech Coalition in weak attempt to disparage NCOSE. Why? Because NCOSE is legally supporting victims of Pornhub.

The FSC and Pornhub thanks you.

————————

On March 26, 2020 Nicole Prause’s Twitter account (@NicoleRPrause) was temporarily banned for “posting violent threats”

Prause uses @BrainOnPorn and @NicoleRPrause to falsely accuse Stefanie Carnes, PhD of “committing perjury,” “threatening to kill scientists,” “colluding to protect a harasser,” “supporting & inciting death threats,” “trying to destroy her,” and in part responsible for the Atlanta massage parlor shootings.

This is one of many sections documenting Prause’s ongoing campaign in which she falsely accuses her chosen targets of sending death threats, or supporting death threats, or causing others to send death threats. Of course, she offers no evidence to support these falsehoods. This section deals with yet another of Prause’s primary targets, Stefanie Carnes, PhD. Carnes is president of IITAP, the largest organization certifying sex addiction therapists (the IITAP certification is a CSAT). While numerous Prause and Ley tweets disparage CSATs and IITAP (like this next one), this section will highlight the many defamatory tweets by Prause.

On to Prause’s (@BrainOnPorn) absolutely insane tweets. The screenshots below are of the same 4 derogatory comments by anonymous trolls that Prause has posted in hundreds of other tweets. @BrainOnPorn falsely accuses Carnes of threatening to kill scientists. Note: In this, and subsequent tweets, @BrainOnPorn links to an opinion piece by RealYBOP member Josh Grubbs. Because Grubbs opines that myriad sex addiction treatments have yet to be “validated,” @BrainOnPorn/Prause tweets that Stefanie Carne’s committed perjury in her affidavit for the Hilton defamation suit. Nonsensical.

It is Prause who has committed numerous instances of perjury:

——————–

Defamatory claim that Stefanie Carnes supports death threats:

——————–

Tags IITAP, suggesting IITAP is sending death threats. Screenshots are of the 3 letters Prause collected for her failed lawsuit with me. None mention death threats. The letter authors just repeat what they have been told by Prause, which is all lies.

On October 8th, 2020 Prause goes on a 20-tweet cyberstalking bender, entering the threads of CSATs and sex addiction therpists, spewing her lies.

Here IITAP is falsely accused of “destroying scientists.”

Prause as @BrainOnPorn falsely asserts lies. Truth: July, 2019: Stefanie Carnes, PhD affidavit: Donald Hilton defamation lawsuit against Nicole R Prause & Liberos LLC.

Cyberstalking CSAT’s – falsely asserting Carnes commited perjury. Cites fellow RealYBOP member and friend Josh Grubbs.

Here Prause cyberstalks CSATs – falsely asserting Carnes commited perjury. Cites fellow RealYBOP member and friend Josh Grubbs. Claims, absurdly, that Carnes “may try to destroy you”:

Falsely asserting Carnes commited perjury:

The article that Prause maliciously reported to the SASH journal was NOT corrected. The addendum only reported an insignificant correction, which had no effect on the results or conclusions.

Same day, same lies.

Same day, same lies. No evidence provided of anyone being attacked.

Same day, same lies. DARVO.

Same day, same lies. DARVO.

Same day, same lies claiming perjury.

Same day, same lies claiming perjury.

Same day, same lies still falsely claiming perjury.

Relevant – July, 2019: Linda Hatch, PhD affidavit: Donald Hilton defamation lawsuit against Nicole R Prause & Liberos LLC.

Same day, same lies still falsely claiming perjury.

Same day, same lies still falsely claiming perjury. Also lying that IITAP was “involved in lawsuits.”

Same day, same lies still falsely claiming perjury.

Prause tweeted an addendum to a study she maliciously reported to the journal. The addendum stated that the slight corrections had no effect on the results. Prause’s harassment of the journal and the authors was unbelievably extensive, leading one of the authors to submit a sworn affidavit documenting Prause’s outrageous behavior – Bradley Green, PhD (affidavit #6).

Same as preceding tweet.

Same as preceding tweet, but with another fabricated assertion, i.e., that Carnes has “threatened over 100 critics with litigation.” Nonsense.

Same day. Attacking CSATs.

End of her October 8th, twenty lie-filled tweet rampage.

—————————

So, we have all perjured oursleves, in 3 states according to Prause. Reality? The courts found that Prause lied: Legal victories over serial harasser/defamer Nicole Prause: She’s the perpetrator, not the victim!

