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
I like that expression “I don’t need to borrow trouble”.
While answering your question from last night I used a common nickname for the town I live in that would be easily understood by anyone who lives in our neck of the woods and that, under normal circumstances, wouldn’t raise an eyebrow. But given the context of your previous post I realized that I should have used another term. I doubt you would have thought or even noticed anything, but I didn’t want to take any chances. I know that when I’m trying to talk about really painful sensitive stuff it’s really easy for tiny things to set me off and, considering how difficult the stuff is you were talking about, I just didn’t want to have done that to you, no matter how innocent or innocuous the comment. And I think I was partly triggered myself by how sensitive and difficult the subject matter was and *really* aware how the smallest thing in that situation can start to sidetrack the situation or aggravate someone’s pain.
Plus, I think I was reacting to the fact that quite a few people here seem to have been a bit touchy lately. Pre-friday the 13th jitters perhaps?
So I think I’ll just be quiet for a little while…!
In the meantime, sending hugs one/joy.
See what happens when I leave my browser open for too long? My last response was to One/Joy.
Katy,
You’re right, I was impressed to see how the two of you worked it out, and impressed with your last post “If you’ve read…”.
re: “NOBODY would have ever forgiven me for just saying “Sorry, I didn’t mean it that way.” I certainly hear you there. In my mother’s world saying “I’m sorry” was just the setup for a whole new world of abuse (she DEMANDED it, and yet saw it as a sign of weakness that was another excuse to take you down…). It’s taken me a while to get past that to realize that normal people don’t do that.
My own experience growing up like that was that I never got appropriate feedback (by appropriate I mean feedback with no MF in it) to learn when I had genuinely – no matter how inadvertantly – transgressed someone’s boundaries, and so never got to learn those lessons. When you responded to Kim I could hear that there was something going on for you which sounded like it might have been a trigger. I guess I was trying to say, inarticulate as I may have been, that I could see you probably didn’t mean to hurt anyone, but that my first reaction was the same one Kim had.
I hope you’re well. And now I really AM going to be quiet for a while. Night everyone, hope you all survived the 13th safe and sound!
Ox, I must have missed something about the Irish sheep analogy being offensive?? What?? it was damn good!
I’ve been waiting to say something about the posts here and how we misunderstand. I did not want to be the one to start it because I am a newbie and I am still treading softly. Last week ( or maybe early this week, CRS!) yes I was VERY pissed because the very core of who I am was being questioned and I felt like I was being singled out. I was very offended by that comment.
Sometimes certain phrases are used here on LF that ARE triggering. Ex: I have something to say about that but I will tell you later 😉 ya know crap like that. I know that some posters email back and forth and it doesn’t take a genius to figure they SOME are prolly getting pretty snarky when off line. Pisses me off seems so sophomoric.
But thank you for encouraging me to LET IT GO and move on.
I am soooo happy that today’s (or was it yesterday’s?) issue was cleared up in such an adult manner. Communication/dialogue leads to peace. BRAVO LADIES!!!:)
Because we tend to get triggered so easy I am trying to re read posts before I ASSUME they are snarky. BUT I have learned enough from you to “say what we need to say”. Well yes that is John Mayer YUK!! but you know what I am trying to say I hope. That we need to be assertive and not doormats.
annie annie annie – so, you were worried that saying you lived in _ _ _ might in some way identify me? i don’t quite understand your above post – but if that’s it, thank you. i actually never worried about the stuff i said about n sire….never occurred to me to be concerned. it’s only ever been the spath i was worried about.
i have taken a number of steps, and actions lately that show me that my concern about her has greatly reduced. and that makes me feel really glad.
it’s beautiful and warm here tonight. but the bedroom i am stuck in because of the noisy db upstairs is hot, and not lovely and warm. people are roaming about tonight outdoors- and i have so much anxiety, because i just want to have an early night.
just to claify Ox, when you said to to “let it go”, it was in a post about me forgiving those who suspect others of being spaths and “seeing spaths behind every bush”.. Don’t want anyone to think we were dissing anyone offline…
we need each other here. Where I come from we have “divide and conquer” in our roots and it is a horrible way to go. We cannot let our differences divide us.
Good night everyone!
Adamsrib,
No – definitely not a miner! I’m a Philosophy teacher, but not doing that at the moment: too disillusioned with the state of American Ed. to continue down that path. (But I still work with kids in various capacities.) I”ve been on night shift for several years, but otherwise I’d better not be too specific – just in case!
I understand. I knew you must be an educator. Thanks for indulging my curiosity!
🙂
Constantine,
To answer your question about did he give her the same song and dance he gave me: I can’t say after all these years-I don’t remember the details just that he has been back with his wife for years now and they have a new child (that they didn’t have when we were together). He did not have the bollocks (or he didn’t think it was important) to tell me that.
Instead, he made up a story about his “partner”. Turns out he is back with the wife he claimed to detest. Their phone records show they are still in the same house!! Oh the internet is a wonderful tool 🙂 And exes that holiday in Spain!!
She and I still email on occasion and she gives me the dirt!! hee hee…
“What an first class ass indeed” is right on my friend.
G’nite and safe home.
Adamsrib,
One of these days I think it might do you good to make a bonfire of that trunk of love-letters. Now that all the mystique is gone (and I sometimes think that’s what hurts the most – realizing that the whole thing was just so base and common), it would perhaps be a symbolic way of ridding yourself of his influence forever. With mine, I threw her gross hair (I used to have a locket which she sent me) and poorly-written love letters straight into the garbage can! And I did that the very day that I found out about all the lies! It’s just a suggestion, but I can honestly say that it did me a world of good. I also met a beautiful lady after her, and didn’t want to have so much as a symbolic tie with the past falsehood.
And stop looking him up on Google! (haha)
Good night to you too, AR.