Poll for the Armchair Psychologists

[MeeBee]

Yes, I have seen those programs they were good! What is interesting to me though, is that 3rd world parenting still includes the benefits of extended family which may make a huge difference to a child. Western models of parenting are less concerned with those values which have been eroded over time. It's often hard to be clear about our native Aboriginals because of the lineage of maternal caring, where all the mother's sisters are also considered to be the mother of the child, and vice versa.

It seemed a very instinctual and uncomplex way of parenting. Very interesting. I found the mom from the US interesting as well. The child had no time to explore and be left to learn and discover on her own. That's very important. It was too much. I think the idea that there is a right way and a wrong way and that the wrong way will irreversibly screw up your child has caused us in the US and in the Western world to try too hard and that can also have adverse affects as well, if small ones.

My friend's SIL and brother are very much like the mom in the US in Babies. Always had the child in classes and was always in her face with books and flash cards and all that trying to engage her. But it took her longer than normal to hit developmental milestones. By the time my daughter was walking and talking, their daughter was still not walking and barely talked and just had kind of a different way of interacting. My daughter was really connecting and bright and this girl was still behind. It took her a while. I figured this was because she wasn't left on her own enough for her brain to just learn on its own and grow and absorb things. That's a very important process. Just sitting back and letting the baby just explore sometimes is so essential. It's a delicate balance and it's hard to know when to pare back and when to get involved.

That's why this whole conversation, this right way and wrong way makes me uneasy. We have put sooo much pressure on parents not to screw their kids up and do it exactly right that we go overboard sometimes. It's truly mind boggling.

I know basically, it's important to parent with love and kindness and patience. I figured that if I did that, then it would go well. But sometimes you get overwhelmed. You can think you're doing it the right way then learn a dozen years from now that some people say that way is wrong.

 

[Curious Me]

The earth no longer has to suffer the likes of this demon. Posting this here because this is the bug that needs to be examined under our microscopes. How many of us can honestly describe ourselves as evil?

A Conversation with Richard Ramirez--The Night Stalker--Reported by Mike Watkiss - YouTube

 

[MeeBee]

I think I can know this, because when I compare all the people I have known who were damaged by parents (siblings, cousins, people in groups) with people who were not;

the former group had huge things done wrong, the latter, little things (in the midst of good things). I think using our reason and logic we can know that pervasive problems lead to big issues, and little conflicts would not.

I am assuming IF the Arias parents damaged Jodi, we did not hear the real issues (and there would be a good reason for that).

But you are assuming based on an anecdote that all people who grow up to kill or who have issues must have parents who did horrible, irreversible damage to them. That's a generalization. It's presumptuous. You cannot possibly know that just because of who you know in your life. You just can't.

You also say that the former group had very bad parents, you say the latter group had parents who only made small mistakes and kids turned out fine. That's too black and white. Perfect parents do not always equal perfect kids and bad parents do not always equal bad kids. This goes against the idea that we cannot see what goes on behind closed doors. How do you for certain that all the parents in the latter group were generally good with only minor mistakes made? Isn't it possible there was more there you never and have never seen and they turned out fine anyway? Travis Alexander had a horrible childhood and he seemed to turn out pretty good. He wasn't perfect but he had his act together. It's not black and white.

BBM: I think with Jodi, we would have. She would have used anything remotely overtly and terribly abusive to cement her stories. That's Jodi. Always the victim. We have heard nothing of the sort from ANYONE, not even the siblings. And even if you did, could you believe it? I already don't believe the stories she'd told now. You would think if there was something there, anything, we would have heard about it like we have with past killers.

We can speculate on what happened to Jodi that made her what she is. But no one can say they know for sure. Huh uh.

 

[MeeBee]

The earth no longer has to suffer the likes of this demon. Posting this here because this is the bug that needs to be examined under our microscopes. How many of us can honestly describe ourselves as evil?

A Conversation with Richard Ramirez--The Night Stalker--Reported by Mike Watkiss - YouTube

I can't take this conversation seriously. He seems so affected and fake here. As if he's trying to cultivate a certain serial killer persona, a la Manson. A troubled man who waxed poetic. Someone who we perceive as evil who actually had more insight into the truth of human nature.

