User Tag List

First 91718192021 Last

Results 181 to 190 of 229

  1. #181
    darkened dreams labyrinthine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    isfp
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    8,595

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmotini View Post
    I just think people are misunderstanding what I see in her eyes. I mentioned way earlier in the thread if this was an Se or Ne issue or what, but to me her eyes more clearly resemble the flatness you see in Ted Bundy's brown eyes as an adult, not in your Autistic child's large blue eyes, nor in Katy Perry's.

    It's a quality of flatness and meanness that she appears to not have completely lost as an adult. I don't think my observation calls for all of this bruhaha and mockery in this thread, as if what I said was outrageous.

    It turned from a thread about a child with violent tendencies who underwent a questionable treatment that has been rejected by many others and the distinct possibility that as an intelligent sociopath she would be bright enough to "pass" as "normal" to the peril of others, that may include children in her care...into some exaggerated argument about the rights of people with disorders to not be judged.
    My impression of the comments regarding the issue with the eyes is that most people are interpreting it in a much more general sense of being "cold, distant, unusual" etc. there is also a fear that if the principle of judging someone based on the eyes becomes the norm, that even if your perceptions are more specific, that in principle it is a problem to draw judgments this way because people are often wrong. I see something very different in her eyes, although rigorously second guess it. The fakeness in her expression stands out in contrast to all the other pics submitted in this thread. Appearing distant, unusual, or even cold isn't the same thing as the calculating fakeness of her smile. What struck me the most in many of the contrasting pics of children who are neuro-atypical is the pure authenticity of their gaze.
    Step into my metaphysical room of mirrors.
    Fear of reality creates myopic morality
    So I guess it means there is trouble until the robins come
    (from Blue Velvet)

  2. #182
    Strongly Ambivalent Ivy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6
    Posts
    24,060

    Default

    Some posts have been deleted due to insults and quotes/references to them.

  3. #183
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,628

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    I agree that most people don't suspect the psychopaths among us, and it would take a great deal of effort to be that vigilant. My comment addressed the idea of premeditation vs. seeking instant gratification. I think the more premeditated and patient a psychopath is, the harder to detect and defend against him/her.
    Hmm, yes, I do believe that perhaps is true, for instance someone who slowly poisons colleagues or patients with medicine, like two cases in the UK I can think of, one being a nurse doing so and another being a Dr administering lethal amounts of painkillers, would be harder to detect than someone using a more obvious means.

    I am just wary of building up these individuals to be superhuman, most of them are less than human. Truly intelligent people can find ways to channel their personal growth or assuage boredom or whatever without hurting unsuspecting or unwary others.

  4. #184
    Let me count the ways Betty Blue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    7W6 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEE
    Posts
    4,797

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmotini View Post
    I've checked out some other web sites about Beth Thomas, on one forum I found another person who said that they noticed not only Beth's eyes, but that the eyes of children diagnosed like her are all chillingly the same.
    Oh yes, i posted a link to an interesting thread where the trail of thought followed a 'very' similar trend, maybe the same one you saw.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmotini View Post
    Attachment Disorder is a made up term, just FYI. Attachment disorder can be used to explain ANY dysfunctional pattern of bonding, running the gamut from being non-communicative to hostile to overly attention seeking or too trusting of strangers with inappropriately infantile behavior. It is not a real disorder *alone* it is simply a state that is indicative of many different states of so-called dysfunctional bonding, whether this was with one abusive care giver, or simply having many care givers (none of which who were abusive).
    Yes and i think there has been confusion in this thread for that very reason. I myself was confused. I did find one article that stated Beth displayed Psychopathy/Sociopathy but because of her age was diagnosed with the above term, aparently there is an age restriction for the specific diagnosis.


    Quote Originally Posted by Marmotini View Post
    SOOOO....

    And this form of "therapy" is widely criticized as being a form of child abuse. To me it more or less looks like Behaviorism, that is, modifying behavior without actually changing the internal state. And without the internal state being changed, it's highly possible that a sociopath could learn simply how to behave better but be inwardly calculating after receiving the "therapy" (part of the reason for my skepticism with Beth).

    Yes another reason for a lot of confusion in this thread. There are different types of very similar named therapies, but which are very different in practise... as this was televised a lot of people initially thought (although it did feel 'off' to most, enough to warrent further investigation) this to be a bonefied therapy. I'm pretty sure that's what happened with Vas, i can not imagine Vas ever condoning things like holding therapy... but the way the documentary was presented did not indicate clearly enough what was really happening. I imagine Vas may know, or have heard of, of a similarly named therapy.


