Psycholanalysis

[caz]

Thanks Blackkat.

It would be nice to think that the frontal lobe could provide us with a simple explanation for the strange behaviour of serial killers. But it wouldn't explain why relatively very few women (and even fewer heterosexual women) repeatedly set out to harm other human beings for no apparent reason.

And it certainly wouldn't account for killers like Dr Harold Shipman, who had no trouble maintaining 'stable and adequate social relations' and 'self control' (except when he was secretly ending the life of yet another vulnerable patient); no trouble exercising 'judgement' (especially when he was busy deceiving everyone involved in yet another death by unnatural causes); no trouble balancing 'individual versus social needs', in order to keep his position as a popular and respected GP while he carried on killing; no trouble with 'many other essential functions underlying effective social intercourse'; no displays of 'inadequate decision-making and planning abilities' and no obviously 'abnormal social conduct, leading to negative personal consequences' until after people had begun to suspect him, due to the sheer numbers involved coupled with a growing carelessness on his part.

In fact, Shipman exhibited no 'severe deficits' in any of these behaviours until he had successfully sent hundreds of his patients into the next world. So if he had any such deficits, he was able to hide them so well that to all intents and purposes he may as well not have had them, for all the good it would do the profilers to look out for them in future. I certainly wouldn't like to be the one to 'posit that the frontal lobe acts as a conscience'. Shipman's frontal lobe deserved an Oscar for directing the doc to act normally in the total absence of a conscience.

All of us have at one point or another imagined killing a person because they displayed tendencies that we did not like. None of us went out and killed them in a ritualized manner.

Again, Shipman doesn't appear to have killed patients in a ritualised manner because they displayed tendencies he didn't like - unless it was their tendency to keep breathing that he disliked.

And here's the rub when one tries to interpret Jack's murders as repeated acts of hatred or rage, or his victim choice as an indication of a street-cleaning or self-cleansing exercise: kill the dirty whores who sell their sordid wares and remind me of my own weakness and so on and so forth.

If Shipman was thinking of 'mother' as he stuck the needle in, he didn't target mother figures, nor even the opposite of mother figures - ie whores. He cynically and deliberately favoured the grandmother and grandfather figure, almost certainly for the very practical matter of self-preservation while he continued to indulge his deadly habit. The vast majority of his victims were considerably older than his mother would have been when she died. Had he targeted women only, or patients of roughly the same age as his mother, a theory that he was reliving her death over and over again might have begun to have legs. But he would have needed longer ones to run like the wind, as it would soon have become all too evident that something was seriously wrong with his bedside manner.

No, Shipman chose to play God with a ready supply of lambs to the slaughter - elderly patients of both sexes under his care and totally at his mercy, whose deaths would not be unexpected or raise immediate question marks. Jack's victims were also like lambs to the slaughter - sick or alcoholic unfortunates, there for the taking with the promise of sixpence, and less likely to be missed and mourned by society than any other breed.

The one thing in common was their tendency to slaughter lambs. The breed of lamb chosen may speak only to its fitness for the killer's purpose and say nothing at all about his motives.

Love,

Caz
X

[Blackkat]

You know what - you've hit a good point right here "But it wouldn't explain why relatively very few women (and even fewer heterosexual women) repeatedly set out to harm other human beings for no apparent reason. I have often wondered this too much. the frontal lobe and the woman not being a SK.

See that's what I'm thinking, when a woman kills many it's just a "spree killing" but a man it's seriel killing.

It's my own opinion that women are indeed seriel killers, not just spree killers. I think they are a little more dangerous than the men. Getting away with things longer, maybe that's why we haven't found some murderers yet. Besides, as long as the FBI uses it's profiling techniques mainly for men, we're gonna be behind in seeing just how many women SK's there are. Yes I know that the FBI's profile Male, white, mid 30's is what a SK happens to be most of the time, but *me* has a sneaky suspicion that women have been overlooked.

