I’ve downvoted this - the article is very poorly written and poorly research rubbish. The “journalist” is totally ignorant of the facts, and repeats falsehoods constantly throughout.
Snopes debunks this well as a another user posted: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/online-rape-academy-cnn/
Essentially, no not 62 million men; 62 million web hits (not gendered) to a general porn site - not even the specific category being discussed. Far fewer people (1 person can make multiple hits on a visit, and can visit multiple times in a month), yes likely mostly men, but of those people a small proportion will have sought out the specific content. We have no way of knowing how many but given this is a general porn site, and a very niche topic, likely very few.
So this article is just sensationalist rubbish from a poor quality journalist and a seemingly very low quality publication.
Holy shit, what a dismissive take on the article. This exact reaction is part of the problem .
Who gives a shit about the accurate reporting of the number. How about the broader issue of a) sleep rape, proven in court, b) that rapists have published their exploits online, and C) that there is an audience for same.
Take your semantics and fuck off.
Journalists are supposed to give a shit. Reporting needs to be accurate for people to be well informed, not sensational exploitation of an actual issue to personally profit from clicks.
Take that argument up with the editor. It doesn’t respond to the concern.
If this is the first you’re hearing of this I can understand your reaction, but this issue has been discussed for about two weeks and there’s better reporting out there. You don’t have to defend clickbait.
Yes it is the first, thank you for the response.
The points raised are important because they determine how prevalent the problem is, and how sensationalized the article is.
There are 6 BILLION internet users. So 1 in 100,000 internet users have viewed these rape videos. Oh wait, less than that, that’s for the whole site. Oh wait, less than that, that’s hits, not unique visitors. Oh wait, only half of that 6 billion are men, more or less. Oh wait, women view porn, too. Etc.
This takes it from something that statistically is a concern for my small city to something that statistically has a single dangerous individual in my city, at most.
We perhaps shouldn’t make special units to deal with this where I live, but should maybe have awareness courses for law enforcement and healthcare professionals to help identify potential victims. Larger cities may want to take a different approach.
So you have personally poked enough holes in the article, and broken down the problem in your head sufficiently, that you are comfortable to ignore the issue.
It must be nice to love in a comfortable bubble like that.
This rape porn is one of many many disturbing things we live with. There are enslaved people all over the world, for example. What do we do about it? This commenter is trying to be logical and you want them to be enraged. Unless there’s a place to channel that rage, what is the point? If you have solutions I’m all ears; finding some action to take would perhaps help me sleep better at night.
I specifically said what I was comfortable with doing to respond to this problem, depending on the size of the local population and therefore the likelihood of this actually occurring. Neither response was ‘nothing’.
Strange. I see 77 upvotes and 0 downvote.
Downvotes only apply for people who are subscribed to the community.
The main stat cited in this article is misleading.
Also, it wasn’t 62 million individuals, it was total monthly site visits. You can count as tens, hundreds, thousands, or even tens of thousands of visits to any given site as long as you visit it enough. (and depending on how that number is calculated)
Doesn’t mean this isn’t a problem, but it doesn’t mean there are 62 million men out there actively visiting this site every month for that kind of content…
…and the views also included every category of content on the site, much of which is just what you could find on any porn site.
So just to clarify - the 62 million visitors were in one month, as Snopes makes clear.
However as you say 62 million visits in internet terms is a nonsense and not equivalent to unique visitors. Such metrics count every page hit so 1 user browsing through pages in one visit will count as multiple visits, and that user may return multiple times.
And the biggest piece of information is that this is a general porn site, with 100 categories of porn. As snopes says “Examples include “blonde,” “skinny” and “webcam” — among many others.” So we don’t actually know who viewed this particular category.
CNN did a decent investigation particularly as they found a telegram group with 1000 users, but the porn site stuff has been misreported by other outlets. We live in an era of slop journalism where people just steal content from the source and make crap poorly researched content from it, or spread stupid rumours.
I noticed that sleep themed videos began being suggested online after that famous case in France. I found it ironic. The case rose awareness, I guess.
What does this say about society? I don’t know. These same websites also recommend poop videos. I’m pretty sure access to the internet has messed people up.
Same thing as copycat killers and echo mass shootings, I guess.
Edit: actually, that’s unfair, same monkey see monkey do happens with charity and the like, it’s not all bad.
Nice trying to misquote statistics… /Edit This was not intentional so that should be noted as updated comment
However, the “62 million” figure cited in social media posts represented the total number of visits to the pornographic website in February 2026
That is not UP UNTIL that month… that is just in that month…
From just monthly visits you cannot possibly determine the active user count but you can compare it to similar activity sites.
A quick AI Slop Overview gives you The average daily active users for a site with 60 million visits in a month would be approximately 2 million
this is skewed statistics as we want active users not visits so with a bit more refining defining Visits Per User
For adult/porn sites, VPU typically skews higher than general content because users often visit multiple times per day. Reasonable VPU ranges to use for estimates:
Low-engagement assumption: 3–7 visits per month Moderate-engagement (common): 10–30 visits per month High-engagement power users: 30–90+ visits per monthDividing this by 30 (mid numbers) we still get a very high estimate of around 2 Million Monthly Active Users.
For context… Crunchyroll as a websites average around 10 Million MAU.
