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
Well, I am torn. Part of me chooses to be done. Another part does not like conflict, so seeks to resolve it.
My use of the term, “suit yourself” is a pat response I learned in therapy years ago. It is a tool of detachment. It is a way to remind myself to detach from other folks opinions and not allow myself to become emotionally embroilled in my own desire to sway them to my way of thinking.
I realize it is a bit toney. But, sometimes tone is necissary to get a point across. Suppose I did feel a bit angry. Is it your place to try to own that feeling and tell me not to feel it? Perhaps you didn’t mean to imply that my liking of the book showed a rubber-necking lack of empathy, okay…it would have sufficed to just say that, but instead you push the same zapping button by asking ME TO EMPATHIZE WITH YOU. At that very moment any empathy I might have had is superceeded by a feeling of anger at being manipulated. And I should not feel anger.
This sort of thing is the underhanded sort of crazy making thing I’ve lived with for most of my life.
Even this response to you feels goaded. Baited, manipulated.
While I am busy not responding, you are so imploring me to explain so you’ll understand…you are so very sincere.
I might be completely wrong, and this could all be an over reaction, I could be triggered and comp;letely out of line, if so, I apologize, but you are the only one who knows that for sure.
Now, I will detach and get my peacefull back.
also you were mentioning about the abuser referring to his victims as “it”. I have had men refer to me in my hearing like” wow it looks good”. I have heard young men say that about girls “it’s fine” etc. I think this is a societal flaw in certain parts of the American male population. They view women as an EXPERIENCE not as persons.
Only a spath can take it to the extreme level and COMPLETLY dehumanize the victim. We see in history just how often this was done to whole populations. Result=atrocities.
When my x hub was reqruiting for the Navy, he and his croneys refered to the successfully reqruited as “bodys”. They had to have so many bodys a month. There was a quota that had to be met. This depersonalization allowed them to lie, conjole and make false promises without suffering too much guilt about it. It also granted them (on a symbolic level) the power of life and death over the reqruit. If they were able to reqruit them, the reqruit was then dead. A body, but not a person.
I think that when a man is sexually attracted to a woman, he feels an intense awareness of HER power, and to deny this he must objectify her. This, in turn allows him to act without conscious and simply gratify himself.
thanks for explaining Kim.
Yes, when I get a bad reaction, I try to use the communication advice I have been trained for. B/c I am already being misunderstood, I try hard to avoid anything I say being further misunderstood. So it comes out stilted.
The reason I asked for empathy was b/c at that moment, I was reliving my pain of why I don’t read/watch that genre. While you found the book validating, I find it makes me relive TERRIBLE pain, pain where I wanted to die. And my having such pain and responding to your post by explaining that feeling is what made you angry? That confuses me. I was NOT assuming your feelings. I was explaining mine.
So yes, when I get such an opposite response, I do want to know what the other person thinks I said b/c I KNOW my intention and I want to FIX the misunderstanding.
I’m trying to be as correct as I can so probably still read as stilted. Can you tell I have been SO DRILLED by the mindf of an spath who changed entire word meanings and if I got ONE WORD wrong, then the punishment followed? Think maybe I was the one triggered b/c that’s what it felt like with you, that I said SOMETHING WRONG, that I didn’t know what, but I was revealing a very vulnerable pain to you, and got snapped at in reply.
AdamsRib
Do you think spying on aunt/uncle having sex is like a little warning sign? I am thinking it might be seen that way. B/c I would have been grossed out. But maybe he was older when he did the spying and in that case, it really is a red flag. Crosses the incest line too.
Disgusting for a man to mention vagina to a four year old. Totally inappropriate.
Great for you to have that validation that your T098 is a first class Azz. I got my validation about my husband when I read his emails to other women and saw he was gaming them the same as he did me. Same words. So that whole time I was excusing him that he couldn’t know how hurtful his words were? Well it was revealed yes he HAD to know b/c he was doing the same to MULTIPLE women. He was not innocent, he was deliberate.
ps Adamsrib, the love of your life is YOU.
Katy, Thank-you. I want to stress that I did not feel angry because you felt vulnerable and were experiencing your own pain. I can empathize with that pain. I am a sexual abuse sirvivor, too. What I felt angry about was that I immeadiatly wondered if you were making a veiled insult toward me, by implying that some people like to rubber-neck at gorey accidents, and that, to you it seems callous. They like to inject themselves into others trauma.
I was cast into the cognitive dissonance of having to guess what you meant….what your intention was, and how I should react. I dtest that crazyness and disequalibrium. It made me feel angry because I felt covertly attacked. At the same time I was feeling that, you asked me to empathize with you, and that just exacerbated what was going on with me.
