Author Topic: Loyalty to John/MMS and Stockholm Syndrome  (Read 1328 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +2/-1
    • View Profile
Loyalty to John/MMS and Stockholm Syndrome
« on: April 17, 2006, 01:45:00 PM »
The "misplaced" attachment of subjects to their abusers is not uncommon, and has been documented in many different contexts. It happens in abused children and women, cults, controlling relationships, prisoner of war camps, and other people or institutions that enforce unreasonable control on those who have no recourse. Stockholm Syndrome itself is most commonly perceived to occur with hostage situations, with the logic behind developing this relationship with an abuser or captor is in the interest of self-protection. (9) This development occurs when there are perceived threats of violence, disempowerment of the subject, high levels of stress or trauma upon subject, and ultimate dependence upon the person in control for base survival.

In an act of self-delusion, the victim of Stockholm Syndrome develops conditions in order to reassure themselves they will be protected or cared for. By creating a false emotional attachment and seeking praise and approval of their captor, they attempt to make a false reality for themselves, in which no harm can come to them. And by defending and/or protecting their captors from police or anyone who "comes to the rescue," they allow themselves to appear as if they have some control in a relationship which they really have no power. The value of their lives, which the captor grants, is seen as a sign of affection or love, and the captive wishes to reciprocate in order to maintain their own position at that time. By accepting a level of objectification that one should reject as a matter of basic human dignity, hostages or captives weaken their ability to control their emotions. This allows themselves to become malleable, thus becoming easily susceptible to the whims of their captors, and creates this unbalanced relationship of attachment between the captor and the captive.

http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/neuro/n ... asnec.html

I KNOW THAT NO ONE CAN DISAGREE THAT WE ALL SOUGHT JOHN'S APPROVAL IN AN INCREDIBLY IRRATIONAL WAY... THIS CLEARLY EXPLAINS WHY
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +2/-1
    • View Profile
Loyalty to John/MMS and Stockholm Syndrome
« Reply #1 on: April 17, 2006, 02:05:00 PM »
Bonding with an abuser maybe the universal survival strategy for victims of interpersonal abuse. Studies of other hostage-like groups seem to bare this out. -- These groups are:

Hostages
Concentration Camp prisoners
cult members
prisoners of war
civilians in Chinese Communist prisons
procured prostitutes
incest victims
physically and/or emotionally abused children
battered women
Four Situation Factors that are Precursor to Stockholm Syndrome:
Perceived threat to one's physical or psychological survival and the belief that the captor would carry out the threat.
Perceived small kindness from the captor to the captive.
(Note: letting the captive live is enough.)
Isolation from perspectives other than those of the captor.
Perceived inability to escape.
Psychodynamics' Underlying Stockholm Syndrome
An abuser traumatizes a victim (who does not believe they can escape, or truly can not) with a threat to the victim's survival. The traumatized victim, who perceives isolation from outsiders; who could provide nurturance and protection, must look to the abuser to meet those needs. If the abuser shows the victim some small kindness, the victim then must bond to the perceived positive side of the abuser, denying (or dissociating) the side of the abuser that produced the terror. The victim begins to work to see the world from the abuser's perspective so that they may know what keeps the abuser happy, thus helping to insure the victim's survival. As a result the victim becomes hypervigilant to the abuser's needs and unaware of their own. The victim comes to see the world from the perspective of the abuser, losing touch with their own perspective, which is unimportant or even counter-productive to their survival. With the denial of the violent side of the abuser, comes denial of the danger. It becomes progressively harder to separate from the abuser due to the fear of losing the only positive relationship identity that remains -- her/ himself as seen through the abuser's eyes (which in the case of the adult victim has replaced any previous sense of self, for a child this may be, and often is, the only sense of self known).