    Quote Originally Posted by Marmotini View Post
    I know of people who work with disturbed or abused children, and all who are abused do not act like Beth, so there is some neurological component here most likely, hence the eye thing.
    I think though marm that there are also children who are abused that do act like Beth (as small children) who are able to change. Maybe this is where we differ so greatly. I read a book called 'one child' by Hayden where there is a very similar child with very similar abuse pattern and behaviour. It's a true story and the outcome is not all rosy but it does indicate (so far as i understandand remember) a child who grew out of these behaviours and thoughts.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmotini View Post
    If I was to come in here and post photographs of adult serial killers and comment on their wild or cold eyes, no one would probably bat an eyelash, but because I dared to say it about a child, hence forth a bunch of bullshit drama.
    Maybe on confirmed serial killers. But i think we just don't have the evidence to say it with Beth, i don't doubt she is capable but i can't say either if she is 'better'... that's my quandry.


    Quote Originally Posted by Marmotini View Post
    It's funny to me that people were so critical of my opinion, but didn't criticize Vasilisa or Rasofy in the same manner, even as she and he sit here and advocate a form of therapy that some people consider a form of severe systematic child abuse.
    I think it's more your delivery than opinion, you came in pretty strong and sometimes come across quite aggressive. I think often you have some incredibly valid points which can be lost amidst the force with which you covey them.

    I honestly don't think Rasofy or Vas had fully grasped exactly what type of therapy she was receiving at the time of posting, and neither had most of us at that same point until we dug further.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmotini View Post
    I do believe that spotting the cruel and sociopathic is possible, and I am even further convinced that I am right, since people seemed to blatantly misunderstand what I was seeing in the first place (strangely comparing people with the same color of eyes, instead of the same expression or quality in the eyes).
    I think there might be something to that but it's not conclusive. I can think of many situations where i'd rather go with your gut instinct on people than my own as you seem to have a keen natural alertness/awareness to you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post

    There are actually two problems here: (1) how Beth was abused as a small child; and (2) the appropriateness of her treatment once she was removed from that situation. The cure may have been worse than the disease.
    I was contemplating a third. It's more out there but lets face it the whole thing is pretty out there. We are dealing with a documentary filmed and televised about a child receiving a therapy which is now known to be abusive in nature. There are still many people watching this vid and thinking this child benefited from the therapy.

    So anyway, what if we go one step futher, deeper. What if the scenario is that this child having displayed 'some' violent tendancies has been selected as a candidate to mold and use for the purpose of marketing and advocating this therapy. What if this child had only displayed a fraction of these reported incidents and really is being coached into saying those things in interview.

    We could say oh that would never happen things have to be checked vetted etc etc but i think it has already been proven that it's possible to show abusive therapy in a positive light and have it televised and have thousands of people sing it's praises on false grounds.
    "We knew he was someone who had a tragic flaw, that's where his greatness came from"

  5. #185
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HelenOfTroy View Post
    Oh yes, i posted a link to an interesting thread where the trail of thought followed a 'very' similar trend, maybe the same one you saw.



    Yes and i think there has been confusion in this thread for that very reason. I myself was confused. I did find one article that stated Beth displayed Psychopathy/Sociopathy but because of her age was diagnosed with the above term, aparently there is an age restriction for the specific diagnosis.





    Yes another reason for a lot of confusion in this thread. There are different types of very similar named therapies, but which are very different in practise... as this was televised a lot of people initially thought (although it did feel 'off' to most, enough to warrent further investigation) this to be a bonefied therapy. I'm pretty sure that's what happened with Vas, i can not imagine Vas ever condoning things like holding therapy... but the way the documentary was presented did not indicate clearly enough what was really happening. I imagine Vas may know, or have heard of, of a similarly named therapy.




    I think though marm that there are also children who are abused that do act like Beth (as small children) who are able to change. Maybe this is where we differ so greatly. I read a book called 'one child' by Hayden where there is a very similar child with very similar abuse pattern and behaviour. It's a true story and the outcome is not all rosy but it does indicate (so far as i understandand remember) a child who grew out of these behaviours and thoughts.



    Maybe on confirmed serial killers. But i think we just don't have the evidence to say it with Beth, i don't doubt she is capable but i can't say either if she is 'better'... that's my quandry.