Spare me.

 

[Curious Me]

BTW, RR (video above) reminds me in looks of Bobby J.

 

[Gecko100]

But what is mind boggling acts of psychological neglect to Jodi? What is so big to her that she feels she is being neglected or abused?

She already talks about getting grounded and being busted for pot and being convicted of murder as massive betrayals and she was deserving of those punishments. She talks about her mother turning her attention to her infant children as abandonment. Maybe to Jodi, this was big and it's hard for parents to balance their attention when a new child enters the family. I'm not saying that wouldn't have an impact on her. But would that really turn a normal person into a killer? Whose eyes should we look through? A normal person's or Jodi's?

She talks about Travis not calling her for three days as if it's abandonment too, even though she was a grown woman. Did this abandonment fears come about because of something her parents did or because Jodi was predisposed from birth to interpret little things as big slights?

BBM: How do you know this is always the case? How can you possibly know this? You don't. You can't.

We don't know and that is part of the problem in decision making.
There are indicators on JA's side for a need to be sexually debased, she looks numb, and appears to have PTSD. What's to say it's not C-PTSD which can manifest as BPD?
I don't know if she was sexually abused, but there are some significant indicators which might suggest it. She desperately wanted her mother to leave her father, but why? She drops out of school despite her intelligence, and sets up home at 16, and is self medicating with pot.
Like has been mentioned, she is intelligent creative and generally kind. Her only friends able to testify for her were threatened, as was her main expert witness.
Only one other person to support her story who has a great deal at stake is disbelieved.
That seems a bit unjust, and I don't understand it.
I could mount a reasonable explanation for many of the things suggested because I am still not convinced knowing what I know, that she had no provocation.

 

[Curious Me]

Waxing poetic just like CMja?

 

[MeeBee]

We don't know and that is part of the problem in decision making.
There are indicators on JA's side for a need to be sexually debased, she looks numb, and appears to have PTSD. What's to say it's not C-PTSD which can manifest as BPD?
I don't know if she was sexually abused, but there are some significant indicators which might suggest it. She desperately wanted her mother to leave her father, but why? She drops out of school despite her intelligence, and sets up home at 16, and is self medicating with pot.
Like has been mentioned, she is intelligent creative and generally kind. Her only friends able to testify for her were threatened, as was her main expert witness.
Only one other person to support her story who has a great deal at stake is disbelieved.
That seems a bit unjust, and I don't understand it.
I could mount a reasonable explanation for many of the things suggested because I am still not convinced knowing what I know, that she had no provocation.

That's BS. Absolute BS. I don't believe it for a second. This was a carefully crafted lie presented by the DT and Michael Keifer to make Jodi and her ilk seem persecuted. Patti wouldn't testify because she had a drug history and would be asked about it. She always seemed high BTW.

Patti, the one person to testify for her, didn't even know her until middle school and then didn't speak to her for years. She had told interviewers that Jodi had a great childhood that she envied but then was going to get on the stand to talk about supposed abuse in Jodi's past. She was disbelieved because she wasn't credible. She changed her story and had issues. That's the one person that could testify for her? Not a sibling who had the same parents? ALV didn't not testify in the mitigation phase because she was threatened. She got in trouble for something and was proven to be a "fact bender." She was not credible either.

The sexual abuse is just more assumptions and does not even flow with how Jodi tells it. When did Jodi say she wanted her mom to leave her father? That's a terrible thing to insinuate about someone when you don't even know if it's true.

Are you saying Jodi killed Travis because she was provoked?

 

[MeeBee]

Waxing poetic just like CMja?

Yeeeeees...

 

[Curious Me]

I can't take this conversation seriously. He seems so affected and fake here. As if he's trying to cultivate a certain serial killer persona, a la Manson. A troubled man who waxed poetic. Someone who we perceive as evil who actually had more insight into the truth of human nature.

Spare me.

Well, his evil manson like ramblings are not some act. It's a common unrational rationalization to commit horrible acts. He did a lot of damage in this world!

