Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group

Addicted to Addictions

By David J. Ley

A few weeks ago, a woman came up to me after a presentation I had given, on why I believed sex addiction was a dangerous myth. She was in tears, as she told me about her son whom she had lost about a decade ago to the ravages of alcoholism. She told me that near the end of his life, her son was in a very expensive private-pay treatment facility, and called her up to ask if he had ever been sexually abused.

As this mother told me this story, and disclosed this part, a look of anguish creased her face. “I told him that I didn’t think he ever was, and he told me that at the facility, therapists had told him that not only was he an alcoholic, but that he was a sex addict as well. And that his sex addiction must have come from being sexually abused.”

The lady’s son sadly died a few weeks after that, from complications related to his severe substance abuse. For a decade, this poor woman has lived with tremendous fear and guilt, guilt that her son might have been sexually abused, something she didn’t prevent, or even know about. She was anguished that the unknown abuse, and her apparent unknowing neglect, might  have contributed to her son’s tragic life and loss.

I was the first person this woman ever heard, who said that sex addiction was a myth, a moralizing and unsubstantiated label that people throw around callously and casually. I gave her some peace, she told me, because for the first time in a decade, she could see that her son probably hadn’t been abused, and wasn’t addicted to sex. These therapists were merely riding the train of sex addiction, throwing that diagnosis at anything they could lasso with it, regardless of the consequences. If they could convince her son that he wasn’t just an alcoholic, but a sex addict too, what did they get out of it? Who knows? Maybe money. Or maybe they just saw every problem in the young man’s life as a form of addiction, and threw that label around to impress themselves.

A few decades or so ago, therapists believed they could recover memories of abuse, uncover buried memories of sexual, physical and even satanic abuse, in their patients. Because they saw symptoms they thought were related to a history of abuse, it didn’t matter that the patient said “Hey, I wasn’t ever abused.” But it turned out the patients were right and the therapists wrong. Lives were ruined, people went to jail and families were devastated because of the therapist’s well-intended arrogance.

They thought they were helping. But hundreds of lawsuits and settlements have now shown that those therapists hurt people. The myth of sex addiction hurts people too. This is why I’m challenging it every chance I can get. To demand that these therapists be responsible with the power they wield over people’s lives and fears.

David J. Ley is a clinical psychologist in practice in Albuquerque, New Mexico. He provides clinical and consultative services in numerous other states. Dr. Ley currently serves as Executive Director of a large outpatient behavioral health agency in Albuquerque and maintains a current caseload of clients. He is the author of The Myth of Sex Addiction and   Insatiable Wives: Women Who Stray and the Men Who Love Them.

Relapse Prevention: It’s The “How” That Counts

By Deborah Serani

A recent study from the University of Toronto suggests how you process information determines if you’re at risk for a depressive relapse. More specifically, researchers learned via the use of fMRI technology that how the brain responded to a sad event was a predicting factor.

In this study, depressed participants were shown a series of sad clips of movies. Individuals who ruminated about the sadness they experienced fell into another depressive state as opposed to those who were able to feel and accept their emotional experience. It’s been long-known that patterns of negative thinking put a person’s mental health at risk. Like treading water, negative thinking gets you nowhere fast, leaves you fatigued and overwhelmed. Before you know it, you’re unable to problem-solve, and depression sets in. In this study, individuals who experienced the depth of their sadness and accepted the limits &/or hardships continued with their recovery intact. So, when it comes to keeping your depression from relapsing, it’s all about “how” you move through your experiences.

Taking the “how” to a scientific level, fMRI data showed that frontal brain activity resulted in ruminating behavior whereas brain activity in the rear part of the brain signaled acceptance. This is of great interest not only to researchers, but also to therapists who specialize in depression treatment. This study supports the aims of psychotherapy and medication, where interrupting a negative rumination style is the targeted goal of treatment. For those who live with depression, learning how to problem-solve, visualize and work toward acceptance of what one can change and what one cannot, can help inoculate against relapse.

“Part of what makes depression such a devastating disease is the high rate of relapse,” says Norman Farb, a PhD psychology student and lead researcher. “This study suggests that there are important differences in how formerly depressed people respond to emotional challenges that predict future well-being.”

