"Child of rage" documentary

[FemMecha]

When I was in high school, I had a few unsettling experiences about wanting to hurt my father. He was rather a bully, would talk over me literally all the time instead of listening to me, ruined pretty any family holidays, and was easier to just avoid than try to relate to. He was so hard to deal with, it was difficult to have any kind of conversation with him without it esalating quickly into a screaming match or a, "Go outside / hide in your room to get away" debacle. Outside the house, he was respected in a certain circle of his professional peers, and they only saw the good things about him without understanding what it was like to live with an alcoholic narcissist, where he literally trampled everyone's boundaries day in and day out (if he was present at all). This was high school, mind you -- not a young child -- but inside I think I had a potential for a lot of anger because of the situation. One night he was sleeping, drunk, in the living room chair; I was standing in the kitchen and literally felt a physical compulsion to take one of the knives and stab him to death, over and over. it freaked me out, and I left the room in order to get away from the source of temptation.

I don't think I would have had such a strong urge, if I had had a viable outlet for my anger toward him, but I had nothing -- no voice, no way to negotiate, no one who understood or would believe what I had to say. I interpreted it as me defending myself (proactively, while he was vulnerable) and venting all of that bile out of myself. Normally I stuffed all my anger so I wasn't even aware it existed (that was my coping mechanism), until it would come out in the dark and in moments where it made sense.

So I think you have something here. I don't considering myself a psychopath and typically such an act would be unthinkable for me, but the lack of outlet for dealing with him... well, it's like when you don't have anything else, you're reduced to primal "fight or flight" rage. I can't imagine how worse it is when you're a young child, so you don't have the life experience to really frame everything, nor the words to articulate everything, and you're still physically, mentally, and emotionally vulnerable to your abusers.

I think those kinds of feelings come up when people feel backed into a corner with no way out of a situation. It is important that you mentioned that outsiders would have no idea. That is more common than people think.

I could share a variety of anecdotes about people I know who have had to suppress rage from being violated, but I'm just not up to it right now.

Also [MENTION=4489]zago[/MENTION] I read in your comments a sense that socio/psychopathy are an authentic state when you compared these to lions. Realize that those conditions result from parents leaving their infant to scream alone in a crib, from parents treating the child with complete dismissal, disrespect, and harm. Lions do not treat their cubs in such a manner. Just consider that early childhood harm leaves an individual in a state of complete internal powerlessness and rage. This is not the empowerment of an instinctual predator. It is a coping mechanism that overcompensates for vulnerability. Consider the internal state of someone hard-wired to feel absolute neglect and abuse vs. the internal state of a a powerful, instinctual predator. I suggest these two internal states are more different than you are assuming. Edit: Actually the equivalent condition in lions might be when you see one abused and filled with reactive rage at a zoo or carnival.

 

[greenfairy]

I see. "She smiled like people I've assumed were ESFJs, and it fit what other gossip I read in the thread."

Because, honestly, that's what's been going on here.
Lots of speculation, not yet a lot of confirmation.

Well it's not like it really matters what type she is, that's just my opinion. And most people type people by much less than that. No one can really know, anyway. What kind of confirmation are you looking for? I'm not assuming anything about her character, only speculating like you say, but what else can we do? Maybe she's a really great person. Who knows.

I think it's pretty clear she's an Fe user because they tend to take their ethics and values from external sources, which she does. Fe users I have read tend to smile in ways which engage the mouth but not the eyes. I don't know if that's true, but they would be more likely to smile to be polite and socially acceptable without worrying if it's genuine or not, leading some people to say their smiles are fake. She seems like a J because the highly structured environment was a good fit for her personality and made her feel comfortable. SJ's tend to be traditional, so a conservative sort of religion would probably be comfortable as well. They tend to respect authority and hierarchy, which she does.

Is this bad reasoning? Is it any worse than typing Kesha as ESFP just because her music has sensing themes, or typing me INFP because I have a fairy in my avatar? I don't advocate this obviously, but I think I have enough evidence to make a tentative guess about her personality type with a reasonable probability of it being right.

 

[Totenkindly]

Well it's not like it really matters what type she is, that's just my opinion. And most people type people by much less than that. No one can really know, anyway. What kind of confirmation are you looking for? I'm not assuming anything about her character, only speculating like you say, but what else can we do? Maybe she's a really great person. Who knows.

