The Body’s Response to Trauma

By Brylie Turk
4 min read

      Sexual trauma can have a profound effect on victims, both physically and psychologically.

The phrase “fight or flight” was originally coined in the 1920s to describe behaviors that occur during a perceived threat (Schmidt et al. 2008), when the body goes into a heightened state of alertness. Later two additional concepts were included to encompass all of the body’s potential responses to trauma: freeze and fawn. These responses are natural physiological reactions to danger outside of conscious choice. However, when a victim of sexual assault ‘freezes’ or ‘fawns,’ their experiences are often stigmatized and discredited, creating significant consequences for survivors. Instead of perceiving the freeze and fawn responses as weak or complicit, they should be understood as common responses to sexual trauma, rather than a victim’s consent.

         The fight or flight response is an evolutionary mechanism triggered when an individual perceives a threat, preparing the body to resist or flee a situation, reflecting “an interaction between learning and innate, biological systems designed to help animals adapt to a threat” (Schmidt et al. 2008). During this response, the body releases hormones such as adrenaline and cortisol, which increase heart rate and blood pressure and heighten the senses. Fight or flight can be beneficial in situations where an individual needs to take action to protect themselves from harm. The fight response may manifest as physical resistance or verbal confrontation. The flight response can include attempts to escape, leave, or hide from a perpetrator. While these responses may occur during a sexual assault, the freeze and fawn responses are far more common.

         The freeze response to sexual assault is the most common reaction described by survivors and was originally described as rape-induced paralysis; “The scientific community widely accepts the fact that many victims of sexual assault experience some variation of tonic immobility that renders the victim incapable of moving, escaping, fighting back, or calling out during instances of sexual assault” (Schiewe 2019). This reaction is triggered by the body’s perception that it is unable to fight or flee, the victim’s “thoughts, intentions, and feelings are irrelevant—her body shuts down in preparation for severe injury and death” (Porges & Peper 2015). Immobilization acts as a primary defense system for humans, as it does with other mammals and some reptiles in response to a life threat; this is a result of the brain making a decision without awareness as it interprets a situation.

Also known as tonic immobility, the freeze response “is characterized by physical immobility, muscular rigidity, and lack of response to stimulation” (Schiewe 2019). The freeze response causes a victim of sexual assault to feel helpless and paralyzed, despite their body’s release of hormones such as endorphins and oxytocin, intended to make them feel calm and safe. This response “may be wrongly interpreted by the aggressor as a passive acquiescence…this misunderstanding may be exacerbated if judgment is clouded by alcohol” (Porges & Peper 2015). Under the influence of drugs or alcohol, a victim’s body and mind may react differently than normally, drastically increasing the likelihood of a freeze response. Thus, it is vital to obtain consent, rather than acquiescence to engage in appropriate sexual activity.

         Fawning is another common response to trauma; it is a coping mechanism victims use to attempt to please or appease their abuser to avoid further conflict or harm and establish a sense of safety. This response is especially prevalent among situations of abuse with prominent power differentials, such as in cases of sexual abuse between children and adults. Fawning may occur when a victim is afraid of saying no to an abuser, so they behave amenably towards them in an attempt to assuage them and escape danger. Fawning is also used as a de-escalation or bargaining tactic to help a victim achieve a locus of control by ingratiating themselves to a dominant perpetrator. It is an adaptive response in which a victim tries to flatter or meet the needs of a perpetrator in self-preservation.

         Both the freeze and fawn responses lead to increased feelings of shame and self-blame for victims of sexual assault. These responses may make it more difficult for survivors to recognize or characterize their assaults, thus, leading to lower rates of reporting. Freezing and fawning also induce victim-blaming responses, as observers may question why the victim responded the way they did and did not fight back. This is a problematic assessment, as a victim’s response to sexual trauma is a psychological, biologically determined reaction outside of their control, just like the fight or flight response. 

         In a common law, many states rely on the use of force to define rape; force implies that a victim resisted their assault. Thus, such states require often evidence of resistance of force through physical injury to a victim, such as bruising or scratches, making it increasingly difficult to prosecute perpetrators of sexual assault, “some states explicitly require proof that the victim resisted as an element of the crime, whereas other states use resistance of the victim to define force and non-consent” (Schiewe 2019). Courts will often digress into an analysis of whether or not a victim made an effort to resist their perpetrator and if that resistance was enough to show a perpetrator refusal of consent. Despite a plethora of scientific research and studies confirming the freeze and fawn responses as typical reactions to sexual assault which render a victim incapable of screaming or fighting their perpetrators, many states continue to require evidence of resistance to prosecute instances of non-consensual sex. This is unacceptable; states must change their laws and better codify consent to ensure perpetrators can be prosecuted and survivors can receive justice, despite their response to an assault.