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
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43029928/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa/
This blows me away. A guy in Iran threw acid in a woman’s face for refusing to marry him. He is being sentenced to have the same done to him – BY HER. Read the article, very interesting.
Interesting that a woman is being treated as an equal in their culture,
I’m glad to read about that part… the thought of the whole thing freaks me out.
very barbaric, old old ways of being in the world, but it may save many women’s lives. I would like to read her boo, though. I wonder how it would speak to us here at lf.
I know very little about Islam, but this ruling suggests that the inequity of men an women and systemic abuse of women is cultural and not religious.
From what I’ve heard, the abuse of women is cultural and religious. I am planning on finding out more about the religion cuz I don’t know a lot about about Islam either. I am not surprised about the guy in Iran getting sentenced to acid on the face because the culture of several different countries in that region is that the practice the whole “eye for an eye” thing. I heard that if someone steals they’ll cut off his arm. I know a guy from Iran who is a young doctor. He is hilarious-not like someone I would expect from there. He is the typical class clown-someone who was always getting written up by my psycho boss for being too loud and inappropriate. The patients loved him. He and his fiancee have both lived here for awhile they are pretty wild. Evidently the young Persians are big party people-they like to have a good time. A patient asked him where he was from one time and he said “the axis of evil” (nod to GW Bush) and the patient was cracking up on the table and said “thanks, now I’m not so nervous anymore since you made me laugh”.
One/Joy, I’d like to expand on your comments above.
I agree entirely about the inequity of women in the Muslim world being more cultural than religious, but like many cultures, it is VALIDATED by the “strict” interpretation of the seventh century religious writings.
The Jewish culture at the times the Bible was written was somewhat unequal of women and some social groups, and very male oriented, but Jesus in his teachings commanded the men to “love your wives as yourselves” even though the male was still “head of the household” THIS WAS A COMPLETELY NEW CONCEPT for that day and age. “Love” in this case mean to ACT TOWARD the women, not just the romantic “love”—-children were to “obey your parents IN THE LORD” In otherwords in the things that were legal and good….fathers were cautioned to not “provoke your children to wrath” (vengeful anger, i.e. be fair to them) and “bring them up in the NURTURE AND ADMONITION of the Lord.” Corporal punishment was acceptable at that time up to and including killing a disobedient child….so this also was a NEW CONCEPT in the Christian teachings versus the old Law of Moses teachings.
Christ’s stopping the stoning of the woman caught in Adultery was also a NEW CONCEPT….notice the man was not being stoned. the concept of MERCY and forgiving enemies taught by Christ was 180 degrees away from the culture of the time. The concept of “lusting” (thinking) being equal to actually committing adultery was another new concept entirely.
So, over time, most Jewish cultures have changed and the religion with them, but due to the fact that the Muslim world has stayed pretty illiterate and pastoral and with the “strict” interpretation backing up the CULTURAL norms, the inequity toward women and servants has continued with a 7th century mentality.
Look at our “Christian” ancestors and their CULTURE that was validated by the “church’s” interpretation of the flat world, burning folks at the stake for not adhering to the CULTURAL interpretation of the “religion” etc. every one of us I think has had some ancestor that was burned at the stake for their non-mainstream religion, AND we have also had another ancestor that LIT THE FIRE. So even western culture has only given the women the vote in the last few decades, given them property rights, taken away the “right” of a man to beat women with a stick the thickness of their thumbs….and so on.
Even with our “enlightened” thinking and “freedom of religion” in our current “culture”—there are still hold overs of the old “culture” that goes back to the DAWN OF MANKIND OF THE STRONG RULES OVER THE WEAKER and that men are superior to women, or that women are chattel property.
I’m reading a book now written by a woman who wrote about her family from the points of view of social change in China (she started out as a child of a Communist believer) and she now lives in the west…but she talked about how women were CHATTELS without any rights as far as the males were concerned, were given as concubines (her grandmother) and even when Mao (for a while) preached equity for women, it was NOT SO in practice. She did a really really good job of showing how the Chinese culture de-humanized women. So I don’t think the Muslim religion being used as VALIDATION for this cultural thing of dehumanizing women is anything “new”—it is just that our culture which has changed SOME is now becoming MORE AWARE of what is going on with the culture of the Middle East. OUR AWARENESS IS INCREASING due to the media and the greater communication.
The rabidly angry Muslims see western culture as trying to take away and lure away their CULTURE of inequity of women and men. They use their religion to validate their culture.
