Protocol 09: Humiliation and Psychological Harm within Artist-Protection Organizations

Humiliation and psychological harm constitute some of the most serious violations that can occur within organizations hosting artists and writers at risk. These forms of abuse rarely appear as isolated incidents; rather, they operate as systematic pressure mechanisms designed to break dignity, weaken autonomy, and enforce submission through fear, exhaustion, and cognitive overload.

Contemporary psychology, affective neuroscience, and international human rights standards converge on a fundamental principle:
repeated psychological harm is as damaging as physical violence, and often more enduring in its effects.

I. Forms of Humiliation and Psychological Harm (Non-Exhaustive)

1. Shouting, verbal aggression, or a degrading tone
   Raising one’s voice, mocking, or speaking condescendingly activates the brain’s threat circuits (notably the amygdala), triggering fear, freeze, or submission responses identical to those produced by physical danger.
2. Forcing ideological or intellectual conformity
   Compelling an artist to adopt a specific political, moral, or cultural framework—or punishing deviation from it—constitutes psychological coercion and a violation of freedom of thought and conscience.
3. Imposing lifestyle or personal conduct norms
   Interfering with an artist’s way of living, relationships, language, or personal expression under the pretext of “harmony” or “institutional values” is a form of boundary violation recognized in law as moral harassment.
4. Blocking the artist’s right to represent their symbols and identity
   Preventing an artist from representing their national, cultural, or existential symbols amounts to symbolic erasure, a practice strongly associated with identity fragmentation, depression, and chronic anxiety.
5. Deliberate ignoring and non-response
   Systematic failure to answer emails, requests, or communications is not neutrality. In psychology, this is identified as silent punishment, a control tactic that destabilizes self-worth and distorts reality perception.
6. Inciting staff or workers to mistreat a specific artist
   Encouraging—or tolerating—hostile, dismissive, or degrading treatment by employees transforms the entire environment into a hostile space, multiplying psychological harm through collective aggression.
7. Using humiliation as a method of compliance
   Repeated humiliation weakens executive functioning in the prefrontal cortex, reducing decision-making capacity and the ability to assert boundaries, thereby increasing vulnerability to control.
8. Reframing resistance as self-harm or instability
   Portraying an artist’s self-defense, objection, or boundary-setting as evidence of psychological instability constitutes institutional gaslighting, leading to cognitive confusion and loss of self-trust.
9. Questioning the artist’s intellectual or professional competence
   Casting doubt on intelligence, competence, or mental fitness without legitimate clinical or professional grounds is a form of psychological defamation designed to delegitimize voice and agency.
10. Discriminatory treatment
    Unequal treatment based on opinion, identity, origin, or perceived loyalty creates chronic stress states and contributes to long-term neurological dysregulation.
11. Reputational contamination
    Spreading insinuations, rumors, or distorted narratives within professional networks constitutes symbolic assassination, often resulting in social isolation and prolonged psychological distress.
12. Theft of ideas, symbols, or intellectual material
    Appropriating an artist’s ideas, concepts, or symbols without consent or attribution inflicts dual harm: professional dispossession and psychological invalidation.
13. Unacknowledged punitive measures
    Silent reductions in visibility, opportunities, or access—without explanation or due process—constitute administrative violence and generate persistent insecurity.
14. Creating an atmosphere of surveillance and fear
    Making artists feel constantly monitored or evaluated produces hypervigilance, a neurological state incompatible with creativity and psychological safety.
15. Selective application of rules and policies
    Enforcing regulations against specific individuals while exempting others is a recognized form of institutional humiliation and discrimination.

II. Psychological and Neurobiological Impact

Neuroscience and clinical psychology demonstrate that prolonged exposure to psychological harm leads to:

• chronic elevation of stress hormones (cortisol)
• sleep and concentration disorders
• anxiety and depressive syndromes
• impairment of memory and creative cognition
• symptoms consistent with complex post-traumatic stress (C-PTSD)

These outcomes are biological responses, not personal weakness.

III. General Legal Principle

International human rights standards and labor protections recognize repeated humiliation, intimidation, discrimination, reputational harm, and psychological coercion as forms of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment, even in the absence of physical violence.

IV. Institutional Responsibility

Any organization that:

• permits these practices,
• minimizes them,
• or justifies them in the name of discipline, order, or reputation

is not neutral—it is structurally producing harm.

V. Final Statement

An artist at risk does not enter a protection organization to be psychologically reconditioned.
They do not arrive to be humiliated, erased, or stripped of their symbols.
They do not consent to endurance tests of abuse disguised as management.

Humiliation is not administration.
Psychological harm is not governance.
Abuse is never a legitimate institutional tool.

An organization that protects the body while degrading the mind
fails ethically, psychologically, and legally.