Geesh - Well F*** I sure am having a hard time spelling and typing today. :grumbles:

[paul emmett]

It's my own opinion that women are indeed seriel killers, not just spree killers.

Hi, BlacKat. I know you are right, but isn't it also true that women just plain don't kill as much as men. And then some of the neuroscience begins to say why--at the same time that it speaks to rage. For example, the neurotransmitter vasopression, more prevalent in men than women, has been linked to both violence and rage. Then there is the fact that murderers frequently suffer from increased metabolic rate in the right hemisphere, which is important because the connections between hemispheres are, on the average, larger, more effective, in women than men--so women are better able to balance left and right, avoiding many of the "problems" stemming from inbalance.

Anyways, there are indeed biological differences, differences enhanced by early trauma and/or loss, which are beginning to speak to your concerns with both rage and female serial killers.

Paul

[paul emmett]

Obviously, millions of youngsters have to watch their mother, or other loved ones, suffering and dying, and don't go on to harm another living soul, while many serial offenders never have to experience such a traumatic event before exercising their murderous urges (and may even start by causing a close relative's illness or death, rather than witnessing it). So there must be other factors present in an offender's case, which can presumably cause the same disastrous overreaction to any negative experience - or perceived as negative - whether it's birth itself and his expulsion from the warmth and safety of the womb; his mother dying on him too early; his father kicking the cat, or his teacher telling him to sit up straight and stop picking his nose.

So you are back to square one before you start to analyse an unknown killer's crimes in the hope of identifying the nature of the trauma which triggered a 'kill' response in him, or of identifying potential suspects accordingly. I suspect that any trauma would have done, and that the 'kill' response was just waiting for a suitable one to come along and activate it.X

Hi, Caz. I certianly agree with the subjectivity you express so well here--but only up to a point. I don't feel we are back to square one, because birth trauma is just more prevelant and relevant than nose picking trauma. In fact, I guess I don't feel the latter exists. Yes, a child could seem traumatized after the teacher tells him to sit up and stop picking his nose, but wouldn't we then say that this only triggered some past trauma? And I know you are pushing it to the max with this nose psycho, so let's go back to mother dying early. Wouldn't the trauma of that death be enhanced by an earlier birth trauma--or near trauma, or normal seperation?

We won't even do kicking the cat. But we could. My point is that when it's trauma, it is frequently not this cause or that, but both. And a few, like birth, are almost always in the mix. So they might well offer a place to start that isn't square one. And as you know I think birthing is an issue for JTR. But we shan't go there again.

Paul

[Blackkat]

PAUL: "because the connections between hemispheres are, on the average, larger, more effective, in women than men--so women are better able to balance left and right, avoiding many of the "problems" stemming from inbalance."

You know this is a great thing you've pointed out. Studies have been done on men that are homosexual and they have found that the connection between their hemispheres are larger than most mens - thus making it more like a woman's brain.

If a woman had a smaller corpus callosum like most men do. Maybe they would tend to be the ones that had a tendency to kill or become a seriel killer. Abnormalities of vasopression and corticotrophin have led to OCD. So I can understand how neurotransmitter vasopression can cause an increase in aggression. There is so much we don't yet know about the brain, and I think the corpus callosum may hold some answers to several things.

[The Good Michael]

I enjoy the study of the brain. It allows us to generalize the differences between types with regards to behavior and capabilities. The fact remains, however that generalizations cannot be applied to the East End murders with regards to psychological profile, and especially based upon physical brain differences. There is no brain to look at.

I would compare this to this simple anthropological fact: The differences between extant, human craniums are vaster than those between what is seen as an average, or typical Homo sapien neandertalensis skull, and a homo sapien sapiens skull. So all the what ifs and "generally speakings", in my opinion, cannot be applied to the psyche, nor the physical, and/or chemical composition of the brain of an unknown quantity. Fun, yes, helpful... probably not.

Cheers,

Mike

[Blackkat]

Mike,

That's been my point exactly over the last month. Before the website went down I started a thread called inadequacies. I stated that although it wouldn't really help solve anything pertaining to JtR it was a very interesting thread and did show some very thought provoking maybes. There are countless things that could have been or may not have been but if it helps us to open up something that MAY shed some light on an already known suspect that would be worth it.