I think it's pretty clear she's an Fe user because they tend to take their ethics and values from external sources, which she does. Fe users I have read tend to smile in ways which engage the mouth but not the eyes. I don't know if that's true, but they would be more likely to smile to be polite and socially acceptable without worrying if it's genuine or not, leading some people to say their smiles are fake. She seems like a J because the highly structured environment was a good fit for her personality and made her feel comfortable.

Is this bad reasoning? Is it any worse than typing Kesha as ESFP just because her music has sensing themes, or typing me INFP because I have a fairy in my avatar? I don't advocate this obviously, but I think I have enough evidence to make a tentative guess about her personality type with a reasonable probability of it being right.

let's just agree that the haphazardness of it as a modus operandi is not indicative of T-style analytics, so at least that question is resolved.

Aside from that, my simple point is that a lot of judgments are being floated around here that people wouldn't appreciate or think fair if they were the object of the scrutiny. That's all. i think Fia has done a great job in trying to politely keep things on target.

 

[greenfairy]

let's just agree that the haphazardness of it as a modus operandi is not indicative of T-style analytics, so at least that question is resolved.

Haphazardness hadn't really jumped out at me, but I can see it if it's true that she is lumping Edgar Allen Poe in with sociopaths. In any case, the ethics she embraces I don't think are genuinely hers; they came from external sources and she is internalizing and embracing them. It seems to me like she doesn't have a well developed sense of right and wrong because she didn't start out with any sense of it, so she is learning about it from society. There isn't really anything wrong with that, in my opinion. That's what a lot of people do; they don't think for themselves and just adhere to an authority whether it be religion or a political party. In her case though, it's not as much that she doesn't think for herself as that she started out from a disadvantaged state and so has more trouble than most people with comprehending things internally. So it's a smart decision for her. I don't know of course; maybe she really did develop empathy to the point where she wholeheartedly believes in these things and does what she does out of love. It just seems a little improbable that a sociopath could evolve that far. But no, although I think she is intelligent and probably has good reasoning capabilities in general, T-style analytics do not appear to be prominent.

 

[Totenkindly]

It just seems a little improbable that a sociopath could evolve that far. But no, although I think she is intelligent and probably has good reasoning capabilities in general, T-style analytics do not appear to be prominent.

I wasn't talking about her.

let's move on, thanks.

 

[greenfairy]

I wasn't talking about her.

let's move on, thanks.

Ok, I think I know what you mean.

Well, I'm not being judgmental about any of this. And what is this central idea we're supposed to be on target with? Sorry, but I thought we were just posting our thoughts about it in whatever way they related. I'm trying to figure out her psychology, just like everyone else. I thought what I said was useful.

 

[Totenkindly]

I know she talks about killing her brother and adoptive parents, but for some reason I don't believe she was really going to do it. I mean, if she wanted them dead she would have really tried to do something already, especially if she had gotten hold of the knives. It could be that 'being bad' got her attention, so she kept at it. Talking about killing people got responses out of the adults, and sometimes kids in unstructured lives would do things like this to challenge the authority and test their own powers.

Sorry I missed this earlier.

I honestly don't know.

But in my time as a parent, none of my kids -- despite being pissed off at us to the point of trying to run away from home -- never took knives from the drawer, never killed animals, never physically abused each other repeatedly in traumatic ways (although there were a few heated moments of scuffle). Nor did I talk to any other parents with kids who did these things, regardless of how much the child felt they hated the parent.

In the few cases I'm personally acquainted with, the risk of permanent physical harm ran very high and wasn't just a bluff per se. Yes, there was likely an element of control to it as well, as part of attention-seeking, but this isn't a typical way in which children seek attention... there are many more ways a six-year-old can get attention.

 

[greenfairy]

Also [MENTION=4489]zago[/MENTION] I read in your comments a sense that socio/psychopathy are an authentic state when you compared these to lions. Realize that those conditions result from parents leaving their infant to scream alone in a crib, from parents treating the child with complete dismissal, disrespect, and harm. Lions do not treat their cubs in such a manner. Just consider that early childhood harm leaves an individual in a state of complete internal powerlessness and rage. This is not the empowerment of an instinctual predator. It is a coping mechanism that overcompensates for vulnerability. Consider the internal state of someone hard-wired to feel absolute neglect and abuse vs. the internal state of a a powerful, instinctual predator. I suggest these two internal states are more different than you are assuming. Edit: Actually the equivalent condition in lions might be when you see one abused and filled with reactive rage at a zoo or carnival.

