Speaking of Which…

Comments on my last post discussed men’s utter lack of shame and awareness regarding their sex’s persistent professional incompetence, and of how shocked women were at the shoddiness of the professions once they were  finally allowed to enter them.

Some great quotes were gleaned including:

” they are a car crash, they can’t run anything properly” (Zeph)

and on the question of whether men should be at least a little bit embarrassed by all their fuck ups:

“They should be. But strangely their extra-logical, super-rational, wonderfully analytical and not at all emotional man-brains just cannot compute such a thing.” (ParallelExistence)

Speaking of which, I recently ordered two books on the subject of Trauma Bonding, the first entitled “Loving to Survive” and the second entitled “The Betrayal Bond.”

The first is written by Dee Graham, and is based on the intensive research she carried out almost decade earlier ( 1987), when she took it upon herself to study the victims of a hostage situation. Until then nobody had never thought of doing that, perhaps because victims of trauma are usually women and therefore not worthy of study, and perhaps because patriarchy is excited and preoccupied at the thought of What Makes a Psychopath Tick, and not so much interested in the effect on the victims. The phenomenon of female trauma bonding was articulated by her, known as Graham’s Stockholm Syndrome Theory.

I am reading Graham’s book very very slowly, so that I can savour and devour every sentence of wisdom.

I was surprised to find that the second book, The Betrayal Bond, was written by a man. Why surprised? First of all the subject deals with women, who have been trauma bonded to men, therefore a man has no credibility when it comes to this subject.

I checked the dates. Loving to Survive was published in 1994. The Betrayal Bond was published in 1997, three years later by a Patrick J. Carnes Ph.D.

I searched The Betrayal Bond for quotes and references of Graham’s research. There are none to be found. It seems that Carnes is appropriating Grahams’ work and passing Graham’s Stockholm Syndrome Theory off as his own idea. Because he has the clout of male privilge, his work is more widely published and acknowledged than Grahams’ original work.

There is no doubt about the fact that the critics and readers believe that Mr Carnes Ph.D invented this concept himself. The blurb gushes:

“Dr Carnes’s deep compassion and abundant insights make The Betrayal Bond invaluable to you as you take the corageous steps necessary to break free of your bonds and embrace healing. If you are the victim of abuse, this book could literally save your life.”

Turn to his list of Acknowledgments, and you find that he has vampirically sucked the energy of countless women in order to write this copy-cat book of his. The sheer amount of gynergy this one man consumed is astounding. And he wasn’t even writing an original idea that he’d thought of himself:

“There are many to thank. Pat Mellody, Pia Mellody and the entire Meadows staff, for their continuous support for my writing and research. I especially wish to thank Maureen Canning, Ray Early, Elizabeth Ewins, Peter Vincent and Linda Grange. Without Kathy Kelley’s support and office skills, this manuscript may never have become manageable. As always, Linda Holman Bentley and the staff of the Phoenix Public Library helped immensely. I relied on two experts. Nancy Hopkins and Jennifer Schneider, MD, whose careful reading of the manuscript helped to fill the gaps.

I have a group of friends who watched over the birth of this book. Known as the Woman Lake Gang [?WTF?] . they are Ann and Fred Foresman, Phyllis and Lennie Brooks, Skip and Sandy Reiter, and Leslie Myers. Their care meant a lot. My wife, Suzanne, walked every step of the way in the making of this book. It is a lucky man who has a wise woman for a spouse.”

It is a lucky man who has a wise woman for a spouse…..

And there you have it. Not a hint of shame, and a blatant parading of incompetence. Every day I learn a little more about just how easy life is for men. They put on a suit, do not much of anything, and get power, money, property and their own personal female slave.


14 thoughts on “Speaking of Which…

  1. So Betrayal Bond was written by Pat Mellody, Pia Mellody (who if my memory is correct is a passionate advocate of co-dependency wherein women but not men suffer from dependency, and that is why so many women become depressed or are supposedly incapable of living independent lives because they ‘need a man to take care of them!) but I digress. In fact all those women Patrick Carnes cited wrote the book and his sole contribution was to claim he wrote this book because Dee Graham’s work is irrelevant since she is female not that default human – aka male! Plagarism thy name is man!

    Furthermore Carnes appropriated the groundbreaking work and research Dee Graham undertook and who then co-jointly wrote the book Loving to Survive with Edna I. Rawlings and Roberta K. Rigsby. Carnes like most men believes what women write and say is ‘nonsense’ but when men repeat the self same statements/writing suddenly malestream critics wax lyrical about the power of male writing and the depth of analysis the male author has engaged in. Reminds me of the late Joanna Russ’s book ‘How To Suppress Women’s Writing.’ After all man is the default human is he not and whatever nonsense illogic men utter it is treated as ‘wisdom.’