Ahhhh - the countless things that could have been. We'll never know. You're right though, it is fun.

[Pilgrim]

Death/Birth.

............

Originally posted by Pilgrim, 31st December 2007, 09:56 PM.

~~~

"Avant-dernier né des huit enfants qu'eurent mes parents, j'ai entendu à maintes reprises ma mère raconter que le jour de ma naissance, le 3 avril 1863, était un Vendredi-saint."*

~~~


Félicien Rops. Danse macabre de Charles Baudelaire. (1865-75)

~~~

Ses yeux profonds sont faits de vide et de ténèbres,
Et son crâne, de fleurs artistement coiffé,
Oscille mollement sur ses frêles vertèbres.
Ô charme d'un néant follement attifé.

Aucuns t'appelleront une caricature,
Qui ne comprennent pas, amants ivres de chair,
L'élégance sans nom de l'humaine armature.
Tu réponds, grand squelette, à mon goût le plus cher !

- Charles Baudelaire, 1861.

~~~

Her deep eye-sockets are empty and dark,
And her skull, skillfully adorned with flowers,
Oscillates gently on her fragile vertebrae.
Charm of a non-existent thing, madly arrayed !

Some, lovers drunken with flesh, will call you
A caricature; they don't understand
The marvelous elegance of the human frame.
You satisfy my fondest taste, tall skeleton !

~~~

* "Next but last born of the eight children my parents had, I often heard my mother say that my day of birth, April 3rd 1863, was a Good Friday."

~~~

My Regards.

[caz]

And as you know I think birthing is an issue for JTR. But we shan't go there again.

Paul

Yeah, but the question is why is birthing an issue for the serial killer but not for anyone else? When you say that birth trauma is almost always 'in the mix', do you mean in the mix just for serial killers, or for everyone? If it's the former, how do you know? You can't just take their word for it. If it's the latter, you are back to explaining what is different about the man whose birth trauma provides him with raw material for repeated indiscriminate acts of violence?

Hi Blackkat,

Are there not still many more documented cases of male homosexual serial killers than female serial killers, regardless of the latters' sexuality?

With female killers, cause and effect tends to be of a more rational nature, with a tangible link between killer and victim, where the former has something positive to gain from the latter's death, whether it be materially or emotionally. It is usually much easier to see what may have prompted a woman to kill men, women or children, whereas it can be nigh on impossible to fathom what a man gets out of snuffing out the life of one stranger after another.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Sorry, Paul. I meant to ask you - do you see rage in Dr Shipman's murders too? Or do you think he was just addicted to exercising his undoubted power over life and death?

Could this not have applied to Jack too? Could he not have found how easy it was to kill and mutilate an unfortunate in the teeming East End and then looked for opportunities to repeat the experience?

Love,

Caz
X

[paul emmett]

[QUOTE=Blackkat;5079] I started a thread called inadequacies. I stated that although it wouldn't really help solve anything pertaining to JtR it was a very interesting thread and did show some very thought provoking maybes. [QUOTE]

Hi, Blackkat. In one sense, yes: all we have are maybes. Did Barnett do it? Was Eddowes a prostitute? Was Tabram a Ripper victim? Maybe!!! In another sense, you are being too hard on yourself and your thread. To know who he is by studying what he does is surely thought provoking, but it's more than that. It can make our maybes more clear. For just one example, what you and others said about rage on that thread, and in particular rage at mother, made me a little more sure that Tabram--Earth Mother incarnate--was indeed a Ripper victim.

And I am looking forward to hearing more about women serial killers.

[paul emmett]

Yeah, but the question is why is birthing an issue for the serial killer but not for anyone else? When you say that birth trauma is almost always 'in the mix', do you mean in the mix just for serial killers, or for everyone? If it's the former, how do you know? You can't just take their word for it. If it's the latter, you are back to explaining what is different about the man whose birth trauma provides him with raw material for repeated indiscriminate acts of violence?

