I got a bridge to sell ya

Post Reply New Topic

you could still interpret this as an alpha male issue... in wolf packs, probably more important than the alpha male is the omega male... whom takes beatings from everyone else.

i'm sure they would have "issues" too. so maybe bullying could be a primal response to fighting the omega postion by attempting to take an alpha postion. (in some cases)

so it actually does fit in...

ahahahahahahahahahaha....... sorry.

MAYBE THESE BULLYS' TENDENCY TO REACH A SO-CALLED "ALPHA MALE" STATUS IS EVIDENCE OF THEIR LACK OF EVOLVEMENT?

Stone Age was a couple Millennial ago. But however some bullies feel the need to cause pain and sorrow because.........well, it's what they do.

You speak the effect, but not the cause. If lack of evolutional maturation is not the cause of the bully's behavior as the effect, then what would you suggest is the cause for that effect? You believe in "cause and effect right" -- that nothing happens without a reason?

You want the text book answer which I happen to know from taking Psych or the answer the most of humanity seems to take from being there and seeing it?

Thank you very kindly for allowing me a choice in the matter, and as always when I receive such an option -- as it inspires my curiosity-- I say "a little of each please."

According to the book, (this is both in my psych and sociology book, more so in the sociology) it's about surroundings and the influences that people had on them growing up. If they were in a loving family then naturally those of that nature would be the same nature as well. While those raised in a family environment where love and peace was not shown, and a bullying atmosphere is felt, then is the natural environment in which they feel necessary to reciprocate to others around them.

According to society, it's about the choices we make and as such those friends that we have at an early age.

Anyway, I would reason that the inability for the parents of the bully to properly raise such a person, are evolutionarily inferior.

The parents are as bad a bullies as the children are, how do you think they learned?
the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.


Merle

The parents are as bad a bullies as the children are, how do you think they learned?
the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.


Merle

Stone Age was a couple Millennial ago. But however some bullies feel the need to cause pain and sorrow because.........well, it's what they do.

Are you considering that the parents usually cause the kid to be a bully by bullying the kid, more than the kid bullying because of being spoiled by the parents? How about the kid bullying because of feeling inadequate to the other kids at school, since maybe he lives in a trailor park or was beat up by a neighbor kid ? Do you give any creedence to the saying that regards the excuse for non-tranquil people -- "held too much or too little"?

no more credence than Autism is caused by 'refrigerator mothers'.

I have met many people in my life that must have reasons for how they behaved when they met me. Maybe I was an easy mark, always taking things so literally, always being so hurt by words, merely words. I really didn't see what their home life was like, but I knew about my own homelife. I just walked to school, I just hid when I saw them coming. I just lived my life in fear and was raised to be a whipped dog, myself. So I figured they learned what they knew.

Merle

Thank you, but what is a refrigerator mother?

The term refrigerator mother was coined around 1950 as a label for mothers of autistic children. These mothers were often blamed for their children's atypical behaviors, which included rigid rituals, speech difficulty, and self-isolation.

The "refrigerator mother" label was based on the assumption — now discredited among most, though not all, mental health professionals — that autistic behaviors stem from the emotional frigidity of the children's mothers. As a result, many mothers of children on the autistic spectrum suffered from blame, guilt, and self-doubt from the 1950s throughout the 1970s and beyond: when the prevailing medical belief that autism resulted from inadequate parenting was widely assumed to be correct. Present-day proponents of the psychogenic theory of autism continue to maintain that the condition is a result of poor parenting.

In his 1943 paper that first identified autism, Leo Kanner called attention to what appeared to him as a lack of warmth among the fathers and mothers of autistic children.[1] In a 1949 paper, Kanner suggested autism may be related to a "genuine lack of maternal warmth", noted that fathers rarely stepped down to indulge in children's play, and observed that children were exposed from "the beginning to parental coldness, obsessiveness, and a mechanical type of attention to material needs only.… They were left neatly in refrigerators which did not defrost. Their withdrawal seems to be an act of turning away from such a situation to seek comfort in solitude."[2] In a 1960 interview, Kanner bluntly described parents of autistic children as "just happening to defrost enough to produce a child."[3]

In the absence of any biomedical explanation for what causes autism after the telltale symptoms were first described by scientists, Bruno Bettelheim, a University of Chicago professor and child development specialist, and other leading psychoanalysts championed the notion that autism was the product of mothers who were cold, distant and rejecting, thus deprived of the chance to "bond properly". The theory was embraced by the medical establishment and went largely unchallenged into the mid-1960s, but its effects have lingered into the 21st century. Many articles and books published in that era blamed autism on a maternal lack of affection, but by 1964, Bernard Rimland, a psychologist with an autistic son, published a book that signaled the emergence of a counter-explanation to the established misconceptions about the causes of autism. His book, Infantile Autism: The Syndrome and its Implications for a Neural Theory of Behavior, attacked the "refrigerator mother" hypothesis directly.

Soon afterwards, Bettelheim wrote The Empty Fortress: Infantile Autism and the Birth of the Self, in which he compared autism to being a prisoner in a concentration camp:

"The difference between the plight of prisoners in a concentration camp and the conditions which lead to autism and schizophrenia in children is, of course, that the child has never had a previous chance to develop much of a personality."

Some authority was granted to this as well because Bettelheim had himself been interned at the Dachau concentration camp during World War II. The book was immensely popular and Bettelheim became a leading public figure on autism until his death, when it was revealed that Bettelheim plagiarized others' work and falsified his credentials. Also, three ex-patients questioned his work, characterizing him as a cruel tyrant.[4]

Although Kanner was instrumental in framing the "refrigerator mother" theory, it was Bettelheim who facilitated its widespread acceptance by the public and the medical establishment cognoscenti in the 1950s and 1960s.

In 1969, Kanner addressed the "refrigerator mother" issue at the first annual meeting of what is now the Autism Society of America, stating:

From the very first publication until the last, I spoke of this condition in no uncertain terms as "innate." But because I described some of the characteristics of the parents as persons, I was misquoted often as having said that "it is all the parents' fault."[5]

This was somewhat a whitewashing of his own history. In many of his articles Kanner explicitly and clearly suggested that parental behavior can contribute to autism. But the renunciation of the idea by the person who originated it was seen as a decisive blow in any event.