Same day, cyberstalking CSATs:

The next day. Same lies.

——————-

Starts up again on October 13 with 6 tweets. No one filed a complaint with me. I filed a complaint with the CA Psychology Board for much of what is documented here. The Board deemed it legitimate enough to conduct a 3- year investigation. Ultimately, the Board determined not to act because Prause’s nefarious actions occurred outside of her psychology practice. This is not exoneration of the items submitted in my complaint.

Cyberstalking Carnes, saying she colluded with a harasser, which Prause seems to be saying is Donald Hilton. All lies, which led to a lawsuit: Donald Hilton defamation lawsuit against Nicole Prause: Downloadable PDF’s of Hilton lawsuit, exhibits, and affidavits by 9 other Prause victims.

Even though she was sued by Hilton, she defames him again. Slow learner. Didn’t go so well for her – Prause files bankruptcy to escape liability for 3 yet-to-be tried defamation suits (Hilton, Rhodes, Minc) and avoid paying me the attorney-fee debt she had incurred (in my Anti-SLAPP victory)

Falsely accusing me of stalking. Posts lie-filled letters by porn-industry shill David Ley and the former owner of RealYBOP, Daniel Burgess.

More of the same. May be referring to Don Hilton, who sued her.

#6 for October 13, 2020. The only person who perjured themselves was Prause.

—————

More accusations of perjury, with irrelevant screenshots/links.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On October 23, 2020 Prause’s porn-industry shill Twitter account (@BrainOnPorn) was permanently banned for targeted harassment and abuse. This meant that Prause was forced to use her @NicoleRPrause account to tweet the same lies, propaganda and defamation. You can see below that NicoleRPrause’s tweets are nearly identical to the garbage spewed by @BrainOnPorn

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Vile. Prause then used her personal Twitter account to imply that IITAP might be responsible for the Atlanta massage parlor killings. Oh please.

———————

Others – Ongoing: Prause uses @BrainOnPorn and @NicoleRPrause to falsely accuse the Society for the Advancement of Sexual Health (SASH) of “attempting to destroy dissent at any cost,” “supporting death & legal threats,” “supporting stalking of Prause,” “claiming she was funded by Pornhub,” and “supporting eugenics.”

One of Prause ‘s favorite targets is SASH, a therapist based professional organization. The tweets below are just a few of over 100 tagging or targeting SASH.

Here, she fabricates victim-hood in response to Alexander Rhodes (founder of reddit/nofap and NoFap.com) filing a defamation lawsuit against her. Prause appears to suggest (absurdly) that SASH is posting death threats on a white supremacy website! Of course, there’s no screenshot of the alleged death threats.

Note – On November 11th, before NoFap’s announcement of the lawsuit and fundraiser, Prause began suspiciously tweeting that she had received death threats.

—————————–

Nothing in this next tweet is true either. Sprout, IITAP and SASH have never said Prause is funded by Pornhub. You can see that the screenshots of Sprout’s tweets do not claim Prause is funded by Pornhub. They do say Prause is cozy with the porn industry, which is true: Is Nicole Prause Influenced by the Porn Industry? Nor did “they” (SASH, IITAP) verify that “Staci Sprout was lying.” No screenshot means Prause is the one lying.

————————-

In this tweet she falsely accuses SASH of backing me in crimes I did not commit.

Truth? She has posted maybe 100 tweets falsely claiming that I perjured myself in 3 states. In reality, Prause perjured herself numerous times in court filings and in two lawsuits she lost to me. See:

As for the alleged “stalking,” the court ruled she was lying: Prause’s efforts to silence Wilson foiled; her restraining order denied as frivolous & she owes substantial attorney fees in a SLAPP ruling.

As for her claimed FBI reports, the FBI disagrees with Prause: November, 2018: FBI affirms Nicole Prause’s fraud surrounding defamatory claims (Prause lied about filing an FBI report on Gary Wilson).

—————————-

In this next tweet we have the insane claim that SASH supports eugenics. In response to Don Hilton’s defamation suit, Prause spliced together a few out of context comments by Don Hilton, posted them on YouTube, falsely claiming he supported eugenics.

————————

Another lie-filled tweet, falsely accusing SASH of wanting to “destroy dissent at any cost”:

The screenshots are of 3 of the 4 letters she has tweeted countless times. The lie-filled letters were written by close pro-porn friends at the behest of Prause. She tried to enter 4 of these letters into her fraudulent restraining order suit, but the judge saw right through them as fabrications (the letter-writers only regurgitated what Prause had told them – which were lies, without a shred of actual supporting evidence).