That “Pastor Jones” who is a rabid “christian” (notice the SMALL C) is doing the same thing. I think that man is a psychopath, or maybe just a narcissistic nut job, but he is using his interpretation of “religion” to validate his nut-job hate-filled opinions to attack others…just like the Muslims are. Just two sides of the same coin.
Any person who is using their “religion” for justification of persecution of others is in my opinion either psychopathicly using their “religion” for validation of their “right” to ABUSE others, or they are nut jobs to start with. BUT…it isn’t the religion, it is the cultural or opinion they are trying to validate with “religion.”
Good point, One.
C,
Well I haven’t “looked him up” in years. I had to do that because people need closure. He loved the fact that I was in a state of uncertainty. That is a place where if we don’t have answers it can really mess with our heads and being a psychologist he knew that. Over the years I have also used dreams and spirit journeys to get the answers the coward refused to give me.
You are right about burning the trunk but that’s exactly what he would want me to do right ? In his country, social strata is highly regarded and don’t you think it bugs the crap out of him that lil ol me has a trunk full of damning evidence against the venerable Dr. O’ Shit Head (and photos too)? ..the best karma of all… 🙂 LOL Haha hee hee…
I am surprised that people still give their beloved a lock of hair. AMAZING! I had one of his too but I let it go into the river where we used to walk. I had a ritual “funeral” for him and that was so very helpful. At the time of our breakup I had no clue that I was duped. It was just recently over this past year since I have been on LF that I put it all together.
He is lucky I did not use it for Voodoo!! Haha…
I respected and honored him but I had to respect and honor myself first.
I often wondered what he did with my letters. They probably are pre turf in an Irish landfill.. They live on in Eire!!
Glad to hear you met a beautiful lady. I have had several partners since him some good some, well here I am on LF!! I have been pretty messed up. I have no doubt that when it is my time I will meet someone special. I have had ten years of amazing healing and finding my Path, and I know I will be ready!
Take Care.
Actually of the religions that originated in the sickle of fertility, Islam is the one that admonishes the most rights to women: the right to posses chattel, have a business and to ask for divorce.
Men are supposed to be equally virtuous as the women, when it comes to staying virgins, in glancing away from women to show respect, etc…
As for litereral interpretations: the Koran is written in Arabic by Allah himself, and no translation is supposed to do it justice. Most common folk (like Berbers) who live outside cities, barely know Arabic, let alone be able to read it. As with the orginal Hebrew scriptures for the new testament, as well as the old that is shared with the Talmud, the language is interprable. There is as little “literal” interpretation possible as there is for the Bible linguistically speaking.
So, yes, basically the inequity is culturally based, and varies from tribe to tribe, and the Koran is interpreted in a way to support and rationalize the abuse. Sharia is what often is referred to as Islamic code of laws. But it’s a code where both laws from the Koran are taken (and interpreted of course), but also based on the example of hte life of the Prophet Mohammed, and secondary sources of religious scholars. There is a big difference in interpretation whether Sunnih or Shia, and many tribe members believe eronously their own tirbal laws are according to Sharia.
So, basically, if you were to travel the Islamic countries starting in Morocco all the way to the Philipines, you will get highly varied versions of Islam practice.
The practice of throwing acid in faces of women is a rampant issue in India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran. One of the sociological issues in these countries is that because of bridal prices and customs, people prefer to have sons over daughters. Since statistically more sons are born than daughters, the physical neglect of daughters has created a resource problem. Too many men, too few women. Add the fact that men are then also allowed to mary multiple women if they are able to financially take on that responsibility, the shortage in women in these countries is become acute. Since many tribes often also abide shame-killings (murdering a family member, usually female, for shaming and disgracing the family honor), it is
very easy in the culture for men to punish women for not doing what the men expect them to do.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid_throwing
C,
p.s I hate to seem so evil!! If I don’t look at it that way I will continue in the lie that was crafted so “ethereally” if you know what I mean. Yes, the mystique of it all.
Something inside of me wants to believe I am wrong about him but………….
Darwinsmom-thanks for that post. It gave a lot of info that I didn’t know about-you educated me a little bit. I had the Jehovah’s Witnesses on my doorstep today and I listened to their little speech. They asked if they could come back letter and I politely said no. They were nice ladies though. I usually listen to their speeches cuz I don’t think it’s right that some people are mean to them. I just don’t agree with their religion.