I remember when he terrorized So. California. In the interview he teases with a remark that "he quit on love and happiness long ago", but wouldn't give why. But quitting was his DECISION, and to be evil was his decision. Totally lost to describe who he is - says "just a guy". Empty evil.

It doesn't matter what the face looks like, but if you look closely you can see something malicious and that dupers delight in him, just like I see in CMja.

:seeya:

 

[human]

The study I posted from the World Health Organization gives studies and discusses things that people are saying here.

It is a cross cultural look at children, but they conclude that what makes children prosper is the same all over the world.

 

[MeeBee]

Well, his evil manson like ramblings are not some act. It's a common unrational rationalization to commit horrible acts. He did a lot of damage in this world!

I remember when he terrorized So. California. In the interview he teases with a remark that "he quit on love and happiness long ago", but wouldn't give why. But quitting was his DECISION, and to be evil was his decision. Totally lost to describe who he is - says "just a guy". Empty evil.

It doesn't matter what the face looks like, but if you look closely you can see something malicious and that dupers delight in him, just like I see in CMja.

:seeya:

Mmm, yeah, but what he was saying seemed to come from a place of getting a sound bite. Like he was intentionally trying to say quotable things. It didn't seem genuine.

Also the line about giving up on love and happiness was telling to me. That's probably true since he seemed so damaged that his only sexual gratification came from rape and violence and murder. How could he ever love and settle down with someone? But that's why I wonder about if he was a true sociopath. A sociopath wouldn't care if he ever found love and happiness, not enough to give up on it. They wouldn't care about it. He could also have just been saying that though, as part of another quotable. Hard to say. Terrifying man though.

 

[SMK]

We don't know and that is part of the problem in decision making.
There are indicators on JA's side for a need to be sexually debased, she looks numb, and appears to have PTSD. What's to say it's not C-PTSD which can manifest as BPD?
I don't know if she was sexually abused, but there are some significant indicators which might suggest it. She desperately wanted her mother to leave her father, but why? She drops out of school despite her intelligence, and sets up home at 16, and is self medicating with pot.
Like has been mentioned, she is intelligent creative and generally kind. Her only friends able to testify for her were threatened, as was her main expert witness.
Only one other person to support her story who has a great deal at stake is disbelieved.
That seems a bit unjust, and I don't understand it.
I could mount a reasonable explanation for many of the things suggested because I am still not convinced knowing what I know, that she had no provocation.

I know the opinions above are very unpopular, but I have had similar thoughts.
ETA: In particular, I was troubled by indicators of sexual trauma, a fear of the father, and being articulate, intelligent, and creative, but not pursuing education.

 

[human]

My friend is a therapist. She had to go through therapy herself inn order to become a therapist.

When she was going through therapy, she discovered her father was an alcoholic. She was 22 years old and had no idea the father she grew up with was an alcoholic. She said that explained why her mother had the issues she did as well.

So an intelligent woman growing up in her house did not even know the issues of her home.

 

[SMK]

My friend is a therapist. She had to go through therapy herself inn order to become a therapist.

When she was going through therapy, she discovered her father was an alcoholic. She was 22 years old and had no idea the father she grew up with was an alcoholic. She said that explained why her mother had the issues she did as well.

So an intelligent woman growing up in her house did not even know the issues of her home.

Absolutely!!!
My sisters and I did not realize we had grown up with an alcoholic father until in our 30s (through therapy)-- all had far above average IQs and were honor students in college. It was a shared denial. And is very common regarding sexual trauma stemming from the father as well.

 

[Curious Me]

Mmm, yeah, but what he was saying seemed to come from a place of getting a sound bite. Like he was intentionally trying to say quotable things. It didn't seem genuine.

Also the line about giving up on love and happiness was telling to me. That's probably true since he seemed so damaged that his only sexual gratification came from rape and violence and murder. How could he ever love and settle down with someone? But that's why I wonder about if he was a true sociopath. A sociopath wouldn't care if he ever found love and happiness, not enough to give up on it. They wouldn't care about it. He could also have just been saying that though, as part of another quotable. Hard to say. Terrifying man though.