The letters pictured in the above RYBOP tweet, which Prause has tweeted numerous times, did not say what she claims they said. None of the letter-writers said that I had stalked their authors. The unsworn letters contained zero actual evidence to support Prause’s claims.

Others – Ongoing: Prause uses @BrainOnPorn and @NicoleRPrause to falsely accuse Gabe Deem of “inciting domestic terrorism,” “inciting violence against women,” “engaging in misogyny & fraud,” “supporting death threats & racism,” “encouraging murder of female scientists,” “threatening to kill women,” “is anti-LGBT,” and “supporting eugenics.”

Background: This is one of many sections documenting Prause’s ongoing campaign in which she falsely accuses her chosen targets of sending death threats, or supporting death threats, or causing others to send death threats. Of course, she offers no evidence to support these falsehoods.

YBOP condemns threatening, vicious remarks on social media, and so does everyone we know. That said, the internet is the Wild West. Most public figures – of every sex and gender – tell us they regularly receive threatening comments from the ill-mannered denizens of the internet. The handful of anonymous comments Prause claims have targeted her pale in comparison.

It appears that she scours the internet for evidence that she is being victimized, even employing a special Reddit app to gather anonymous, troll-generated remarks that forum moderators had already promptly and routinely deleted. She then accuses people she wishes to defame of authoring or encouraging the comments – without a shred of evidence. It’s telling that she has dredged up relatively few examples of her purported victimhood. It seems that people rarely care enough about Prause’s activities to bother trolling her.

Earlier sections also document Prause’s similar false claims that Gabe Deem sent or supported death and rape threats targeting her.

On to Prause’s vile, lie-filled tweets. Note – Prause’s tweets often say that Gabe is part of an imaginary group. There is no Group. Perhaps she does this sleight of hand thinking it protects her from a defamation lawsuits. It doesn’t.

Supporting hate and eugenics, just for tweeting papers by Donald Hilton? Prause posted a lie-filled video on her TruthShallSetSetYouFree” YouTube channel claiming Hilton said things he did not. So, she is using her lie-filled video as “evidence” that anyone who has ever tweeted material by Hilton is anti-LGBTQ and promoting eugenics. That’s it.

——————–

@BrainOnPorn claims that because Gabe follows Exodus Cry on Twitter, he supports everything EC does or stands for. Regardless, Exodus Cry did not say what @BrainOnPorn asserts.

Another, on the same day. Now Gabe encourages murder! That’s defamation per se because she is accusing Gabe of criminal activity.

Same day. “Threatens to kill women.” Insane. (Again, there is no “group.”)

Same day. Same 4 comments by anonymous trolls. (Note – she says that Gabe knows all about the 4 comments, but @BrainOnPorn has blocked him. So, even if he wanted to “denounce” random comments, he doesn’t officially know they exist.)

Same day. Supporting hate and eugenics, just for tweeting a video by Donald Hilton, MD? Prause posted a lie-filled video on her TruthShallSetSetYouFree” YouTube channel, claiming Hilton said things he did not. So, she is using her lie-filled video as “evidence” that anyone who has ever tweeted material by Hilton is anti-LGBTQ and promoting eugenics. That’s it.

Same day. Same false accusations.

———————-

Tags Gabe, suggesting he and others may be sending death threats. Note: She claims to have been receiving “death threats” since 2010. However, the handful of anonymous comments that might be loosely interpreted as threats only date back to 2019.

Same day. Prause is tweeting that I am a known criminal. Really? That’s news to me, and egregious defamation by Prause.

Speaking of the law: Legal victories over serial harasser/defamer Nicole Prause: She’s the perpetrator, not the victim!

Same day. All lies, as she falsely claims I am physically stalking women all over the world. She posts her same 3 letters, which do not say what her tweets claim.

As for stalking, my first legal win fully exposed Nicole Prause as the perpetrator, not the victim of harassment. On August 6, 2020 the Los Angeles County Superior Court ruled that Prause’s bogus attempt to obtain a restraining order against me constituted a frivolous and illegal “strategic lawsuit against public participation” (commonly called a “SLAPP suit”). Prause lied throughout her fraudulent TRO, providing zero verifiable evidence to support her outlandish claims that I stalked or harassed her. In essence, the Court found that Prause abused the restraining order process to bully me into silence and undercut my rights to free speech. By law, the SLAPP ruling obligated Prause to pay my attorney fees.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On October 23, 2020 Prause’s porn-industry shill Twitter account (@BrainOnPorn) was permanently banned for targeted harassment and abuse. This meant that Prause was forced to use her @NicoleRPrause account to tweet the same lies, propaganda and defamation. You can see below that NicoleRPrause’s tweets are nearly identical to the garbage spewed by @BrainOnPorn.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Below Prause enters a 3-year-old thread. She links to the new site replacing RealYBOP, which I now own. Mirroring the misinformation that her RealYBOP account had tweeted.