Reference:

Farb, N.A.; Anderson, A.K.; Bloch, R.T. & Segal, Z.V. (2011). Mood-linked responses in medial prefrontal cortex predict relapse in patients with recurrent unipolar depression. Biological Psychiatry, DOI: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2011.03.009

Deborah Serani is a psychologist in private practice in New York and the author of Living with Depression: Why Biology and Biography Matter along the Path to Hope and Healing.

Celebrities, "Extravagant Expectations" and the Love Life of Americans

By Paul Hollander

The recent ending of Oprah Winfrey’s talk show that ran for a quarter century is a reminder of the importance and prominence of celebrities in American society. The reverence shown toward them prompt reflections about the social, psychological and cultural conditions which underlie their cult.

Celebrities differ from the famous people of the past because their prominence depends to a very large extent on publicity - on the successful projection (or marketing) of a certain image or a "trademark" by the media. They also differ from the culture heroes of the past because their accomplishments, talents, skill or moral stature are more questionable. Most celebrities are entertainers, or known for some personal quality the public considers entertaining that may include forms of misbehavior or scandalous aspects of their personal lives.

I suggest that some of the conditions which underlie and promote the rise and cult of celebrities also play a part in the difficulties large numbers of Americans experience when trying to establish and maintain long term, intimate personal relationships. "Relating" to celebrities is a fantasy relationship stimulated by the shortage of genuine, face-to-face, one-on-one relationships - a futile attempt to personalize an impersonal world. When there is a scarcity of sustaining, intimate personal relationships and a decline of closely knit, durable communities, people seek substitutes. Celebrity worship is one of them. The endless browsing of dating sites is another one.

People admire celebrities because they seem to possess everything most ordinary people do not have: wealth, fame, huge amounts of attention, excitement and physical attractiveness.

Not unlike the difficulties many young people have in distinguishing a "soulmate" from a date or a "hook-up," fans of celebrities have an impaired capacity to distinguish between what or who is truly admirable and what or who is not. Confused values cast their shadow over the search for an ideal partner as they do on the attention and affection lavished on celebrities of questionable accomplishments and often even more questionable moral character. What seems to matter is that most celebrities are an integral part of popular culture that satisfies the enormous demand for entertainment.

In my recent book (Extravagant Expectations: New Ways to Find Romantic Love in America) I reported that the majority of a large sample of people (using a popular dating website) considered the most important human quality the sense of humor. These people were looking for somebody who would make them laugh, who are entertaining. Honesty, sincerity, integrity, intelligence, sense of responsibility were far less often mentioned as desirable qualities. I also found that conflicting and unrealistic expectations contribute to the difficulties many Americans experience in the pursuit of intimate personal relationships. It seems that Americans incline to believe that all good things are compatible, as for example adventure and security, excitement and stability, the capacity for self-promotion and authenticity, being rich and charitable, self-realization and dedication to some community.

In the final analysis the worship of celebrities and the haphazard pursuit of intimate personal relationships have similar sources.

Paul Hollander is professor emeritus of sociology at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, and author or editor of 15 books. His most recent book is Extravagant Expectations: New Ways to Find Romantic Love in America.

Shopping for an Organ Transplant?: The Pitfalls of Medical Tourism

By Katrina A. Bramstedt

In the US, thousands of patients are waiting for a kidney or liver transplant. Sometimes, they get so desperate, they contemplate traveling to a foreign country to buy an organ. In their desperation, patients often don’t think about the pitfalls and ethical problems of organ tourism, and there are many. Some organs are known to come from prisoners who did not give informed consent. Some organs are taken from women who are forced by their husbands to “donate” a kidney or liver tissue to pay a debt. Is this the setting for ethical medical care?

Other problems with organ tourism are issues such as the lack of medical records, or records which are written in a foreign language and unhelpful upon return to the US. Organs are sometimes also contaminated with viruses such as HIV and hepatitis. And what about these medical complications? Who pays for the treatment? What if there is malpractice? Can the patient obtain any recourse? The complexity of organ tourism is immense, clinically, ethically, and legally. So is there another option for patients who need a kidney or liver transplant?

Enter the Good Samaritan. These are people, right here in USA, who are ready and willing to give an organ to a stranger. They have no goal other than “to help”. Their organ gifts are “no strings attached” and often, they never even meet the person who receives their organ. For the Good Samaritan, all that matters is that they have something extra and they want to share it with someone who needs it. In the new book, The Organ Donor Experience: Good Samaritans and the Meaning of Altruism, 22 donors were extensively studied to learn their personalities and motivations for organ donation. In general, these givers are normal, everyday folk, of average means, with a genuine desire to serve their community. Often, they have a lengthy history of volunteerism and their parents did as well. They originate from all fields, law, law enforcement, health care, education, you-name-it. A Good Samaritan could be your neighbor down the street, the clerk at the grocery store, a local taxi driver, or even your bank teller. These people want to give, and with medical, surgical, and psychosocial screenings, they can be lifesavers.

References:

• Bramstedt K.A., Xu J. Checklist: passport, plane ticket, organ transplant. Am J Transplant. 2007 Jul;7(7):1698-701.
• Bramstedt K.A. Ethical minefields in medical tourism. Sonoma Medicine 2011.
• Bramstedt K.A. Steering clear of organ tourism. Kidney Review 2007.

Dr. Katrina A. Bramstedt is a noted medical ethicist associated with California Transplant Donor Network in Oakland, California. She also has a private practice in Marin County where she has performed over 800 ethics consultations and published over 75 articles in medical and bioethics journals. She lectures nationally and internationally and has made numerous appearances on television and radio discussing transplantation and donation. She is the co-author of The Organ Donor Experience: Good Samaritans and the Meaning of Altruism.

Mental Illness Does Not Erase Your Dreams: The Little Metal Box

By Randye Kaye (parts first published on Ben Behind His Voices blog)

Mental illness makes news. Usually sensational news. CNN reports that Jared Lee Loughner is unfit to stand trial. Last month, Catherine Zeta-Jones spoke openly about her bipolar diagnosis. Charlie Sheen? Anybody’s guess. (But I say: get that man into treatment, stat!)

But what about the people who don’t make the news? What about the large proportion of consumers who are managing their lives somehow, or trying to, without shooting anyone or landing on the cover of People? Those who have been diagnosed with mental illness deserve respect - and help. Their courage is enormous, the obstacles often beyond comprehension for those who don't understand.

My son, Ben, earned another six college credits this semester, and is still on the Dean's list. Plus - in the past two months - a new job, and a move to his own small apartment. All this after seven hospitalizations, seven years in a group home, eight years unemployed. Amazing! He's getting his life back in small steps. But there’s no news coverage for people like Ben.

Why did it take so long? Ben has paranoid schizophrenia. That kind of messes up your path to maturity. Never, never compare his progress to someone else his age whose brain functions without illness. There are other yardsticks to use.

Ben spent lots of time dealing with an illness whose onset confused us all, and then lots of time learning to recover. He’s still learning to recover. But years ago, when all was in confusion and chaos, he’d still had dreams, which he wrote down and kept in a little metal box. I discovered these seven years after his fifth trip to the Emergency Room for psychiatric admission.

When I cleaned out Ben’s last apartment seven years ago, I’d found a little metal box. At that time, I peeked at its contents: more scraps of paper, obviously precious enough to be stored in this place of honor. I couldn’t bring myself to open these papers then. What crazy ideas would I find written on them? He was so desperately ill, his schizophrenia so in charge of his mind at that time. I’d seen enough; I’d heard enough. I threw the box in with the rest of his “desk supplies” and stored it away with more evidence of his disastrous attempt to live on his own that year.

Recently, I rediscovered that old metal box in a storage bin in Ben’s childhood bedroom. It had originally held mints: “Organic Cinnamon Snaps! Over 100 snaps per box,” reads the cover. The hinges are covered in duct tape now; the picture of forests and volcanoes under the words has faded. Ben’s little treasure box, now seven years old.

I open it. Inside are pages ripped from a small spiral notebook, carefully folded to fit. I hesitate. I do – and I don’t - want to open these.

What will I find? What secrets has he kept in here? I hold the box in my hand, a key to the things my son considered sacred when he was 20 years old.

I take out the first paper and unfold it. I expect to see what I have found before in his writings from that period: grandiose ideas, poetic phrases, delusions that guide my son when his symptoms flare up.

But I’m wrong. It’s only a list of phone numbers, readable, organized. His friends, our family, his most recent employers. At the bottom of the list, the names of some old friends – from high school days – with no numbers listed.

People he hoped to get in touch with again, I think. I’d almost forgotten how many friends he used to have. So many friends. Would they even talk to him now?