http://www.geocities.com/kidhistory/trauma/stockhol.htm
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +2/-1
    • View Profile
Loyalty to John/MMS and Stockholm Syndrome
« Reply #2 on: April 17, 2006, 09:39:00 PM »
In 1982, the first and only discussion of psychotherapy cults appeared in the literature. Temerlin and Temerlin (1982) studied five "bizarre" groups which were formed when five practitioners of psychotherapy simultaneously served as friends, lovers, relatives, employers, colleagues, and teachers, all to patients who were themselves mental health professionals. In choosing the term "psychotherapy cult," the authors have noted similarities of the groups they reviewed to some religious cults, citing the three definitions of the "cult" in Webster's 1966 Third New International Dictionary: (1) a system for the cure of disease based on the dogma, tenets or principles set forth by its promulgator to the exclusion of scientific experience or demonstration, (2) great or excessive dedication to some person, idea or organization, (3) a religion or mystic regarded as mysterious or unorthodox. The psychotherapy cults studied by Temerlin and Temerlin varied from 15 to 75 mental health professionals held together by their idealization of a shared therapist and the activities which they conducted jointly: workshops, seminars, courses, businesses, professional ventures, and social life. As patients became more involved in the social and personal life of their therapists, they gradually withdrew from all friends and family, becoming increasingly dependent on the therapist and their new "siblings." Upon joining the group, many patients felt a sense of being loved and belongingness. The authors described the "cognitive pathology" of idiosyncratic group jargon which served to maintain an illusion of knowledge, sophistication, and personal growth, while removing all ambivalence and uncertainty. The authors concluded that psychotherapy cult membership is an iatrogenically determined negative effect of psychotherapy. Of the former cult members they interviewed, most had perceived themselves as deteriorating or at an impasse, or had experienced disillusionment with their therapists; however, they were unable to terminate unilaterally because of a pathological symbiosis with the group. This paper focuses on a now defunct school of psychotherapy which had both much in common with these psychotherapy cults and several contrasting qualities. First, the school was officially led by a junta of psychotherapists, in a deliberate attempt to avoid any taint of a personality cult. Second, the group of patients and therapists was far larger than any referred to in the original study. Third, most patients were not mental health professionals. Fourth, liberal usage was made of many novel techniques identified with the California psychotherapy scene.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/quer ... t=Abstract
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +2/-1
    • View Profile
Loyalty to John/MMS and Stockholm Syndrome
« Reply #3 on: May 01, 2006, 07:56:00 PM »
1. The captives begin to identify with their captors.  At least at first  this is  a defensive  mechanism, based  on  the  (often unconscious) idea that the captor will not hurt the captive if he is cooperative and even positively supportive.  The captive seeks to win the favor of the captor in an almost childlike way.


2. The captive often realizes that action taken by his would-be rescuers is  very likely  to hurt  him instead  of obtaining  his release.   Attempts at  rescue may  turn  a  presently  tolerable situation into  a lethal  one.  If the bullets of the authorities don't get him, quite possibly those of the provoked captor will.

3. Long term  captivity builds  even stronger attachment to the captor as he becomes known as a human being with his own problems and  aspirations.  Particularly  in  political  or  ideological situations, longer  captivity also  allows the  captive to become familiar with  the captor's  point of view and the history of his grievances against  authority. He may  come to believe that the captor's position is just.


4. The captive  seeks to  distance himself emotionally from the situation by denial that it is actually taking place.  He fancies that "it  is all a dream," or loses himself in excessive periods of sleep, or in delusions of being magically rescued.  He may try to forget the situation by engaging in useless but time consuming "busy work."   Depending on his degree of identification with the captor he  may deny that the captor is at fault, holding that the would-be rescuers  and their  insistence on  punishing the captor are really to blame for his situation.

5. If the  captors are  numerous the captives may identify with some and not with others.  They may perceive a set of "good guys" and "bad  guys" amongst  their captors.  The captors may make use of such  perceptions to gain information or desired behavior from the captives by having the "good guys" gain the confidence of the captives and  by the  subtle threat  of what the "good guys" will not be able to keep the "bad guys" from doing if the captives are uncooperative.


6. The captives  may blame  some of their captors and exonerate the others.   Depending  on which  set they  are able to identify with, they may hold that "their leaders forced them to do it," or conversely, that  "their leaders  don't know  the terrible things they are doing."

7. Finally, it has been seen that captors too are influenced by the interaction of personalities.  They are rarely able to retain their ruthlessness  if they come into contact with and learn that their  captives   are  also   human  beings   with  problems  and aspirations.   To this  end, they  may seek to isolate themselves from their  captives.  It goes without saying that they can never communicate their limitations to their captives; never admitting, for example,  that the  "explosives" they  brandish are  made  of rubber instead of dynamite!"


Ok.... as a teen everything is magnified. Every situation, thought, and feeling is blown out of porportion. As an adult reading this, there is no way I feel these things apply. Then I think back to the fact that everything is blown up in my mind as a teen and any little thing is traumatizing and I can see how it would fit for a teenage mind. I do remember being horrified and scared and trying to figure out how to comply. I just remember the day I couldnt tell if I was conforming or it was just 'who I was'. I went with it. TADA! Here I am today, 30 years old, and still questioning reality.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline poncho

  • Posts: 6
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Loyalty to John/MMS and Stockholm Syndrome
« Reply #4 on: May 01, 2006, 10:32:00 PM »
Quote
Ok.... as a teen everything is magnified. Every situation, thought, and feeling is blown out of porportion. As an adult reading this, there is no way I feel these things apply. Then I think back to the fact that everything is blown up in my mind as a teen and any little thing is traumatizing and I can see how it would fit for a teenage mind. I do remember being horrified and scared and trying to figure out how to comply. I just remember the day I couldnt tell if I was conforming or it was just 'who I was'. I went with it. TADA! Here I am today, 30 years old, and still questioning reality.

"


This has nothing to do with a teenage mind magnifying anything. Ask some level headed adults who had to deal with him.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +2/-1
    • View Profile
Loyalty to John/MMS and Stockholm Syndrome
« Reply #5 on: May 01, 2006, 10:43:00 PM »
I am just saying that as an adult I can see how people would justify it as, " teenagers magnify everything". As you read what I was writing I go on to mention that as an adult it is easy for us to look back and chalk it up to just being a kid. I distinctly remember the fear. I had nightmares for years, and still have them from time to time about being sent back
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »