Reviewed by Joyce Alexander, RNP (retired)
Cold-Blooded Kindness: Neuroquirks of a Codependent Killer, or Just Give Me a Shot at Loving You, Dear, and Other Reflections on Helping That Hurts is the tongue-in-cheek title of this book by Barbara Oakley, with a foreword by David Sloan Wilson. It belies the serious research and investigation done by this remarkable, highly educated and acclaimed woman.
Oakley is associate professor of engineering at Oakland University in Michigan, and her work focuses mainly on the complex relationship between neurocircuitry and social behavior. The list of her varied experiences reads like fiction ”¦ she worked for several years as a Russian language translator on Soviet fishing trawlers in the Bearing Sea during the height of the Cold War. She met her husband while working as a radio operator at the South Pole station in Antarctica. She went from private to Regular Army captain in the U.S. military, and is also a fellow of the American Institute of Medical and Biological Engineering.
In Cold-Blooded Kindness, along with a project called Pathological Altruism (forthcoming book by the same name this year), Oakley was investigating if altruism could be taken to the extreme and become pathological and harmful.
Some “researchers” have, for what they thought was the “greater good,” slanted their research to show what they believed was an altruistic motive. For example, many people have heard about the “battered woman syndrome,” and how it is now incorporated into laws in many states as a mitigating factor in cases where women wound or kill the men who have battered (or supposedly battered) them. What isn’t known, though, is that the “research” into this “syndrome” was badly flawed. The researcher was a woman who was so intent on doing the “greater good” of protecting abused women, that her altruism caused her to slant her studies, and anyone who pointed out that her research was suspect, was in fact, “blaming the victim,” and therefore, evil.
Oakley points out that she started to seek out a person who appeared to be altruistic to the point that it became harmful, but her own research led her to see the situation differently than she had planned.
She started investigating a Utah woman and artist named Carole Alden, who had “been abused” and had killed that abusive husband, Marty Sessions. But the book really isn’t so much about Alden murdering Sessions, for which she ended up in prison, but about how Carole Alden, though presenting herself as the ultimate altruist (rescuing animals and people), was instead, the ultimate abuser.
The examination of the human brain, and the social interactions of children, and the development of empathy and altruism in children, are explored. Both the social and the genetic aspects of these are gone into in depth.
Oakley explores “co-dependency” and “enabling” behaviors and calls for more actual research into these areas, especially concerning possible sex hormone links and to genetics. She also points out while little, if any, real research has been done on “battered women syndrome,” and it is not accepted in the DSM-IV, it is accepted in many state statutes.
Oakley never comes out and actually says Carole Alden is a psychopath (though the word is used and described in the book itself), but Oakley’s book describes Carole Alden’s behavior relative to the Psychopathic Check List-Revised. It shows that while Carole presented herself to others as a victim of circumstances, and as altruistic to the nth degree, she was, in fact, a controlling, manipulative, using, abusing, pathological liar, who took in dozens, if not hundreds, of stray animals. She cared for them poorly in most cases, but better than she cared for her own children.
It is also possible that Carole is a serial killer, as there are two other deaths of men she was involved with that were “suspicious” in their very nature.
When Oakley was corresponding with Carole Alden, she was convinced by the letters that Carole Alden was the personality she was seeking for her thesis of “altruism gone too far,” and that Carole was indeed the victim of this. Upon meeting Carole though, in prison, Oakley began to see the real situation. When she investigated the family, the crime, the real history of Carole Alden, not just the self-serving tales of how everyone abused her, Oakley began to see the malignancy. Carole changed her story, came to believe her own lies, and slanted all aspects of “truth,” even in the face of evidence to the contrary.
Not only is this a history of one pathological woman who murdered one man and possibly more, and who abused and neglected her children, it is about the personality disordered in general who present themselves as victims, when in fact, they are at best—co-victims/co-abusers with their partners.
Oakley is not “blaming” legitimate victim, but seeking to find the common thread in some partners (women and men) who participate to one degree or another with the abuse they endure. She is seeking a way to educate and warn these people so that the abuse can be prevented.
While Carole Alden took in a series of ex-convict men, who were addicts, to “cure” and “fix” them, which appeared to be altruistic in nature, in fact, it was anything but altruistic. It supplied Carole with her “professional victim” and “professional altruistic” persona that she was seeking to establish. What caused this in Carole, when her parents and other siblings were apparently normal and highly functioning members of society?