I open the next paper. It’s another list, with “Stuff” written across the top, then: candles, lawn chair, blank tapes, phone card, origami paper. The list goes on; it’s a “want” list, or a shopping list. Things he’d like to have for his birthday, perhaps. The simplicity of these small desires touches me.

The next sheet is a to-do list. Again, the handwriting is legible and the columns organized. There are about seventy-five items on this list. Most are written in blue ink, a few in green, black or red. I stare at this for a long time.

Among the plans he’d made:

• Write letters (with a list of over twenty people, including me, Ali, other family, old friends, our rabbi, his old therapist – what had he wanted to say?)
• Write play
• Write animal language dictionary
• Make gifts: Mom pillow, Dream Catchers, Ali cookbook (for his sister)
• Compose college essay
• Build a drum
• Make chess set

More lists: movies he wanted to see, videos he wanted to rent, books he wanted to read, CDs he wanted to buy.

I’d almost forgotten that he used to have dreams. So many dreams, such simple ones. Any dreams at all. It’s not fair! He had all of these plans. Will he ever get to do them?

At the bottom of the pile is a last piece of folded paper. This one is messier, but I can still read what it says. It is full of quotes, ideas, and plans that are more internal. Written here are ideals Ben wants to live by, almost like New Year’s Resolutions:

• Listen a lot.
• Blow nothing up out of proportion.
• Simplify, don’t be hypersensitive.
• Don’t judge people.
• Don’t use your muscles, use your mind.
• Don’t use big words.
• Think before I speak or act.
• Don’t try to control others, let them be.
• Reach out to people, lovingly.
• Hear and consider others’ points of view.
• …and the list continues.

I’d had no idea Ben was trying to change himself all the time I was desperately trying to change him.

Plans for his life - a life at a standstill for so many years. A life worth living; a life worth saving; a life stolen from him. Will he – will we -ever get it back? My boy, my precious boy. I know you’re still in there. Come back to us. Come back to you.

I wipe my eyes, carefully refold the papers and put them back in the little metal box. I wish I could sleep with it under my pillow, like a lost baby tooth, and have my wishes – and Ben’s – come true.

Randye Kaye is an actress, broadcaster, voice talent, and speaker. She is the author of Ben Behind His Voices: One Family's Journey from the Chaos of Schizophrenia to Hope.

Remembering the Dead

By Linda Ethell

Last week the Washington correspondent of our major state newspaper pointed out that Americans couldn’t be less interested in Australian news than they are; nonetheless, the funeral of 250 Australian and British soldiers found buried in a mass grave by the Germans at Fromelles, in France, in 1916 raised questions for any country which sends young soldiers to war. Some of these soldiers were identified, some were not, although appeals are still being made for any family descendants to provide DNA samples. They were re-buried with full military honours, speeches, high-ranking officers, government representatives, and so forth.

On the one hand, it seems strange that so much effort and emotion was expended on the burial of the bones of men none of whom could now be remembered, even faintly, by any living person. On the other, their lives are given a determinate significance that they probably never had in their lifetimes: a more articulated and publicly important meaning. The point seems to be that there is some underlying inchoate belief that the stories of their lives are structured by the manner of their deaths, that the ending determines the significance of the events that precede it.

This is a feature of narrative, as such, but I don’t know that it is a feature of the life-histories of any but soldiers, or perhaps those who die young. We make stories that comfort us by holding chaos at bay, we give young lives a meaning that the protagonist did not have the time to make, by the ways in which we commemorate their passing. We become emotionally entangled in stories so that we can grieve for people we never could have known, fictional or not.

And yet…one letter to the Editor asked, “Will the true stories of those who have been lost in Iraq and Afghanistan come to light in time?” Why are soldiers’ “true” stories those that view their lives through the lens of their deaths in war? Why are all the events that preceded them, out of all of the other possible stories that could be told, a prelude to death in war?

Linda Ethell is an honorary research fellow at the University of Melbourne and the author of Narrative Identity and Personal Responsibility.

Greenhouse Gases, Inaction, and Beyond

By Louis S. Berger

The world has been struggling with climate change issues for several decades, one major part of the dire threats to the environment and global survival that began to be identified more than 50 years ago in such pioneering works as Rachel Carson’s The Silent Spring. Yet, on the whole, nations, especially the big powers, seem to be doing very little, perhaps just enough to give lip service, to deal with these looming catastrophes. A recent evaluation by Janos Pasztor, the UN Secretary-General’s top climate advisor, of the results of the recent Copenhagen climate conference sounds the dire warning that it is unlikely that the minimal plans that were agreed on there can prevent disastrous climate changes by midcentury. Obviously, we are not doing nearly enough.