I found a site discussing RR and his past, his possible brain flaws, and his cousin's influence. It is hard to say.

Hope it's okay to link this. http://www.nyu.edu/classes/keefer/ww1/grise.html

:seeya:

 

[SMK]

Mmm, yeah, but what he was saying seemed to come from a place of getting a sound bite. Like he was intentionally trying to say quotable things. It didn't seem genuine.

Also the line about giving up on love and happiness was telling to me. That's probably true since he seemed so damaged that his only sexual gratification came from rape and violence and murder. How could he ever love and settle down with someone? But that's why I wonder about if he was a true sociopath. A sociopath wouldn't care if he ever found love and happiness, not enough to give up on it. They wouldn't care about it. He could also have just been saying that though, as part of another quotable. Hard to say. Terrifying man though.

He was a terrifying man but I agree he cultivated it: He wanted to be a sociopath and was willing to do anything to achieve that end.

Perhaps that was what was so chilling about him: He was a wanna be sociopath and engaged in the most horrific acts to win his little slice of fame and to bolster his egoism. He was a charm boy, and a fake.

 

[MeeBee]

I found a site discussing RR and his past, his possible brain flaws, and his cousin's influence. It is hard to say.

Hope it's okay to link this. http://www.nyu.edu/classes/keefer/ww1/grise.html

:seeya:

This is great, thank you.

 

[MeeBee]

He was a terrifying man but I agree he cultivated it: He wanted to be a sociopath and was willing to do anything to achieve that end.

Perhaps that was what was so chilling about him: He was a wanna be sociopath and engaged in the most horrific acts to win his little slice of fame and to bolster his egoism. He was a charm boy, and a fake.

I believe his acts were more a fetish-istic compulsion. The need to cultivate a persona came after his incarceration when he realized how popular he'd become with certain groups. I think he was just really socially awkward and unaware and figured he'd win people this way. His behavior in the courtroom was laughable. He tried too hard. Way too hard. So transparent.

 

[Gecko100]

That's BS. Absolute BS. I don't believe it for a second. This was a carefully crafted lie presented by the DT and Michael Keifer to make Jodi and her ilk seem persecuted. Patti wouldn't testify because she had a drug history and would be asked about it. She always seemed high BTW.

Patti, the one person to testify for her, didn't even know her until middle school and then didn't speak to her for years. She had told interviewers that Jodi had a great childhood that she envied but then was going to get on the stand to talk about supposed abuse in Jodi's past. She was disbelieved because she wasn't credible. She changed her story and had issues. That's the one person that could testify for her? Not a sibling who had the same parents? ALV didn't not testify in the mitigation phase because she was threatened. She got in trouble for something and was proven to be a "fact bender." She was not credible either.

The sexual abuse is just more assumptions and does not even flow with how Jodi tells it. When did Jodi say she wanted her mom to leave her father? That's a terrible thing to insinuate about someone when you don't even know if it's true.

Are you saying Jodi killed Travis because she was provoked?

Could be, the 'stab' wounds on his back are superficial slashing wounds that could only be accomplished by someone lying on top of another. The wound shapes are consistent with that because they have a 'tail'. All the wounds were superficial except for 3. None of those wounds except for 3 could have been fatal. If her intention was to kill, she had much better opportunities to do so without a hellishly gory fight. He was photographed sleeping at one point, that's when I would have struck, no mess no clean-up quick escape.
She went to an awful lot of trouble to carry out a pre-meditated murder and made some very silly mistakes for an above average intelligence creative person.
It's really not the behaviour of pre-planned psychopath, those are very cold and swiftly carried out, it's part of the thrill of high risk taking. I could not in all honesty see JA as a thrill seeking sexual psychopath acting out a fantasy.
I can only think that a fight took place, for whatever reason and that JA defended herself. There are some great resources available to discover the differences between stabbing and 'chopping slashes' - one produces a tail and the other does not.
I am not trying to defend her, I just need more information than we are given by television pundits and innuendo.