Yeah, that's a good point; a well adjusted lion will be different from a maladjusted human, and humans are not carnivores, so our instincts even when we kill other beings will be different. But it was an interesting comparison. The mentality may have some internal similarities.

 

[Thalassa]

You cannot read a bio at a distance, see that the person is not incarcerated, and then determine that they are psychologically healthy and functioning in society. You have to know them personally and witness first-hand the destruction of ruined lives they leave in their paths. This can include psychological and physical harm and even murders that cannot be identified or defended against.

I agree with this completely.

I was reading once about sociopaths in the military, how well they do in the beginning, because their seratonin is unnaturally high they are eerily calm in stressful situations, making them seem like perfect soldiers who will never get PTSD.

Problem being that they can't keep up the facade forever, even in the military (perhaps surprising to some) and get caught doing heinous things.

Psychopaths in particular have actual neurological issues, it isn't just a matter of being abused.

 

[Thalassa]

The whole documentary seems off when you re-watch it. It's like she was trained to answer in a specific way... she has feelers out to see if she is doing a good job. She seems terribly afraid too, constantly checking for approval before continuing. Even at one point the male therapist corrects her... when she talks about the birds being dead he says "mom told me that you killed them, did you squeeze them?" or somesuch then she says she did... and he says "it's ok it's hard to remember" like he's coaching and reassuring her it's fixed.

What i see is possibly quite different to you (and others) i'm sure.

I see a terribly abused child abusing others to stop the hurt within and then getting put into a system when she is further abused. And it would not be the first time, systematic abuse is rife in areas of the already abused, the mentally ill, aged etc... all who are less able to take care of themselves.
Weather or not she is a sociopath/psychopath i'm not convinced.

It actually reminds me of a child in a book i read, a true story concerning a child put in a special education class who was torturing animals...and generally wild and unteachable. This child, with help, did seem to adapt (somewhat) but i suppose who really knows.

I am glad you have such compassion for her (not being sarcastic, I am utterly disgusted by child molesters) ...but the problematic situation here is that she may also have hereditary issues i.e. tendency toward psychopathy, which needs a "perfect storm" of heredity or congenital neurological issues and abuse to evolve. I'm not sure that all small children who are sexually abused start killing small animals and saying they want to kill their family members.

As much as I'm horrified by what happened to her, I don't want her hurting other people.

 

[Thalassa]

This case is an interesting one because the child is pretty articulate, verbal, engaged in the process and, apparently, reflective but perhaps all the non-verbal, behavioural, resistant and destructive side preceeded these interviews.

I've known adults with the benefits of years who're not able or willing to engage as the kid does in the first seven minutes of the video. I've not watched it all but I plan to.

Thank you for being so keenly observant. That's why her moral confusion as an adult seems bizarre and absurd to me, because she's clearly a very articulate and bright individual.

That makes her all the more dangerous, and all the more likely to learn how to game people.

 

[Thalassa]

How bizarre, he has beautiful eyes! My daughter (also autistic) has huge abyss eyes too... i actually think it's a common characteristic, but to me they are more 'look after my physical needs' eyes than anything else.... similar to the bush baby effect. So much going on behind them though and so much misinterpretation and misinformation about the autistic mind esp re:intelligence.

I want to discuss this eye thing. It's common knowledge that autistics' eyes focus on objects more than people, and in severe cases also have trouble bonding without therapy. Some people also say they have larger eyes and wider mouths.

I think it's a bad idea to compare your autistic child's eye characteristics with that of a child who is clearly showing sociopathic tendencies. Many children who are sexually abused just end up histrionic or with BPD, and not murderous.

There's a coldness in this woman's eyes (and in her eyes as a child) that I do not see in Ivy's son's eyes (not to mention she posted a singular photo from a particular angle, and we can freely observe Beth on video as well as a photo later in adulthood).

I sometimes wonder if stuff like this is Se versus Ne or something, because people with certain disorders do indeed show particular physical characteristics and it's as old as the hills that you can see things in people's eyes i.e. "the window to the soul."

 

[Coriolis]

Thank you for being so keenly observant. That's why her moral confusion as an adult seems bizarre and absurd to me, because she's clearly a very articulate and bright individual.

That makes her all the more dangerous, and all the more likely to learn how to game people.

So being bright and articulate makes someone dangerous? Is it better for the morally confused to be stupid or slow? It seems that would make it easier for the unscrupulous to manipulate them.

 

[Thalassa]

So being bright and articulate makes someone dangerous? Is it better for the morally confused to be stupid or slow? It seems that would make it easier for the unscrupulous to manipulate them.

With her other symptoms, yes of course. The more intelligent a sociopath is the more dangerous they are because they are then capable of heights of manipulation than that which a less intelligent individual would be capable of.

So far in this thread I've seen people try to say that someone's childhood behavior shouldn't have bearing on our rational analysis as an adult (um, no, actually childhood is one of the primary places we look to when psychologically analyzing anyone), people saying that we shouldn't judge people by their eyes (when it's been documented that people with varying neurological disorders do have strange eyes, and furthermore, of course autistics would show some similarity in eye characteristics because of their preference of objects over people and trouble bonding emotionally)...now we have you completely misunderstanding that I'm saying ALL intelligent people are more dangerous. NO. People with violent personality disorders and psychopathy are more dangerous if intelligent.

All children who are sexually abused do not do the things this child did; furthermore, attachment therapy has been criticized by many as being unvalidated, made-up and having trouble attaching in childhood can mean a number of things ranging from autism to psychopathy, it's not some thing where we should just sit here and boo hoo because this was about a child.

Children can kill people too, and this person isn't a child anymore.

 

[Ivy]

I want to discuss this eye thing. It's common knowledge that autistics' eyes focus on objects more than people, and in severe cases also have trouble bonding without therapy. Some people also say they have larger eyes and wider mouths.

I think it's a bad idea to compare your autistic child's eye characteristics with that of a child who is clearly showing sociopathic tendencies. Many children who are sexually abused just end up histrionic or with BPD, and not murderous.

There's a coldness in this woman's eyes (and in her eyes as a child) that I do not see in Ivy's son's eyes (not to mention she posted a singular photo from a particular angle, and we can freely observe Beth on video as well as a photo later in adulthood).

I sometimes wonder if stuff like this is Se versus Ne or something, because people with certain disorders do indeed show particular physical characteristics and it's as old as the hills that you can see things in people's eyes i.e. "the window to the soul."

I have not compared my son's eyes to Beth's- I compared the reaction of some people to his eyes to the reaction of some people to Beth's eyes. I posted the pic of his eyes along with the anecdote about people making comments about him similar to yours about Beth's to illustrate that the instinctive responses people have to someone's eyes cannot be used as evidence that that person is "wrong." It's very easy to say "oh yeah, I totally see the sociopathy in her eyes" when we already know so much about her behavior. That is a form of confirmation bias, and IMO a particularly risky kind, since it leads to not taking your own knee-jerk instinctive responses to people with the grain of salt that kind of judging by outward appearance requires. It's one thing to rely on your knee-jerk instinctive response to keep yourself safe in public- but another thing entirely to make assertions about a person's character based on their appearance.

 

[Thalassa]

I have not compared my son's eyes to Beth's- I compared the reaction of some people to his eyes to the reaction of some people to Beth's eyes. I posted the pic of his eyes along with the anecdote about people making comments about him similar to yours about Beth's to illustrate that the instinctive responses people have to someone's eyes cannot be used as evidence that that person is "wrong." It's very easy to say "oh yeah, I totally see the sociopathy in her eyes" when we already know so much about her behavior. That is a form of confirmation bias, and IMO a particularly risky kind, since it leads to not taking your own knee-jerk instinctive responses to people with the grain of salt that kind of judging by outward appearance requires. It's one thing to rely on your knee-jerk instinctive response to keep yourself safe in public- but another thing entirely to make assertions about a person's character based on their appearance.

Mmhmm. I know what has kept me safe in life, and I know I would keep my eye on Beth.

 

[Betty Blue]

I want to discuss this eye thing. It's common knowledge that autistics' eyes focus on objects more than people, and in severe cases also have trouble bonding without therapy. Some people also say they have larger eyes and wider mouths.

I think it's a bad idea to compare your autistic child's eye characteristics with that of a child who is clearly showing sociopathic tendencies. Many children who are sexually abused just end up histrionic or with BPD, and not murderous.