I tend to underline and highlight important passages in my books as I read, and I finally gave up trying with this book, as the first 100 pages are almost all day-glow yellow.
This is a highly readable book, and I am anxiously awaiting the arrival of one of Oakley’s previous books. I will also be one of the first in line to buy her upcoming one Pathological Altruism. I highly recommend that anyone who is seriously trying to figure out how we (former victims) are alike, and how the fake altruism of some psychopaths works, read this book.
Cold-Blooded Kindness on Amazon.com
AR,
Good for you that you signed up for the ballroom dance class! – I hope you meet some nice people there. If nothing else, it has to be an improvement of the types you were bumping into at the fitness club!
Constantine,
I enjoyed the brief late night boredom relieving debate we had. I wanted to leave you with a few things to check out:
http://youtu.be/wBoMjORwA-4
http://youtu.be/6JONMYxaZ_s
http://www.quirkology.com/USA/Video_ColourChangingTrick.shtml
OneJoy,
Allowing ourselves to see the truth about a close relative or lover is hard. For you to acknowledge what you saw… that couldn’t have been easy. The pieces of the puzzle just fall into place if we stop refusing to see the big picture.
Regarding your question about spaths and peds…
good question and I appreciated all the interesting ways people have of seeing this. It’s particularly interesting that people are differentiating between a genetic spath and a spath abused into it. Really, why or how does anyone make such a differentiation? By most accounts, most people would not see me as having been abused because my parents were covert narcs. Even I didn’t know until I read about it. And genetics, again, are still a mystery.
So my take is: lets define the word psychopath and sociopath.
The etymology of those words are “soul-suffering” and “society-suffering”. Which means that they either cause destruction of a soul or destruction toward society. When a person sexually abuses a child, they are destructive to the soul of that child. And an offense against a child’s soul offends the society which must live with that child in the future.
I’m overweight and I have remorse after I eat cheese. But when I see that delicious Wasabi Cheese in front of me, I rationalize that this one time won’t make me fatter. there will be no harm done. LIES. I lie to myself. When I step on the scale I have remorse. I ONLY have remorse because of the consequences, which I should know will be there, but my urge for cheese… etc… If I didn’t get “caught” getting fatter on the scale, I would have no remorse. In fact, I’d be quite pleased with myself because I got to have my cheese and eat it too (like I used to when I was young)
A pedophile’s remorse is just “sorry I got caught because of the damage I did”. It had no regard for the human being that was intended by God to be the best that he/she could be. It only wanted it’s own gratification. No matter how much I like cheese, I’d never harm another person for it, I’d only harm myself.
This may not apply to people like my spath, whom I believe, his entire intention is to destroy innocence. He doesn’t rationalize that no harm will be done. Instead, I think, he rationalizes that the innocent child should not have that innocence because he has none, so why should the child?
Interestingly, one of his friends told me that when spath talked about molesting a young girl, spath referred to the girl as “it”. *sigh* so many tells! I think, that the spath is an “it” and “it” projects its “itness” onto its victims. Or maybe, it refers to its victims as it because it attacks both male and female.
Me too Blogger! – though last night was the first time I’ve had Internet access at home, so I’m just getting used to that! And thanks so much for that great link: I’ve always been fascinated by the dynamics of perception and memory. – It reminds me of a book I read not long ago called “Stumbling on Happiness”, which dealt with similar themes.
Sky, you have an interesting take on many things, including how socios revel in the destruction of innocence. I enjoy hearing your thoughts!
Okay, now I really have to get to sleep: I’m a part-time insomniac and was up until almost twelve noon today!
Annie,
I work for a community services board (CSB) and employees are required to take The Mandt System training, learning different holds to place on clients who may become aggressive. So far, I have never had to use any of the holds, the clients not usually getting out of hand. Your college roommate may have learned this program.
Skylar,
You’ve confused an spath to have the character trait of compassion or empathy (the ability to value someone as male/female). When spaths refer to a HUMAN as “it”, they are revealing what they thinking, that “it” is an object to be USED as an object or tool, as in the victim you wrote about was used for sexual gratification by a child rapist.
