#clean beating

A character claims to have been trained in torture techniques that not only leave no marks (which I think you've called "clean torture"), but also don't require "tools" - no weapons, no devices, no technology, no environmental control (e.g. over lighting or temperature), and so on. If I recall correctly, he says this to threaten someone who is restrained in an otherwise completely bare room, and there's no suggestion of sexual assault being one of the techniques

Is this a thing? Would one person actually be able to torture another if it was just the two of them alone in a room, and not have it leave any kind of physical evidence?

In short: yes, that’s possible. But the devil, as always is in the detail.

 You see from the way this is framed it seems as if the story is implying the character is highly skilled, dangerous and required specialist training. And that is in keeping with how torturers talk and behave. But it isn’t really in keeping with reality.

 Because what he’s talking about is probably a ‘clean’ (ie non-scarring) beating, which essentially amounts to repeated open handed slaps on fleshy areas of the body. It’s very painful. It is still dangerous and it can kill (via kidney failure). But it isn’t… smart or complicated or hard to think up. It doesn’t require training or specialist knowledge.

 It’s probably worth mentioning here that clean torture does sometimes leave temporary marks. But they’re always the sorts of marks that might be explained away by something else.

 The swelling standing stress positions cause in the legs goes down quickly. But even if an independent witness sees this swelling… it can be caused by a whole range of diseases and health conditions. Institutions can and have turned around and said possible evidence of torture was down to underlying health conditions or other factors.

 This is part of why torture trials usually have a lot of survivors giving evidence. It’s about establishing a consistent pattern over dozens or hundreds of victims rather then tearing apart the evidence of one person.

 Clean beatings can leave the skin swollen, inflamed and sometimes visibly reddened. But a wide range of skin conditions can look similar. Some people would get similar looking marks from being restrained on a hard bed in a hospital. I get similar marks from sitting her on my sofa with my laptop on my knees typing asks. I also get them from kneeling on the floor when I use my sewing machine.

 There are a couple of other clean tortures that could fit in this scenario. The British National Style favours standing stress positions without restraints, usually using a wall and enforcing them by beating people who refuse to comply. Forced exercise is another relatively common torture that fits this description.

 And again, these can potentially leave some evidence. It’s just not clear evidence and it’s not obvious evidence. An exhausted, pained prisoner does not mean clear evidence of torture.

 With more torturers sleep deprivation could also fit this scenario. Something like relay interrogation, where the torturers swap out to rest but continue questioning/berating the prisoner and keeping them awake for days at a time.

 Generally I don’t think there’s anything wrong with using this scenario in a story. But I’d advise anyone considering it to be careful how they frame this incident. It would be very easy for the narrative to accidentally back up the torturer’s assertion that they’re skilled/trained or imply that these ‘techniques’ are intelligent, unusual things.

 The scene itself isn’t ‘wrong’. It’s just the sort of scenario that can relies on the reader’s background knowledge to fill in the blanks.

 And unfortunately that’s not something we can do when we’re talking about torture or abuse. Accurate information is difficult to find and not accessible for the majority of people. Misinformation and apologia is everywhere. Until that changes I don’t think we can rely on readers filling in the blanks with anything but apologia.

 Which is why it’s important to try and think through the implications of what we write.

 I hope that helps :)

Available on Wordpress.

OK I have a few concerns about the background scenario which I’m goingto bring up but I realise that you may well have thought of all these pointsalready and just not felt you had the space to put them into the ask. Which isperfectly alright but I like to try and make sure I cover as much as possibleso everyone gets as much help as I can give. :)

 Essentially children don’t make effective soldiers and torturing people,whatever their age, makes them less effective soldiers.

 There’s an awful lot in modern pop culture (almost exclusively mediaproduced in stable, rich countries) that glamorises child soldiers. Iunderstand that most people in a Western audience are viewing these things aspurely fantasy, but that’s not a degree of detachment I can share.

 Be aware of the issues you’re touching on here and be aware that thesymptoms torture causes in victims make torture victims worse as soldiers not better. Torture isnot an effective training technique.

 Your idea of having the survivors reluctant to talk to people outsidethe program is a nice detail. A lot of survivors of big, traumatic, groupevents like this find it uncomfortable, or impossible, to talk to people who ‘weren’tthere’.

 You’ve probably already considered this but that suggests a very strongbond between the survivors and I think you could use that to show a wider arrayof symptoms and coping mechanisms in a very natural way.

 You’veprobably had a look at the National Styles masterpost which covers the mostcommon techniques in the USA.

 I think I’d start by narrowing those down to techniques that have definitely been used on children in theUSA. That’s electricity tortures, solitary confinement, clean beatings,starvation and sleep deprivation.

 Electricity tortures in the USA basically means the misuse of Tasers andstun guns. Both of them carry considerable risks and I’m honestly not sure howmuch worse those effects would be when the victim is a child.

 They can cause seizures, heart attacks and deaths from falling injuries.People hit with Tasers and stun guns often lose control of their muscles, ifthey’re standing at the time that means falling and being unable to protecttheir head. That often leads to serious brain damage and death.

 This isn’t to say that you shouldn’tuse electricity based tortures in your story. But be aware of the risks and ifpossible include a character who died as a result. Because a lot of people die every year because ofTasers and stun guns.

 I’d say solitary confinement is definitelysomething you should include.

 It’s awful and it has profound effects on children especially. But itsuse within American institutions is incredibly pervasive and it is used against children throughoutAmerica. Sometimes on extremely young children.

 Ihave a Masterpost on solitary confinement specifically here and there is an excellent freeonline resource which focuses on prisons in particular here.

 I’d also suggest including clean beatings, repeated hits to fleshy areasof the body with open hands, because it’s extremely common worldwide and oftenignored or dismissed.

 I don’t think you shouldinclude waterboarding in your story.

 It’s a central part of the American National Style but the risks,particularly against children seem too great. I think it would result in a highnumber of deaths and a lot of children with brain damage and/or limb amputationcaused by lack of oxygen.

 Similarly I don’t think you should use stress positions because of thebackground your institution has.

 The American system which favours standing stress positions usingrestraints is likely to cause a lack of fine motor control in at least some ofthe victims. That’s a particularly poor fit for a ‘training program’ even one you know isn’t going to work.

 Now that does leave you with a high enough number of techniques for arealistic torture regime but it doesn’t leave you a lot of room for choice. SoI’m going to suggest a few other elements that are not quite so ‘typical’ ofAmerican torture.

 Don’t feel you have to include any of these, I’m suggesting them so thatif you feel you need ‘more’ you’ve got some options.

 The first thing I’m going to suggest is…I think you call it ‘mace’ overthere right? Aerosol sprays containing a stupidly high concentration of theactive component of chili peppers.

 It’s incredibly painful and leaves no lasting external marks. Torturersusing the analogous ‘pepper’ generally apply irritants to the mucous membranesof the body: the eyes, nose, mouth, anus and genitalia.

 You might personally want to avoid attacks to the anus and genitalsbecause of the connection to sexual abuse.

 Spraying directly into the nostrils, mouth or eyes would all beincredibly painful. It causes an intense burning sensation and the victim wouldcry because some of the chemical components in these sprays trigger theproduction of tears.

 Exhaustion exercises would also fit your scenario very well.

 This is basically forcing a victim to exercise until they collapse. It’soften combined with beatings.

 So for example a method the British used in the past was giving a victimtwo large buckets full of water and making them run repeatedly through acorridor of guards/soldiers. The guards would hit and try to trip the victim asthey ran carrying heavy loads. If the victim tripped they were beaten and thebuckets were refilled and they were made to do it again.

 This would continue until the victim was incapable of running.

 I’m suggesting this because it’s still unfortunately common in UK armybases where it has not only been used on children (in their late teens) but hascaused or contributed to deaths.

 It may cause some scars, especially when combined with beating andtripping victims. But these scars are rarely large and can not obviously belinked to torture. A scar from a fall looks like a scar from a fall, whetherthe victim fell accidentally or was pushed.

 As a finally point I’d suggest temperature tortures because while they’reless common in America now I know they were used there in the not-so-distantpast.

 The general method is to make a cell, especially a solitary cell,unusually hot or cold. One of the ways this was accomplished in America was bybuilding cells right next to the furnace that heated the entire building.

 Unusually cold cells are often accompanied by taking away the victim’sclothing and blankets. Unusually hot cells are often combined with rationingwater, making the character dehydrated.  

 I hope that helps. :)

Hmmm well if they’re not outright killing the character then theorganisation might use threats beforetorture.

 It depends what you need from the story here. Is thischaracter a MC or someone who passes on important information to a maincharacter? Is it important to the story that someone spots signs of torture?

 If the character is seen as replaceable then the most likelyoutcome seems to be either death or threats, not jumping straight to torture. Because torture can galvaniseresistance. Torture can drive someone toblow the whistle.

 Granted torturers don’t seem to know that. But if the mainpoint is that this character is scaredthen threats accomplish that just as well.

 Even if you feel torturing them is necessary for the storyI’d suggest starting by having them threatened. Simply having members of theorganisation tell them that they’ll be tortured if they reveal anything (andperhaps show them proof that the organisation has tortured others) would work.If you then want to move on to the character being tortured, the most realistic way to do it is by having thetorturers think their victim wasn’tsufficiently scared by the threats.

 I’m going to give you an example of the American ‘NationalStyle’ of torture in case you want to use it. But I think you should reallycarefully consider whether you needtorture at this point in your story. It sounds to me as though the threat of torture could be moreeffective for your story.

 I picked the American National Style (and this is moreparticularly Chicago circa 70s) not because I’m assuming your story is setthere but because it’s as much a style that crops up in police settings as militaryones. And I think that fits with the idea of security personnel. I am assuming this is set in a relativelymodern time period though.

 Clean beating is a big one, repeated hits with an open palm,especially to the belly are a favourite in this particular national style butfeel free to vary that to fit with your setting. Objects are also sometimesused, they should be relatively soft and without sharp edges. Hose pipes andphone books have both been used.

 Dry choking (rather than waterboarding) seems to be morecommon in police-based cases of torture (rather than military). Plastic bagswere most commonly used but tightening a necktie has also been known. It’s veryeasy to accidentally kill someone this way and the air hunger very quickly (andinstinctively) makes people panic.

 The mainstay of US torture though seems to be electricity. Tasers,stun guns and the like. These are painful, widely available and rarely leavemarks. Aside from the pain of the electric shock itself they can cause musclespasms. With repeated shocks victims often pass out and this can be lifethreatening if they’re standing at the time because the fall (and subsequenthead injuries) can kill.

 Most modern torture uses some form of stress position. The USseems to favour standing cuffs, cuffing their hands in front of them and tying them above their head so the character is forced to stand on their toes. In this case I’d suggest not using it. It would be harder to get a one-handed character intothat position and it would involve keeping the character locked up for morethan a day.

 In your scenario, no matter how replaceable the character isto the organisation, the longer the character is held the higher the chances that someone discovers the organisation torturing. Andin your setting, where secrecy is important, that’s something they’d want toavoid.

 That’s also why I’ve suggested a modern, ‘clean’ tortureregime. Properly done the techniques I’ve suggested don’t leave marks. Thatmakes it much harder for the victimto accuse the organisation of torture in a ‘believable’ way. It makes it harderfor any law enforcement agency to prosecute the organisation for torture even if they take the victim seriously (there’s no obvious physical evidence).

 It makes it harder for the victim to persuade other peoplethey were tortured, and thatundermines the credibility of the victim which makes anything they have to sayabout the shady dealings of the organisation seem less believable.

 I hope that helps. :)