    I think it's more your delivery than opinion, you came in pretty strong and sometimes come across quite aggressive. I think often you have some incredibly valid points which can be lost amidst the force with which you covey them.

    I honestly don't think Rasofy or Vas had fully grasped exactly what type of therapy she was receiving at the time of posting, and neither had most of us at that same point until we dug further.



    I think there might be something to that but it's not conclusive. I can think of many situations where i'd rather go with your gut instinct on people than my own as you seem to have a keen natural alertness/awareness to you.



    I was contemplating a third. It's more out there but lets face it the whole thing is pretty out there. We are dealing with a documentary filmed and televised about a child receiving a therapy which is now known to be abusive in nature. There are still many people watching this vid and thinking this child benefited from the therapy.

    So anyway, what if we go one step futher, deeper. What if the scenario is that this child having displayed 'some' violent tendancies has been selected as a candidate to mold and use for the purpose of marketing and advocating this therapy. What if this child had only displayed a fraction of these reported incidents and really is being coached into saying those things in interview.
    Well I voiced my opinion, and then others wanted to debate my opinion, and I have more of a Gamma than Delta way of expressing myself, in that I often speak with very clear assertiveness if I find something to either be Te factual or an Fi value of mine. I also find that this forum has some kind of "conditioning" effect on me where I automatically come across as more aggressive here than on any other web site I visit, and I think that has to do with early trauma here of being bullied by domineering members of the forum who acted like if I did not speak in an aggressive tone, that I should GTFO.

    That being said, I believe I said something to Fia along the lines of "I know this sounds terrible but..." so I didn't just say "hey that kid is satan."

    No one has to engage with me or challenge my opinion, but if they do, I am more than happy to argue with them, though they're going to get what they asked for and not:



    My opinion on this matter isn't going to come across as "politically correct" because I'm very clear on what I see in this child's expression...and I strongly disagree with you, Vas seemed to be completely supportive of this kind of therapy and the conclusion that a child could be healed by it.

    Just like if someone yells something doesn't automatically mean they're right, if someone says something "nicely" enough it doesn't mean they're right, either, it just means they're trying to be polite, and a lot of people are swayed by politeness rather than facts or reason.

    I do probably go on gut instinct in some ways in a more reliable manner, and it may just be a difference in what forms of perception and judgment have served you best in life.

    On the other hand, yes, I'm going to become frustrated and seem irritable if I see people speculating about a bunch of garbage that isn't based in psychiatry or psychology, and is more trailing off into socially conditioned responses such as "but it's just a child" and "wait people said my kids eyes are strange too."

    Other people in this thread said things like they wouldn't like Beth to baby-sit their children, suggested that she may use needles on her patients in a sadistic manner given her childhood habits, or that if she wasn't a sociopath before the treatment, she is one now.

    But I say I think she has a socipath's eyes and all of a sudden everyone freaks out. What that says to me is this is Fe ethical conditioning, perhaps, or some kind of off-topic emotional response based on false comparisons to one's own loved ones.

  6. #186
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,556

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HelenOfTroy View Post
    I was contemplating a third. It's more out there but lets face it the whole thing is pretty out there. We are dealing with a documentary filmed and televised about a child receiving a therapy which is now known to be abusive in nature. There are still many people watching this vid and thinking this child benefited from the therapy.

    So anyway, what if we go one step futher, deeper. What if the scenario is that this child having displayed 'some' violent tendancies has been selected as a candidate to mold and use for the purpose of marketing and advocating this therapy. What if this child had only displayed a fraction of these reported incidents and really is being coached into saying those things in interview.

    We could say oh that would never happen things have to be checked vetted etc etc but i think it has already been proven that it's possible to show abusive therapy in a positive light and have it televised and have thousands of people sing it's praises on false grounds.
    I wouldn't put it past folks like these "therapists" to use a child like Beth to promote their own program, even staging much of the presentation. I suspect any of this came after the initial treatment, though, mostly because IIRC the criticism of this technique became widespread only after she was an adult. There wouldn't have been that great a need for a flashy sales pitch earlier on, but I can see where they would have taken advantage of the opportunity offered by her particular case.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  7. #187
    Senior Member captain curmudgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    BIRD
    Enneagram
    631 sp
    Posts
    3,264

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmotini View Post
    Well I voiced my opinion, and then others wanted to debate my opinion, and I have more of a Gamma than Delta way of expressing myself, in that I often speak with very clear assertiveness if I find something to either be Te factual or an Fi value of mine. I also find that this forum has some kind of "conditioning" effect on me where I automatically come across as more aggressive here than on any other web site I visit, and I think that has to do with early trauma here of being bullied by domineering members of the forum who acted like if I did not speak in an aggressive tone, that I should GTFO.