Why this obviously inappropriate, inadequate response to an equally obvious global threat? It seems to me the only thread of a rational argument that might be cited in support of this criminally irresponsible inaction is the highly dubious claim that there really is no threat, that global warming is a scare tactic used by various groups to promote their nefarious self-interests, that the supporting data are cooked. To cite yet more scientific evidence seems to have no effect on this kind of militant opposition; it is based on zealously held dogma and thus immune to change via scientific rationality or data, or ordinary reasoning.

If we look at the groups that oppose the taking of these desperately needed measures, and at their arguments, we can get an inkling of one of the roots of this opposition: unrealistic beliefs about what is in one’s best interest. The positions of nations, corporations, segments of industry, reflect the presence of short-term, ill-advised, childish self-interests that masquerade as reasonable motivations, usually economic and competitive. Ignoring real and huge long-term costs, these groups in fact claim that it would simply be too expensive to make the proposed changes, take childish positions that amount to saying “Your country isn’t doing cutting emissions, so why should ours?” etc. The motives and alibis are not only short-sighted but also rooted in an unrealistic, unwarranted optimism, in a profound unwillingness to face up to reality unless it is staring one in the face, unavoidably already present (there is no more gasoline; huge numbers a dying from radiation poisoning; natural catastrophes abound). We find current positions based on magic hopes instead (science can and will fix everything, no matter how bad is has gotten; the situation really isn’t all that serious; there’s plenty of time, and we’ll worry about the problems tomorrow; let’s worry about this quarter’s profits and creating new jobs, etc.). Furthermore, these powerful groups are able to persuade the general public that there are no real global dangers, that proposed corrections are much too expensive, promoting a widespread apathy, even antipathy, that further abets the blocking of needed corrective actions.

It seems to me that this situation concerning global warming is but one part of a larger gloomy picture: one can see the same inadequate responses also being made to the other major general situations that pose severe threats to global survival: wholesale environmental pollution and destruction (e.g.,the problem of nuclear waste), nuclear holocaust, drastic overpopulation. Again, if we look at the situations dispassionately we can see that roots of the real problem are much the same: the resolute avoidance of reality that motivates opposition and/or inaction, poorly conceived self-interests, magic hopes.

The point I am making is this. Global threats are usually addressed as problems of what to do, how to do it, and when or whether to do it (e.g., build more nuclear plants? invest heavily in solar power?). If my claim that the root problem lies elsewhere, in the aversion to facing realities, is accurate, then the logically prior task is to correct these immaturities. I maintain that unless and until that is done, the current roadblocks to proper action will continue to stymie the needed countermeasures, at least until global destruction has become so present that it no longer can be denied; at that point it will be much too late. So, under my premise the primary question becomes: How are these unrealistic immaturities best approached and implemented?

I have outlined my answer in a recently published book, Averting Global Extinction. It sketches an approach incorporating ideas taken from the field of clinical psychology. The work is a first attempt to deal with this daunting problem of the unwillingness to face realities, and is offered as a starting point that will encourage others to explore and pursue the unconventional proposed approach to dealing with the threat to global survival.

Louis S. Berger is a clinical psychologist and the author of Averting Global Extinction: Our Irrational Society as Therapy Patient.

Could Mousavi’s Martyrdom Spark Revolution In Iran?

By Adam Lankford

How rarely the fate of a nation rests in the hands of just one man.

And yet, in the aftermath of the election crisis in Iran, reform candidate Mir-Hossein Mousavi may be facing a momentous decision.

It’s possible that he could be in the unique position to spark revolution in Iran. But to do so would cost him his life.

In order to understand the potential significance of Mousavi’s death, it is important to understand the powerful history of martyrdom in Iran. Every year, millions of Iranians gather to commemorate the holiday of Ashura, which marks the honored death of Mohammed’s grandson, Imam Husayn ibn Ali. Legend has it that Husayn was killed in battle in 680, after he defiantly refused to swear allegiance to the corrupt dictator Yazid, despite the certainty of his death.