There's a coldness in this woman's eyes (and in her eyes as a child) that I do not see in Ivy's son's eyes (not to mention she posted a singular photo from a particular angle, and we can freely observe Beth on video as well as a photo later in adulthood).

I sometimes wonder if stuff like this is Se versus Ne or something, because people with certain disorders do indeed show particular physical characteristics and it's as old as the hills that you can see things in people's eyes i.e. "the window to the soul."

Hmmm interesting observations but i'm not sure i entirely agree, i would say that some autistic individuals find it difficult to understand things from others perspectives but they do have very real and reactionary feelings... even if they do not completely understand them (most are very capable of it). Also some autistic persons are empaths. I don't think attachment is so much of a problem, i have seen dozens and dozens of autistic children and adults all with very firm attachments. Change however and possibly new attachment they (generally) can have difficulty with.

It is common as i mentioned before hand for autistic individuals to have larger than usual eyes... unsure of the mouth...

My daughters eyes...

 

[Betty Blue]

Sorry I missed this earlier.

I honestly don't know.

But in my time as a parent, none of my kids -- despite being pissed off at us to the point of trying to run away from home -- never took knives from the drawer, never killed animals, never physically abused each other repeatedly in traumatic ways (although there were a few heated moments of scuffle). Nor did I talk to any other parents with kids who did these things, regardless of how much the child felt they hated the parent.

In the few cases I'm personally acquainted with, the risk of permanent physical harm ran very high and wasn't just a bluff per se. Yes, there was likely an element of control to it as well, as part of attention-seeking, but this isn't a typical way in which children seek attention... there are many more ways a six-year-old can get attention.

Well there was a lot of mention of her physically abusing her brother and causing him much pain. There was also the basement incident where she aparently repeatedly hit his head on the concrete... i think it said he was bleeding and had to go to the hospital... not entirely sure.

I believe everytime she hurt anyone she was reinacting herself being hurt... reliving the trauma. I have seen this happen irl... becomming stuck in the reinactment and loosing control.

Obviously i do not advocate this, it's terribly dangerous and her poor brother. There should be a way of her letting this go without harming others as fia?someone? said earlier. If it could be reinacted in a safe way and the ending could be measured and someone could explain to her what is happening and talk through the process... i'm not an expert but it feels like the right direction.

 

[Totenkindly]

Well there was a lot of mention of her physically abusing her brother and causing him much pain. There was also the basement incident where she aparently repeatedly hit his head on the concrete... i think it said he was bleeding and had to go to the hospital... not entirely sure.

I believe everytime she hurt anyone she was reinacting herself being hurt... reliving the trauma. I have seen this happen irl... becomming stuck in the reinactment and loosing control.

Obviously i do not advocate this, it's terribly dangerous and her poor brother. There should be a way of her letting this go without harming others as fia?someone? said earlier. If it could be reinacted in a safe way and the ending could be measured and someone could explain to her what is happening and talk through the process... i'm not an expert but it feels like the right direction.

I'm not sure this is anything different than what I said. Basically, her behavior is anything but normal. I don't think she's necessarily bluffing for attention. More chance she is reliving trauma (just as she was masturbating until she bled). She definitely needed a controlled environment with some amount of structure that she could trust, and where she won't get hurt or hurt others in the process of releasing the pain.

it's also complicated in the fact that she's a child, and children normally do some level of attention-seeking, and this could be folded into it to make things even worse. It's not wrong for a child to enjoy being taking seriously and given attention; it gets complicated in teasing out ultimate motivation since there are likely multiple things involved in her psyche at once.

 

[Lark]

Thank you for being so keenly observant. That's why her moral confusion as an adult seems bizarre and absurd to me, because she's clearly a very articulate and bright individual.

That makes her all the more dangerous, and all the more likely to learn how to game people.

I'm not doubting that she is sincerely engaged with the process just that I know a lot of kids who've suffered that kind of abuse or different and less severe in some ways that are not verbal, some are withdrawn into private worlds and dont speak, but age and stage of development alone might make a kid unlikely to sit and engage in talk therapy.

There's cultural factors too though I guess, I do a lot of talk therapy driving in a car because the kids I've worked with dont handle sitting in place and "eye balling" well, then again there's some therapists who would suggest that "eye balling" is necessary and even of therapeutic value.