—————————–

Entering a 3-year-old thread, suggesting Gabe incited terrorism, violence against women, misogyny and fraud. She links to the new site replacing RealYBOP (which I now own). Notice how the new site crams Prause’s favorite targets YBOP, FTND, Nofap, and Exodus Cry into its media page title. These are the prime targets of the porn industry as well. Hmmm….

As everyone can see, Prause was the operator of @BrainOnPorn Twitter.

———————-

Entering Gabe’s threads, even though she is blocked, posting her lie-filled attack on porn recovery forums. Keep in mind that Big Porn is extremely threatened by porn recovery forums, as they allow those negatively affected by internet porn use to share their stories with their peers. Given Prause’s cozy relationship with the porn industry, it’s no surprise that she takes every opportunity to misinform the public about these forums.

In reality, porn recovery forums are some of the friendliest, most supportive and inclusive cyber spaces. Visitors often comment on this. Yet the porn industry and its shills would have everyone believe recovery forums are hotbeds of vicious hate groups. Disgusting smear campaign, eh?

Same day. Tweeting wherever Gabe is mentioned, posting her pro-porn article:

Entering Gabe’s threads, even though she is blocked, posting her lie-filled attack on porn recovery forums suggesting Gabe teaches violent misogyny.

Teaming up with her fellow cyberstalker @SexualSocialist:

—————–

Posting her Medium article, attacking porn recovery forms like RebootNation

———————–

Another nutty tweet. Screenhtst have nothing to with what Prause is claiming. Again, in support of pornhub:

As you can see, the screenshots do not say what she is claiming (they never do with Nikky):

————————–

The next day, posting Gabe, who has blocked her

Others – Ongoing: Prause uses @BrainOnPorn and @NicoleRPrause to falsely accuse Fight The New Drug (FTND) of being anti-LGBT, “promoting misogyny,” “committing fraud,” and “teaching eugenics.”

Prior to Laila Mickelwait’s TraffickingHub campaign, Fight The New Drug and I were Prause’s favorite targets. These sections contain numerous instances of Prause defaming and harassing FTND:

The current section is devoted to libleous tweets that did not fit into the above sections.

We begin with two accounts that are now banned for targeted harassment. Nothing in the following @BrainOnPorn’s tweet is supported by evidence (@BrainOnPorn suggests FTND is anti-gay).

————————-

Links to her SLT op-ed about FTND, suggesting FTND is anti-LGBT:

Prause’s 600-word Op-Ed is chock full of unsupported assertions meant to fool the lay public. It fails to support a single assertion as it cites only 4 papers – none of which have anything to do with porn addiction, porn’s effects on relationships, or porn-induced sexual problems. Several experts in this field debunked its assertions and empty rhetoric in this relatively short response – Op-ed: Who exactly is misrepresenting the science on pornography? (2016). Unlike the “neuroscientists of the Op-Ed,” apparently authored by Prause, they cited several hundred studies and multiple reviews of the literature.

————————

RealYBOP says FTND promotes misogyny. What do the cited random tweets on reddit have to do with FTND? Nothing.

——————

Falsely accuses FTND of commiting fraud, when it accurately described a study:

Prause is trying to play the games described by Paul Wright: Paul Wright PhD Calls Out Porn Researchers’ Questionable Tactics (2021) by ignoring the dozens of longitudinal studies suggesting porn use leads to harms.

————————–

Calls FTND anti-homosexual while tweeting her debunked op-ed (Op-ed: Who exactly is misrepresenting the science on pornography?, 2016):

Notice how Prause is defaming FTND in threads where Pornhub is fiercely criticized. Is this more of her consistent support in defense of Pornhub?

——————–

In this next tweet we have the insane, horrific claim that FTND teaches eugenics:

In response to Don Hilton’s defamation suit, Prause spliced together a few out of context comments by Don Hilton, posted them on YouTube, and falsely claimed he supported eugenics. A vile tactic to say the least.