For many Iranians, Husayn’s death is much more than just a story or historical event. It’s the foundation of a divine moral code that insists that standing up to oppressive rulers, no matter what the sacrifice, is not just the right thing to do—it’s God’s sacred command.

Over time, the lessons of Ashura have become a fixture in Iranian politics. In the lead up to the Islamic Revolution of 1979, Ayatollah Khomeini accused the U.S.-backed Shah of being a modern day Yazid: a corrupt and illegitimate leader and the enemy of Shi’a Muslims everywhere. And before long, Iranians rose up and expelled him. Similar charges were made against Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq war. And thousands of teenage boys ended up martyring themselves for the cause, clearing mine fields with their bodies to repel their Iraqi foes. More recently, Iran’s leaders have employed this same tactic by referring to the United States as the “World Oppressor”—the same type of evil, Yazid-like dictator, just on a larger scale.

But now the shoe is on the other foot. For years, Iran’s leaders have used the legend of Husayn’s death to rally the masses to fight against the enemies they selected. But in the aftermath of the disputed election, millions of Iranians have finally recognized that the corrupt government that is harming them the most is actually run by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and their fellow hardliners. The rooftop chants of “Allahu Akbar” and “Death to Dictators” are evidence of this social awakening.

The defiance of the corrupt regime has begun. However, Mousavi’s death would be the next important step for this historical allusion to be fulfilled. As a martyr in the line of Husayn, Mousavi could become a symbol with extraordinarily powerful religious legitimacy that should not be underestimated.

Mousavi’s martyrdom could remind committed Iranian Muslims that fighting back against the corrupt regime is not merely a matter of their own political freedom—it’s a matter of the religious principles on which they’ve based their entire lives. According to the values which they hold most sacred, they must be willing to die—if that’s what it takes—in order to defeat their current oppressors.

But so far, despite their courage, the Iranian protesters who have died during the conflict appear to have been tragically unlucky, not declared and deliberate martyrs. Very few, if any, have been willing to follow Husayn’s legendary lead and intentionally sacrifice themselves for the cause.

On the other hand, Mousavi has already publicly proclaimed that he is ready for martyrdom, and he continues to defy the corrupt regime. If he deliberately provokes the regime into killing him while emotions are still high, he could leave an indelible mark on the Iranian psyche. And that could spark a revolution.

Adam Lankford is assistant professor of criminal justice at The University of Alabama and the author of Human Killing Machines: Systematic Indoctrination in Iran, Nazi Germany, Al Qaeda, and Abu Ghraib. Listen to an interview with Dr. Lankford about his book at PsychJourney.

Valentine’s Day in DeKalb: Two, Three, Many Virginia Techs?

Ben Agger and Timothy W. Luke

Last Thursday, February 14^th, 2008, Steven Kazmierczak reportedly shot and killed five students, and then turned a weapon on himself at Northern Illinois University. At least sixteen students were wounded in the rapid-fire shootings in this large NIU lecture hall during class. We have few certain details about the shooter, except that he used four weapons, two of which were purchased legally within the past week—a shotgun and a 9mm Glock semi-automatic handgun. Ironically, he purchased two magazines and a holster for the Glock from the same online vendor which sold Cho, the Virginia Tech shooter, one of his guns through a dealer transfer last spring.

Apparently, he was a good student (a former sociology major at NIU) who had no police record. He was pursuing graduate studies in social work at the Urbana campus of the University of Illinois. It was also rumored that he recently had ceased taking mood-modifying medication and had broken up with a live-in girl friend. He was 27 when he died in the large NIU lecture hall. Yet, there was another side to him. He enlisted in the U.S. Army in September 2001, but soon was “administratively discharged” within six months. More recently, he took a job as an officer at the Rockville Correctional Facility in Indiana in September 2007, but he failed to complete his preliminary training after only two weeks, and then never returned to work.

The shooting in DeKalb, Illinois occurred almost exactly ten months after the shootings at Virginia Tech last April, when 33 died, including students in classrooms, some of their professors, and the gunman himself. On November 7, 2007 Pekka Eric Auvinen walked into his high school in Tuusula, Finland, and shot eight people, killing five, and then also turned the gun on himself. There are parallels between these three bloody events: The shooters were young males; they used deadly semi-automatic weapons; they burst into school classrooms to do their damage; they took their own lives. There were apparent differences, too, although as yet we know next to nothing about the ‘real’ Steve Kazmierczak. Cho had already been identified in the Virginia mental health system as a troubled individual, and a potentially dangerous one at that. And Auvinen and Cho left video and written manifestos. In his testimony, Cho acknowledged the inspiration of Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris, who killed twelve of their high-school classmates and a teacher at Columbine in Colorado on April 20, 1999.

