''My mom is no felon'' - Teen girl kidnapped 18 years ago defends her abductor

[h2o_proof]

Were you a psych major?

Initially...however my response relied more on mathematics than psychology. Denial minus captivity doesn't equal Stockholm

 

[Blackout]

I think the gap in how you're connecting the dots to draw the conclusion of Stockholm Syndrome is the fact that you're misinterpreting "denial" for "sympathy" and placing them in the same continuum.

The girl is not sympathizing with her "captor", rather she's in denial that her "captor" is a captor because it doesn't align with her truth; her truth, is that this woman is her mother. Of course that's not the case, however when this is the only mother you've known for 18 years, the denial is healthy and real. On the other hand, in the face of captivity, sympathy, which one would exercise through Stockholm Syndrome is a defense mechanism.

You're also breaking the continuum by assuming Stockholm because what you're assuming is "sympathy", which we can clearly see is denial, ONLY occurs AFTER the "captor" has been caught and removed from the scenario. Meaning, once the victim starts to exhibit signs of [what you think] is Stockholm, she's no longer in captivity. Now if the victim continues to be in denial after having time to process the facts, she moves to the stage of delusion. This is key, because, while there is a bond between delusion and Stockholm, Stockholm-related delusion is self-induced where denial-related delusion is a byproduct of a much different syndrome, PTSD, which more than likely is what this girl will have IF indeed she moves to the state of delusion.

In a nutshell, you weren't as far off a people in this thread have made it seem, but your main flaw was time and space, which would have needed to be a constant. For example if the girl found out about her situation while still being in the situation, she quite possibly could have developed Stockholm. However since she was removed from the situation somewhat simultaneous to finding out about the situation, there was no time/space to develop Stockholm. Or in other words; just because a person has a droopy face and thick plastic glasses doesn't mean they have Down's Syndrome, lol.

Finally a credible answer

As for the underlined they made it seem like I was far off because they were driven by emotion instead of logic therefore instead of saying anything credible they simply relied on how they felt that I was wrong and try to justify it with how much people believed them instead of going at me with the actual truth

Frankly it's quite counterproductive on how they argue to win instead of arguing to get to the truth

 

[spliz]

I think the gap in how you're connecting the dots to draw the conclusion of Stockholm Syndrome is the fact that you're misinterpreting "denial" for "sympathy" and placing them in the same continuum.

The girl is not sympathizing with her "captor", rather she's in denial that her "captor" is a captor because it doesn't align with her truth; her truth, is that this woman is her mother. Of course that's not the case, however when this is the only mother you've known for 18 years, the denial is healthy and real. On the other hand, in the face of captivity, sympathy, which one would exercise through Stockholm Syndrome is a defense mechanism.

You're also breaking the continuum by assuming Stockholm because what you're assuming is "sympathy", which we can clearly see is denial, ONLY occurs AFTER the "captor" has been caught and removed from the scenario. Meaning, once the victim starts to exhibit signs of [what you think] is Stockholm, she's no longer in captivity. Now if the victim continues to be in denial after having time to process the facts, she moves to the stage of delusion. This is key, because, while there is a bond between delusion and Stockholm, Stockholm-related delusion is self-induced where denial-related delusion is a byproduct of a much different syndrome, PTSD, which more than likely is what this girl will have IF indeed she moves to the state of delusion.

In a nutshell, you weren't as far off a people in this thread have made it seem, but your main flaw was time and space, which would have needed to be a constant. For example if the girl found out about her situation while still being in the situation, she quite possibly could have developed Stockholm. However since she was removed from the situation somewhat simultaneous to finding out about the situation, there was no time/space to develop Stockholm. Or in other words; just because a person has a droopy face and thick plastic glasses doesn't mean they have Down's Syndrome, lol.

Oh now he wanna dap this post. I and other posters have been telling him this SAME shyt. All the way down to me saying denial was shorties main issue.

 

[spliz]

Finally a credible answer

As for the underlined they made it seem like I was far off because they were driven by emotion instead of logic therefore instead of saying anything credible they simply relied on how they felt that I was wrong and try to justify it with how much people believed them instead of going at me with the actual truth

Frankly it's quite counterproductive on how they argue to win instead of arguing to get to the truth

nikka I told u the same shyt. Literally the same shyt.

 

[Blackout]

nikka I told u the same shyt. Literally the same shyt.

No you didnt.

You didn't go deep enough and dissect the case piece by piece like the other guy did and point out which part of my claim was wrong. You just glossed over it and said I was wrong without showing why

I asked you to do that multiple times but you never bothered to put in the effort

 

[pawdalaw]

No you didnt.

You didn't go deep enough and dissect the case piece by piece like the other guy did and point out which part of my claim was wrong. You just glossed over it and said I was wrong without showing why

I asked you to do that multiple times but you never bothered to put in the effort

Lol, you full of shyt. Not only did myself and other posters tell you the same thing (maybe not so eloquently) I quoted the definition and pointed out the differences.

 

[Blackout]

Lol, you full of shyt. Not only did myself and other posters tell you the same thing (maybe not so eloquently) I quoted the definition and pointed out the differences.

All you did was mention one difference of duress.

Other posters just said I was wrong and that's it lol

That aint much.

Ain't no half steppin son.

 

[pawdalaw]

All you did was mention one difference of duress.

Other posters just said I was wrong and that's it lol

That aint much.

Ain't no half steppin son.

I told you about awareness and duress. The other posters probably didn't have the patience to break it down or go back and forth with you.


One last question. Does she have Stockholm or naw?

 

[Blackout]

I told you about awareness and duress. The other posters probably didn't have the patience to break it down or go back and forth with you.

One last question. Does she have Stockholm or naw?

You are making a baseless claim as if the other posters could back up why they thought I was wrong lol. They didn't back it up so your baseless claim fails.

Her finding out that her mom was fake made her aware.

So the only difference you brought up that was credible was duress but I already called out that difference before you brought it up.

So no you didn't say what he said.

 

[pawdalaw]

@Blackout

The key to the whole argument is awareness and duress. The relationship with her captor is all she's ever known. By all accounts it was a traditional mother /daughter relationship. Stockholm requires the awareness of being held against your will. If you can't see that then we agree to disagree. Ty for clean debate.

*reread the definition. 99% of it is non existent in this case

Does the girl have Stockholm or naw?

 

[Blackout]

@Blackout


Does the girl have Stockholm or naw?

I already read that post

When the case was broken she became aware there is actually awareness. She just doesnt care and still thinks of her captor as her mom.

Therefore the only difference left that you brought up is duress which I already mentioned before you brought it up.

 

[pawdalaw]

I already read that post

When the case was broken she became aware there is actually awareness. She just doesnt care and still thinks of her captor as her mom.

Therefore the only difference left that you brought up is duress which I already mentioned before you brought it up.

Does the girl have Stockholm or naw?

 

[Blackout]

Does the girl have Stockholm or naw?

Ask h20proof

 

[pawdalaw]

Ask h20proof

lol. I already got his take on it. honestly after so many iterations of what it is in this thread, I want to know your take. Yes or No?

 

[Blackout]

lol. I already got his take on it. honestly after so many iterations of what it is in this thread, I want to know your take. Yes or No?

There is no iteration .

He is the only one who compared the case to Stockholm syndrome fully.