7 ms·

The BBC article avoids taking sides where it shouldn't. Stockholm Syndrome is bullshit, not merely "controversial". https://www.stadafa.com/2020/12/stockholm-s

The BBC article avoids taking sides where it shouldn't. Stockholm Syndrome is bullshit, not merely "controversial". https://www.stadafa.com/2020/12/stockholm-syndrome-discredit.html https://www.stadafa.com/2020/12/stockholm-syndrome-discredit... "The psychiatrist who invented it, Nils Bejerot, never spoke to the woman he based it on, never bothered to ask her why she trusted her captors more than the authorities. More to the point, during the Swedish bank heist that inspired the syndrome, Bejerot was the psychiatrist leading the police response. He was the authority that Kristin Enmark – the first woman diagnosed with Stockholm syndrome – distrusted." "On the radio, Enmark criticized the police, and singled out Bejerot. In response, and without once speaking to her, Bejerot dismissed her comments as the product of a syndrome he made up: ‘Norrmalmstorg syndrome’ (later renamed Stockholm syndrome). The fear Enmark felt towards the police was irrational, Bejerot explained, caused by the emotional or sexual attachment she had with her captors. Bejerot’s snap diagnosis suited the Swedish media; they were suspicious of Enmark, who ‘did not appear as traumatized as she ought to be.’ "

interludead 2y ago
The origins of Stockholm Syndrome and its initial framing may be debated, its continued use in psychology suggests that it provides a useful framework for understanding certain psychological responses
- grecy 2y ago
  The one where people distrust the authorities because they are handling a situation extremely poorly ?
- marcuskane2 2y ago
  That's a very optimistic and charitable interpretation. It also might be that "its continued use in psychology suggests" that false information taught to university students can result in years of incorrect orthodoxy before the error is corrected.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- ToucanLoucan 2y ago
  > The origins of Stockholm Syndrome and its initial framing may be debated It's not really a matter of debate. We know the origins. We know it is junk science. We know this about multiple sciences and scientific theories, that's how science works: someone gets an idea, they theorize about it, test their theories, and our shared understanding grows. This is not that. This is an ass-pulled theory that's been debunked at it's point of origin. This doesn't deserve rebuttal, it deserves mockery and derision.
  - olalonde 2y ago
    Doesn't the idea that one can debunk a theory at its point of origin contradict your earlier statements about how science works? You could perhaps argue that it has neither be proven nor disproven, due to lack of data and experimentation. Also, the FBI seems to believe it exists, based on 1200 hostage incident reports[0]: > According to the FBI’s Hostage/Barricade System (HOBAS), a national database that contains data from over 1,200 reported federal, state, and local hostage/barricade incidents, 92 percent of the victims of such incidents reportedly showed no aspect of the Stockholm Syndrome. When victims who only showed negative feelings toward law enforcement (usually due to frustration with the pace of negotiations) are included, the percentage rises to 95 percent. In short, this database provides empirical support that the Stockholm Syndrome remains a rare occurrence. [0] https://web.archive.org/web/20040627010420/http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/fbi/stockholm_syndrome.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20040627010420/http://www.au.af....
    - kstenerud 2y ago
      A theory (as in a proper, scientific theory) must be testable, and then it must actually be tested to verify it. Neither of these are true of Stockholm Syndrome. It's no better than the many "theories" of hair tonic merchants. You're also grossly abusing the concept of "statistics" in your statement "this database provides empirical support that the Stockholm Syndrome remains a rare occurrence."
      - olalonde 2y ago
        Why do you believe that the Stockholm Syndrome is not testable?
- some_random 2y ago
  Is there any standard too low for Psychology? Would you balk at someone telling you that they know something is untrue but still teach it because it's politically convenient? How about if it just makes them money? Why does Psychology get to call itself a science when the field seems to refuse to stop teaching known falsehoods, to say nothing of actually using the Scientific Method?
  - ItCouldBeWorse 2y ago
    The quacks rode the boomer wave all the way to shore..
- kstenerud 2y ago
  That's known as the "bandwagon fallacy": People in authority believe it, so it must be true. Homosexuality used to be a psychological disorder, at times treated by castration. Hysteria used to be a diagnosable illness in women for which they'd spend years in an institution. The psychological establishment has a very dark and nasty history, replete with "theories" that they all believed were justified - a practice that continues to this day.
snapcaster 2y ago
Agreed on your larger point, but I think one of the reasons the "syndrome" has had such staying power in our culture is that it's describing a very real thing people see in the world (abusive relationships, bad working conditions, etc.)
- spwa4 2y ago
  ... but one wonders how often abusive relationships are simply better than available alternatives.
  - megous 2y ago
    eg.?
    - Scaevolus 2y ago
      Being homeless is the immediate alternative to many abusive situations.
      - jajko 2y ago
        Thats the more severe possibility, and I don't claim its not realistic. But from what I've seen so far, its more the fear of unknown and uncertainty. Fear of unknown can be very powerful, horror movies build mainly on this. Also cumulative hurt of staying, while being higher overall, is much less than single huge immediate dose of hurt received by running away, at least they project it this way. Put kids into the mix, and we have what we have.
        rendx 2y ago
        If you were treated like shit when raised, you will believe being treated like shit later in life is something you need to accept. Or, the other way round: If you were raised to develop healthy boundaries, you will not end up in an abuse relationship later on in life.
      - 2y ago
nsteel 2y ago
From the end of the article: > Speaking on the BBC's Sideways podcast in 2021, Kristen had a blunt assessment of Stockholm Syndrome. "It's bullshit, if you can say that on the BBC. It's a way of blaming the victim. I did what I could to survive." And that podcast episode is very good.
Gud 2y ago
Nils Bejerot is also the reason why Sweden has some of the highest drug related deaths in Europe. This charlatan made Sweden embrace the war on drugs like no other country in the western world, they still have some of the most backwards drug related policies. He was well connected to the social democratic politburo which is probably why his ideas got so embraced.
- bjourne 2y ago
  Sweden's stock of heroinists is among the oldest in Europe. The high death rate us due to (for drug abusers) natural causes.
  - Gud 2y ago
    Where are you getting this from?
    - bjourne 2y ago
      F.e. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1075278/average-age-of-drug-deaths-europe/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1075278/average-age-of-d...