How are we to understand the sequencing and connections among Columbine, Virginia Tech, Tuusula, and now Northern Illinois? It is unimaginable that the Valentine Day’s Massacre in DeKalb would have occurred in the way that it did without Virginia Tech having occurred, as the December shootings in Finland also demonstrated. Tech is imbedded in DeKalb as its prototype and possibility. Kazmierczak might have found other ways to kill and to die without the example of Tech (and Columbine or Tuusula before it), but he surely framed his actions last Thursday within the scenario of last April in Blacksburg, Virginia.

 

This is not to suggest that DeKalb is simply a copy-cat killing. What did Klebold, Harris, Cho, Auvinen, and Kazmierczak have in common that led them to enact these epic killings and suicides, on school grounds? It seems they were alone in a crowd; they were alienated, lacking social ties. Whether they were mentally ill or not is somewhat beside the point. They might have been stopped, helped, redirected—yes, even medicated. We are intensely interested in the experience of being alone in a crowd, in Cho’s case as an Asian-American outsider on a big-time college/fraternity campus, which considers itself ‘Hokie Nation,’ —the illusion of tight community achieved through the gridiron Gemeinschaft of the Virginia Tech campus. And in the hours after the NIU attack, the response in DeKalb, Illinois and around the nation was to appeal to the school’s athletic mascot, the Husky, and tout “Huskie Spirit.” Perhaps we know only this: people more on the inside do not tend to commit mass murder and then take their own lives.

It cannot escape notice that the killers at Columbine, Blacksburg, Tuusula and DeKalb were men.  Women usually do not embark on shooting/suicide escapades, even though not even a week before on February 8, 2008 at Louisiana Technical College a female student shot two classmates and then herself in a classroom. Four of the five killed at DeKalb were women students, and many of those killed in Tuusula and Blacksburg also were female. This is a potent admixture: social isolation, male gun culture, fantasies of revenge.

Were the killers evil madmen predestined to wreck havoc? Were they beyond social influence and redirection? They committed mad acts, to be sure. But there is a thin boundary between those who keep their demons within, and at bay, and those who erupt. The answer to these acts of deliberate madness lies not in armoring our campuses but in acknowledging people’s interior turmoil and trying to help, where possible. This is difficult amid a sea of faces in large college lecture halls. But can we afford to reduce such acts merely to irreversible psychopathology? Columbine and Virginia Tech have now become a set piece—a media spectacle--with a certain inexorable momentum.

Ben Agger is professor of sociology and humanities at University of Texas, Arlington.  Timothy W. Luke is professor of political science at Virginia Tech. They co-authored a book There is a Gunman on Campus: Tragedy and Terror at Virginia Tech forthcoming in April 2008.

Creating Presidential Images

by Ruthellen Josselson

As the current political campaign for President intensifies, we are all engaged in creating images of the candidates. The spin doctors try to manage how we will imagine them, but they know perhaps better than anyone that what we each take in about each of the candidates reflects our internal sensitivities even more than what the pundits say. We create one another in our social and political worlds just as much as we do in our personal life. Political drama offers the citizenry opportunities for playing out personal conflict but concealing it beneath the political debate.

I recall a conversation with my tailor several years ago when the debate about the Clinton impeachment was raging. My tailor is an aged man, an immigrant from Italy, who told me that he didn’t mind so much that Clinton was “playing around” with a young intern – but that he did it in the same house where his daughter was – THAT was unforgivable and deserving of ultimate sorts of punishment.

From the viewpoint of the theoretical framework that I set out in Playing Pygmalion: How People Create One Another,  I avidly read each day’s political commentary to track the latest in the imaginary constructions of each of these candidates. I wonder about what is in the unconscious of the American electorate. Are we in search of the good mother, the soothing father, the aggressive warrior, the stern taskmaster? Perhaps others would here like to add their observations of how this is unfolding.

Ruthellen Josselson, Ph.D. is professor of psychology at The Fielding Graduate University and was formerly professor at The Hebrew University of Jerusalem as well as at Harvard University.