Hi, Caz. I think it's about degree--to a degree. Is birthing an issue for everybody? I recall your vivid description of it earlier in your nose pickin' scenario, and say yes, it is. I'm more with Rank than Freud here. And I certianly don't want to take people's words for it, neither serial killers nor just plain folks. The manifestions have to be unconscious.

Birth trauma as "raw material" for violence? That's where the degree thing comes in. They are beginning to study the relationships between the degree of birth trauma and different forms of neurosis. But it ain't just that, right? It's again about your case of birth trauma, mother's death, cat kicking and nose picking. I know you were positing them as alternatives, but I go back to my last post that considered the sequentially. When one trauma, one loss, is heaped upon others; when early traumas like birth are reinforced by later traumas like early death--trouble, I feel, looms. What precise kind? OCD or slaughter or both? All we can do is look at the particulars of the traumas and study unconscious manifestations. And more and more, neuroscience is looking at the particular effects of early trauma, and the subsequent behaviors it causes.

I have 2 questions, in turn. 1: Do you know I can't type? 2: What do you think?

Resting,

Paul

[paul emmett]

Sorry, Paul. I meant to ask you - do you see rage in Dr Shipman's murders too? Or do you think he was just addicted to exercising his undoubted power over life and death?

Could this not have applied to Jack too? Could he not have found how easy it was to kill and mutilate an unfortunate in the teeming East End and then looked for opportunities to repeat the experience?

Love,

Caz
X

Hi Caz, I know zippo about Shipman. The only thing is, I would ask in return whether you see rage and power here as mutually exclusive? As for Jack, as you know, I feel strongly that JTR's killings are the paradigm of misogynist rage. Yet he still luxuriates in control too, right? Power over life and death AND the somewhat necrophiliac power to pose the dead as he wishes. Each is kinda both.

Have a good day,.

[paul emmett]

* "Next but last born of the eight children my parents had, I often heard my mother say that my day of birth, April 3rd 1863, was a Good Friday."

Hi, Pilgrim. I've missed talking to you. Is this birth as crucifixion?

Also I know this isn't the place, but I'm leaving for school and I haven't gotten to the Jewish and/or local threads, so I wanted to say that your Mitre Square thing was perfect, and at the perfect time.

Paul

[Blackkat]

Paul:

I wonder why it's so hard for some people to understand misogynist rage. I mean - most people can buy the fact that JtR hated women, had to - to an extent, but I'm talking about the very specific unconscious (maybe) hatred of the very first women in JtR's life. His mother. Why do I feel comfortable saying that some of his rage may have come from mother? How a man treats a woman or young girl, reveals how he feels about his own mother as it is his first relationship in life with a woman. I don't think a baby recognizes mom as a seperate entity at first. During the toddler years they learn that mother is seperate. So the first months of life, the baby and mother are "one" fused together pyschologically. The baby isn't and can't be independent.

The first months of a babies life, is the first time for sensuality. Breast feeding, touching, bathing, playing. I think this sets the tone for future relationships. Later in life with other relationships having sex recreates that fusion of two becoming one. Though the early part of mother gets displaced into that sexual relationship.

Looking back over time, we can see in many cultures that women are valued less - (regardless of if they are a prostitute or not) and there is a hatred of women that was accepted during those times, we still see it today in many countries. This rage,that one feels towards their mother is now projected outward, displaced onto his victims which he subsequently murders.

So I think that JtR had misogynist rage, and that instead of killing off his mother in fantasy, he literally acted out his rage in real time and space.

So I don't understand why there are some people who say "JtR didn't have problems with his mother." well we don't know that for sure, just like we don't know if he did. All I'm saying is that looking at what he did, it sure gives a lot of weight to "Perhaps Jack's mother had some things in common with the women Jack killed" His rage had to spawn from somewhere, he doesn't come across as disorganized and just out for a FUN kill. He was enraged.