Interesting that one of the recommended ways to survive being murdered is to get your assailant to see you as HUMAN, to call you by name, to know personal HUMAN details. Makes it harder for them to Murder. BUT, as you can imagine, not possible with an spath. Remember: to spaths ALL people are “it”, but in order to scam “play the game”, they have learned to use other nouns instead of “IT”.
And, in an earlier post, I was dismayed to read someone dismissing their siblings assertionof childhood sexual molestation b/c that sibling was spath or “the crazy one”. Remember child rape or abuse was done to a CHILD, not to an spath. That they grew up into being an spath is a different aspect. Hopefully we’ve learned on here that many of us were portrayed by spaths and their minions as “the crazy one” esp when we objected to or revealed abuse done to us. I am not saying you have to believe an adult spath, I am saying let’s not be “LIKE THEM” in their dismissing abuse and rape as made up b/c we’re “the crazy ones”.
katy – don’t know if you are refering to my post (re dismissing abuse), but something i didn’t say is that my sib is an n; and that her take on reality has always been delusional. and the other thing you need to know – i come from a history of exposing sexual predators, including others in my family. this situation is more complex than, ‘of course she was telling the truth, because she told.’
BloggerT, Thanks for the links. I must admit that I did not notice any of the changes in any of the videos. I had a sort of a sensation, or an intuitive “feeling” that something was slightly “off”, though.
How do Psychologists explain this blindness to change? I was absolutely amazed when I watched the Gorilla video, that I had been hood-winked into NOT seeing the gorilla….a magicians trick, distraction….directing your attention away from their true intention….they engage your vanity. They challenge you to “pay close attention, because there will be a quiz later” and we, understanding that we are highly intellegent people feel the need to prove it to ourselves and desire to come away with very high scores….in the mean-
time we are duped and fail miserably.
I think the spath’s operate in the same way. Eventually we do see them, though. Then they are like the wizard of Oz…Frantically pleading with Dorthey and company, that they pay no attention to the little man behind the curtain….the powerful Oz has spoken.
Once you see the man behind the curtain, you will never get back your faith in Oz.
It’s like those color blind tests, where a number is imbedded on a colorfeild. The number is of a different color, but it takes you awhile to SEE the number…once You’ve seen the number, you will always, immediatly SEE the number.
Just brain-storming here. It’s kind of fun!!
Did you know the phrase, “having the wool pulled over my eye’s” origenated from Homer’s, “Oedessy”? Oedesius is in the cave with the psyclops, Polyphemis and is being held captive…He blinds P with a hot poker, then ties himself to the under belly of a ram, so that when P allows the flock to leave the cave, running his hands across their wool because he can’t see them. Od is able to escape by being disguised as a ram. When P asks Od who he is, Od answers, “I am nobody”. He does this, so that P is put into a linguistic state of cognitive dissonance, and when he tries to tell his fellow cyclops friends what has happened to him, when they ask, “who hurt you?” his only possible reply is, “nobody hurt me.”
Homer’s Oeddesy is probably the earliest stories ever written, and has it’s origens in the oral tradition. What that means is that it was past down from generation to generation before we even had a written language. It is a culture making blue-print. Not that Od is a spath, but he IS the HERO, and he clearly knows how to manipulate for the sake of power.
That was fun. Thanks for letting me play.
And taking it even furthar, P is the only monster (of many) in the story that is gendered male. Every other monster is female. Do you imagine that that is coincedence. He has only one eye….no depth perception, and can we say myopic…a single point of view…a decidely male one, and maybe that’s why he is so easily fooled….
This is not meant to be “man-bashing” in any way. This is not a critique on maleness. It is meant to chime in on the gender specifics that we previously noted. Men can be fooled, too…and often it is our own preconcieved notions that lead us down the prim rose path…notions about our intelligence, notions about the goodness in people, notions of certainty, and such.
Just sayin”.
One step,
I tried to find the post but didnt’ so I don’t know if it was yours. But what made me sad was it was the same dismissive behavior done to me, that I said I was sexually molested as a child but was dismissed b/c I am the “crazy one” and you can’t believe me.
I am sure your situation is more complex. We could probably compare crazy families into eternity. But I have an spath sister and she tells of being sexually molested. While I won’t let her have any space in my life, I refuse to tell others she made that part up, BECAUSE in my crazy family, such a thing is possible.