In fact, women never said 62 million men were involved in the raping themselves. Women’s concern was that 62 million men were collectively engaged in the crime through their consumption of the content and their failure to report it. They were therefore co-conspirators, enablers, complicit, aiding and abetting the rapists and helping them monetize their crimes.
The real problem is that each month that site gets visits from what is more likely men than women who approve and support this type of behavior. Even if the 62 million is an exaggeration it is extremely disturbing that these visitors are OK with this and helping the actual rapist monetize their crimes.
A quick AI Slop Overview gives you
Bye!
You’re not wrong, but they just used AI to get 2M daily users from 60M monthly visitors. Which feels silly to me, but it’s just dividing 60M by 30, and it’s not done wrong.
I’m not interested in reading something someone regurgitated from ai, but I won’t hold someone using them for arithmetic against their arguments (but please just use a calculator).
There’s a double red flag:
- they used AI in an argument
- they used it for arithmetic.
To read such a comment further is a waste of time.
Sure, but a red flag is a warning sign, not an automatic rejection (at least in my parlance). They did notice that the original commenter was misinterpreting where 62M comes from and their comment thus brings more clarity to this thread, making it not a waste of time.
I think we disagree. I find such flaws to poison the whole well.
If we fully agreed, it would have been unnecessary for me to comment :)
I think it’s pointless and wasteful to use ai to answer questions or provide information like this, but I’ll read a comment written by a human who does, because I see that there is often still something valuable to me there. Others having a different line for their acceptance of AI is to be expected, but I still wanted to point out the use I got out of this comment, in case it prompts others to get use out of comments in the future, in spite of their writers’ use of ai.
Nice trying to misquote statistics…
I wasn’t “trying” to do anything. I misread it. Don’t automatically apply guilt to people.
I’ll update my comment.
Fair enough!
Surely there is at least one person who visits the site multiple times.
They’re not even necessarily visiting for the videos described in the article. That’s total visitors to the site.
Not visitors. Visits. If one person views 15 pages, that’s 15 visits. If Google crawls the site, that’s thousands or tens of thousands of visits. If Bing, Yahoo, and a dozen other bots and scrapers do the same, that’s a good fraction of the 62m. And if even one person visits the site but doesn’t watch any videos, that’s still at least one visit.
It’s very, very far from “62m men attended an online rape academy”.
Or bots.
Yeah
“The
wc -l site.log*said 62M”
… It’s… a fetish.
Jesus fucking… Yes sexual violence is a problem, but holy shit do articles that seem to be unfamiliar with the concept that PORN ISN’T REAL not help the issue get taken seriously.
Yes there are a handful of cases where this happens, but fucking hell.
It’s not just a fetish there is real legitimate rape of unconscious/drugged women on there.
Motherless is a very loose site compared to say PornHub, which itself still has illegal content but makes a much stronger effort to remove.
I mean… Yes, I don’t doubt there is some on there, it’s an unfortunate reality that even with the best moderation in the world, you can’t catch all the henious shit.
But… 20,000 videos worth like the article implies? I mean I can promise it’s not literally that many because because several of the vids being discussed here are of me and those were all extremely consensual (and I think are all faked). And I have a lot of friends who do similar content whose stuff winds up on those sites - it’s a super popular fetish.
Yeah, I had a friend (wb) send me a video where the woman was choked to death and she said she felt embarrassed for finding that hot.
I’m pretty sure the actress did not, in fact, die. It would’ve been pretty big news.
Would take a special kind of fucked up person to create real rape/snuff/whatever content if you could just have the actors… act it out. You’d also be documenting your own crime, easy way to get caught.
Pretty sure everyone who watches porn knows, or at least assumes, that it’s all made up.
And for that reason even if we assume the worst about the site, it’d be the uploaders being the problem, not the visitors.
its a deviance, fetish usually some form of consent, deviancy doesnt.
Something that strays from normality? Thats the end of the world right there!
Somnophilia is just a paraphilia, and a pretty common one. I have never seen “deviance” used in the way you describe - I’m super curious where that comes from.
I mean, even if it’s a few orders of magnitudes off, it’s still bad.
CONTENT WARNING: This article discusses rape
SIXTY-TWO MILLION. That’s the number of visits in one month to the porn site Motherless.com, which hosts 20,000 “sleep” videos, made by men who have drugged and raped their girlfriends and wives. No, it’s not all men. But it’s tens of millions of them.
This horrific figure was highlighted by the CNN report ‘Exposing a global “rape academy”’ on 26 March. The concept of “sleep” videos (can we call them rape videos, please?) was made famous in the court case of French man Dominique Pelicot, who drugged and raped his unconscious wife, Gisèle, along with 50 of his friends and associates.
The world was confronted by this grotesque rape practice in 2024 during the mass rape and drugging trial of Dominique Pelicot and 50 other men in southern France. Pelicot had been drugging and raping his wife for nine years and inviting friends and acquaintances into his home to share in the rape.
He uploaded the rape videos to an online forum where he helped to educate other men on how to drug and rape their partners. He has also been charged with murdering and raping a 23-year-old woman, and attempting to rape another.Saved you a click: Visited motherless.com and they host sleeprape videos.
Well, made me click so the headline did what it was supposed to and the content was exactly what I expected.
Tl;dr: men bad.
Td;dr: men bad.
Some men bed.
Any dude out there doing this shit is a pathetic creep. Don’t ever do that, ever. Even watching it is fucking weird.