interludead 2y ago

The origins of Stockholm Syndrome and its initial framing may be debated, its continued use in psychology suggests that it provides a useful framework for understanding certain psychological responses

grecy 2y ago
The one where people distrust the authorities because they are handling a situation extremely poorly ?
marcuskane2 2y ago
That's a very optimistic and charitable interpretation. It also might be that "its continued use in psychology suggests" that false information taught to university students can result in years of incorrect orthodoxy before the error is corrected.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
ToucanLoucan 2y ago
> The origins of Stockholm Syndrome and its initial framing may be debated It's not really a matter of debate. We know the origins. We know it is junk science. We know this about multiple sciences and scientific theories, that's how science works: someone gets an idea, they theorize about it, test their theories, and our shared understanding grows. This is not that. This is an ass-pulled theory that's been debunked at it's point of origin. This doesn't deserve rebuttal, it deserves mockery and derision.
- olalonde 2y ago
  Doesn't the idea that one can debunk a theory at its point of origin contradict your earlier statements about how science works? You could perhaps argue that it has neither be proven nor disproven, due to lack of data and experimentation. Also, the FBI seems to believe it exists, based on 1200 hostage incident reports[0]: > According to the FBI’s Hostage/Barricade System (HOBAS), a national database that contains data from over 1,200 reported federal, state, and local hostage/barricade incidents, 92 percent of the victims of such incidents reportedly showed no aspect of the Stockholm Syndrome. When victims who only showed negative feelings toward law enforcement (usually due to frustration with the pace of negotiations) are included, the percentage rises to 95 percent. In short, this database provides empirical support that the Stockholm Syndrome remains a rare occurrence. [0] https://web.archive.org/web/20040627010420/http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/fbi/stockholm_syndrome.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20040627010420/http://www.au.af....
  - kstenerud 2y ago
    A theory (as in a proper, scientific theory) must be testable, and then it must actually be tested to verify it. Neither of these are true of Stockholm Syndrome. It's no better than the many "theories" of hair tonic merchants. You're also grossly abusing the concept of "statistics" in your statement "this database provides empirical support that the Stockholm Syndrome remains a rare occurrence."
    - olalonde 2y ago
      Why do you believe that the Stockholm Syndrome is not testable?
some_random 2y ago
Is there any standard too low for Psychology? Would you balk at someone telling you that they know something is untrue but still teach it because it's politically convenient? How about if it just makes them money? Why does Psychology get to call itself a science when the field seems to refuse to stop teaching known falsehoods, to say nothing of actually using the Scientific Method?
- ItCouldBeWorse 2y ago
  The quacks rode the boomer wave all the way to shore..
kstenerud 2y ago
That's known as the "bandwagon fallacy": People in authority believe it, so it must be true. Homosexuality used to be a psychological disorder, at times treated by castration. Hysteria used to be a diagnosable illness in women for which they'd spend years in an institution. The psychological establishment has a very dark and nasty history, replete with "theories" that they all believed were justified - a practice that continues to this day.

snapcaster 2y ago

Agreed on your larger point, but I think one of the reasons the "syndrome" has had such staying power in our culture is that it's describing a very real thing people see in the world (abusive relationships, bad working conditions, etc.)

spwa4 2y ago
... but one wonders how often abusive relationships are simply better than available alternatives.
- megous 2y ago
  eg.?
  - Scaevolus 2y ago
    Being homeless is the immediate alternative to many abusive situations.
    - jajko 2y ago
      Thats the more severe possibility, and I don't claim its not realistic. But from what I've seen so far, its more the fear of unknown and uncertainty. Fear of unknown can be very powerful, horror movies build mainly on this. Also cumulative hurt of staying, while being higher overall, is much less than single huge immediate dose of hurt received by running away, at least they project it this way. Put kids into the mix, and we have what we have.
      - rendx 2y ago
        If you were treated like shit when raised, you will believe being treated like shit later in life is something you need to accept. Or, the other way round: If you were raised to develop healthy boundaries, you will not end up in an abuse relationship later on in life.
    - 2y ago

nsteel 2y ago

From the end of the article: > Speaking on the BBC's Sideways podcast in 2021, Kristen had a blunt assessment of Stockholm Syndrome. "It's bullshit, if you can say that on the BBC. It's a way of blaming the victim. I did what I could to survive." And that podcast episode is very good.

Gud 2y ago

Nils Bejerot is also the reason why Sweden has some of the highest drug related deaths in Europe. This charlatan made Sweden embrace the war on drugs like no other country in the western world, they still have some of the most backwards drug related policies. He was well connected to the social democratic politburo which is probably why his ideas got so embraced.

bjourne 2y ago
Sweden's stock of heroinists is among the oldest in Europe. The high death rate us due to (for drug abusers) natural causes.
- Gud 2y ago
  Where are you getting this from?
  - bjourne 2y ago
    F.e. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1075278/average-age-of-drug-deaths-europe/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1075278/average-age-of-d...