I hope we have a better understanding of eachother, now. I’m glad you explained your take on it.
Oh, I just want to add that I don’t generally like victim Lit either, but this book is just so well written, and remember, the narrator does not present herself as victim and thinks of herself as the one in control.
I can’t watch or even listen to those commercials seeking money for animal shelters. They raise in me a sense of horror.
KD yes I do think it crosses the incest line. He went into detail about this favorite uncle who groomed him to be promiscuous, taking him to hookers when he was a young man etc. I researched the voyeurism thing. He was a CHILD! Maybe it’s different with guys but to us girls that is YUK!
All of the studies I read on childhood visual exposure to sex indicated that it is certainly a springboard for child molestation. He bragged how this uncle could still bone much younger women when he was in his 80″s. The apple does not fall too far from the tree. Strange that he loved this uncle and was the only one who provided care for him when he was old and dying. Wonder where all the ‘goddesses” were when Charlie Sheen Sr. passed?
I got the gist that his uncle molested him and he seemed to like it enough to model himself after the perv. And YES it is TOTALLY GROSS to talk to your lady friend about your 4 yo granddaughter’s vajayjay. My first thought was “that little girl should NEVER be left alone with him”. His daughter seems to think he is a good grandpa but who knows what is underneath the tip of that iceberg. Not my problem any more thanks be to GOD!
I like the idea that the love of my life is ME! TOWANDA!!! thanks….
Yes, Kim, the animal shelters commercials get to me too. And the starving sponsor children ones. I always want to help but I know SO many are scams. SO there’s the pain I feel from understanding their starvation and deprivation, and then to be scammed for wanting to help the pain…pain on top of pain.
I had a problem with Oprah books b/c almost all the books she recommended seemed to be that way. I think probably subconsciously Oprah was probably working out her own abuse…. but for those who have NO such history, yes it does seem like that genre of books/films is voyeuristic pornography (thus I equate them to rubber neckers) and I don’t understand the people who find such pain to be entertainment. (NOT the same as people who find it resonates and comforts them)
Does that makes sense?
adamsrib, I am so envious of your ballroom dance classes. I love to watch it on tv. I think my fav is the quick-step.
My mom taught ball-room dance way back around the time of WW2, and she met my dad at a dance. She said that it was the way they danced together that made her fall in love with him.
My dad taught me how to waltz when I was 4 yaers old by putting a peice of newspaper on the floor and having me step on the 4 corners, waltz style. My whole family would break out in dance, on occasion. We would push back the chairs and move the coffee table out of the way and dance to, “String of Paerls, or Carmen Miranda singing, “Jumbilia”.
Good fond memorys.
I took Ballet and Tap for 5 years, in my child-hood and really loved it.
They have free ball-room lessons for children, here, ages 6 and up. I would love for my Grandaughter to get involved in that. I have a hunch that her mom will put her in gymnastics, though, so she can get her started in cheer-leading…(my daughters thing.)
What do you all think about the fancy, glittery, and skimppy ballroom dance gowns worn by these little dancers? They also wear a lot of make-up. Do you think it’s different than the beauty pageant thing, or is it the same. I’m curious. I hate the pageant thing, but this
feeeeels different to me, somehow.
Interestingly enough I have heard that the SPCA commercials which want you to donate so much a month do not give any of that money to local shelters at all…may be true maybe not, but I don’t donate to large orgainzations any more because I really don’t want my money to go to flying their CEOs around the country in a private jet and paying them big salaries….I give to the smaller groups that I KNOW, or to individuals directly.
Those “starving children” and “starving animals” commercials are an attempt to hit into your guilt and make you want to send money to these people. They are effective. But, just like a lot of the “ministers” (tele-evangilists) who live in $1-10 MILLION DOLLAR ESTATES and get on TV and get the little old ladies on welfare and social security to send money to “spread the word”—-or that jack ass preacher that drives the BENTLEY and sends pictures of him posing to young men….I will not send these people ONE DIME. Hey folks, Jesus didn’t own a home, much less a multi-million dollar one, and He didn’t pay the chief of his “security” $100K a year….so that the guy decided to kill his wife and kids so he wouldn’t get fired and could marry his mistress. LOL So I figure if Jesus didn’t live in a multi-million dollar palace anyone who says they are following Jesus and does live in that kind of palace, is LYING THROUGH THEIR TEETH.
I don’t have a problem with a minister being “supported” but I don’t think they should live like a “sports star” either—well, actually I don’t think “sports stars” should get zillions of dollars a year either, but I digress…..