    I’m certain you will find Loving to Survive thought provoking and it certainly does challenge misogynistic assumptions men make with regards to their claims of ‘defining women.’ Much of what women do in order to survive living in a male supremacist/women hating culture are coping strategies, but as you rightly say, male supreamacy always pathologises the suffering women experience due to having to live in a male supremacist and male dominated culture/society.

    Analysing how and why men dominate women is seen as ‘man-hating’ because questioning/challenging male supremacist system is ‘man-hating is it not’ whereas women-hating/male contempt for women is logical given man alone is the default human. That is why men become hysterical when they are challenged because women must never ever challenge the dominant group since they are individuals not men who happen to have appropriated power and control over women for centuries.

  2. “Plagarism thy name is man! ”

    Ne’er a truer word spoken.
    All of us here can think of any number of examples of men copying women’s work and passing it off as their own. They really have no shame at all when it comes to this sort of thing. They do it in the workplace all the time.

    • Oh gosh, when I was much younger, working on projects with my father, I would suggest one way to go about things and he would ignore me. Then, magically, five minutes later, he comes up with his *cough* own suggestion, which was remarkably identical.

      So yeah, got the souvenir t-shirt on that one.

      • yes, that is *exactly* how they do it, isn’t it. I used to believe they had actually thought something up themselves (by some strange coincidence a short time after I had thought of, and articulated, a particular idea) but no, it is completely deliberate. WHat fragile egos….

        stats are through the roof on this post. it’s always the ones you least expect. I’ve followed some of the links here… some men are getting a little annoyed that we see through their posturing.
        I haven’t bothered to read past the first lines (slagging off this post) but I should imagine they’re pretending men invented professions such as medicine. Err, no they didn’t. ANyone alive today still pretending women weren’t the traditional healers and midwives, in all cultures around the world, until the doctors of death forced their way into the labour rooms, should brush up on their history, or at least google the Burning Times.

      • It is also similar to what Watson & Crick did to Rosalind Franklin, they snuck into her lab, looked at her research, then went off to take all the glory themselves.

        Thankfully she still gets a little recognition, but W&C would be anono dudes had they not ‘stolen’ her work. They got Nobel Prizes, she died of cancer quite young as a result of her work.

      • Yes, I can’t believe what teh menz did to Rosalind Franklin.
        Here we see it again. Their lack of shame. Those two men *accepted* nobel prizes that should not in fact have gone to them. They belonged to a woman. And tHey did this in a world where women do not get access to decent financial support and education, but where men are handed everything on a plate, and yet women *still* manage to surpass them intellectually.

  3. The disgusting, filthy men can accept credit for all the pain, suffering, mayhem, gridlock, avarice…..

    Ya see? they CAN get stuff done all by themselves.

  4. I’ve begun reading it, and it’s worse than I ever could have imagined it could be.
    He practically blames OJ Simpson’s wife for her own murder.. citing the fact that she stayed with a known abuser as the cause of death…

    “When a major sports figure batters his wife, or worse, kills her, we can get lost in the legal contest, the race issues, the fate of the children, the grief of the families, and the lifestyles of the wealthy. THe fact that the victim stayed in the relationship where violence was predictable underscores an insane loyalty.”

    Umm, so what? A woman stayed with a violent man and *this* is to be the focus of the book?
    What about men’s culturally legitimized right to batter their wives?
    IN his short-sightedness ( an occupational hazard of being a privileged male) he completely overlooks the fact that she probably *knew* her husband was a killer, and that if she’d left him he might have killed her even sooner.


  5. Hello- Thought i would de-lurk if you don’t mind and share another stealing story. It’s about the Q-tip, invented by a man, of course.
    Except not, a man saw his wife taking a piece of cotton out and put it on the end of a tooth pick to clean the baby’s ears. He thought, wow, that’s a good idea, I’ll invent it!
    Now, but any company’s org chart, he would clearly be place in marketing, not R&D. He saw a product, tweeked it, packaged it and gave it a name. That’s all the things that the marketing department would do. Valuable, yes, but he didn’t invent that idea. Hell, his wife probably didn’t either. She probably saw her mother do it and her mother do it and so on.
    And why didn’t the wife think- wow, that’s a great idea, I’ll give it to the world. Well, because women have long been taught that whatever we have isn’t worth it. It doesn’t even occur to most of us to share what we know and what we have with the world because it comes with so much derision and contempt.
    Ok, back to lurking. Bye.

    • Please keep posting Valerienorth!

      This line of yours is so true:
      “It doesn’t even occur to most of us to share what we know and what we have with the world because it comes with so much derision and contempt”

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s