    That being said, I believe I said something to Fia along the lines of "I know this sounds terrible but..." so I didn't just say "hey that kid is satan."

    No one has to engage with me or challenge my opinion, but if they do, I am more than happy to argue with them, though they're going to get what they asked for and not:



    My opinion on this matter isn't going to come across as "politically correct" because I'm very clear on what I see in this child's expression...and I strongly disagree with you, Vas seemed to be completely supportive of this kind of therapy and the conclusion that a child could be healed by it.

    Just like if someone yells something doesn't automatically mean they're right, if someone says something "nicely" enough it doesn't mean they're right, either, it just means they're trying to be polite, and a lot of people are swayed by politeness rather than facts or reason.

    I do probably go on gut instinct in some ways in a more reliable manner, and it may just be a difference in what forms of perception and judgment have served you best in life.

    On the other hand, yes, I'm going to become frustrated and seem irritable if I see people speculating about a bunch of garbage that isn't based in psychiatry or psychology, and is more trailing off into socially conditioned responses such as "but it's just a child" and "wait people said my kids eyes are strange too."

    Other people in this thread said things like they wouldn't like Beth to baby-sit their children, suggested that she may use needles on her patients in a sadistic manner given her childhood habits, or that if she wasn't a sociopath before the treatment, she is one now.

    But I say I think she has a socipath's eyes and all of a sudden everyone freaks out. What that says to me is this is Fe ethical conditioning, perhaps, or some kind of off-topic emotional response based on false comparisons to one's own loved ones.
    First, I highly doubt something said via internet forum 4 years ago 'traumatized' you and went without consequences. Second, it's not what you say, it's how it's said- regardless of what those initial few interactions may have indicated. Accordingly, it would be nice if you would stop disproportionately reacting to things so often on threads- if it is such a major issue that is going to take a while to work out, it ought to be left to visitor messages and/or PMs.
    Jarlaxle: fact checking this thread makes me want to go all INFP on my wrists

    "I'm in competition with myself and I'm losing."
    -Roger Waters

    ReadingRainbows: OMG GUYS
    ReadingRainbows: GUESS WHAT EXISTS FOR ME
    hel: fairies?
    Captain Curmudgeon: existential angst?


    Johari Nohari

    https://www.librarything.com/profile/wheelchairdoug

  8. #188
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    4,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmotini View Post
    yes, I'm going to become frustrated and seem irritable if I see people speculating about a bunch of garbage that isn't based in psychiatry or psychology, and is more trailing off...
    So, um...

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmotini View Post
    her eyes ... are frightening, her eyes are horrible, dead, flat.
    I just wanted to point out that you're the one who brought up all this stuff about her eyes, which has no concrete basis in psychiatry/psychology and is mostly speculative, in the first place. You seem frustrated and irritable simply because people don't agree with you entirely.

  9. #189
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    8w7
    Posts
    2,319

    Default

    Many of you fail to see the before and after. You only see the after.

    There's certainly an element of acting. But no one wants to stay in pain. Some of them forget what it even means to feel pain because they've become so accustomed to it. You must remind them of what it feels like to experience it, and they must be in a safe environment to reveal it. If it takes your finger nail to dig a hole in the coconut, then that's what its gonna take. You just gotta keep digging and digging for their emotions and encourage them to come out.


  10. #190
    You have a choice! 21%'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    2,631

    Default

    OMG I finally read up on this "Attachment Therapy" thing and felt sick.
    4w5 sp/sx EII

Similar Threads

  1. [E9] The soul child of Type Nine - Point Three
    By Gerbah in forum Enneatypes
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01-29-2017, 04:15 PM
  2. [E5] The soul child of Type Five - Point Eight
    By Gerbah in forum Enneatypes
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 07-26-2015, 12:54 PM
  3. [E8] The soul child of Type Eight - Point Two
    By Gerbah in forum Enneatypes
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 04-21-2013, 04:01 PM
  4. [E2] The soul child of Type Two - Point Four
    By Gerbah in forum Enneatypes
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-15-2010, 05:31 AM
  5. [ENTP] ENTP = the child of someone rich?
    By Cypocalypse in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 67
    Last Post: 09-28-2009, 04:41 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO