Idiot of the Century Award?

I don't think it's quite right to call this woman an idiot. It's a strange and rather sad phenomenon, but a lot of women have a tendency to stick up for boyfriends and husbands who abuse them. Stockholm syndrome, perhaps. At any rate, it's not simple supidity, it's a far deeper psychological issue.

Yeah, it's a "far deeper psychological issue" that she's too stupid to comprehend or seek help addressing.

Either that, or it's a "far deeper psychological issue" that no one in her family or community will admit, recognize, or help her address.

Someone here is an idiot: either her, or the parents who never taught her how to recognize dangerous and/or irrational behavior, and protect herself against it.

Steve Reuland wrote:

I don't think it's quite right to call this woman an idiot. It's a strange and rather sad phenomenon, but a lot of women have a tendency to stick up for boyfriends and husbands who abuse them. Stockholm syndrome, perhaps. At any rate, it's not simple supidity, it's a far deeper psychological issue.

Believe me, I've known a lot of women like that, including some very dear friends. But there's a point at which you have to call a spade a spade. If you're sticking up for someone who shoots you four times and who, along with his elderly parents, holds you hostage so you can't get medical help, that's rank stupidity. Clearly there are other psychological issues as well, but it's still incredibly stupid.

I think its sad and disturbing, but not all that surprising that a woman would do this. Apparently its fairly common among the abused to cling to their abuser, unable to distinguish real love from this kind of sick emotional attachment. It's not all that different from women who fall in love with brutal thugs or murderers behind bars, sometimes marrying them.

Dave S: Sometimes I think these women have an exaggerated notion of their own specialness, or of how their love can "change" or "transform" people. And sometimes I think the men they so stupidly love pander to this notion.

There's also a possibility that such women "grow up" without ever seeing any examples of healthy love or relationships to go by. If all the men I had encountered in my childhood and adolescence had regularly beat their wives, would I have learned a better way to get along with a woman?

I think this goes beyond the typical battered wife's refusing to part with an abusive husband. This apparently fell just short of "murdered" rather than "battered," Since the family helped in the crime, I think it points directly at stupidity on a grand scale including all involved. It is so overwhelmingly stupid that it is almost redundant even to say it.

If it doesn't make Maury, it will probably show up as a plot theme for an episode of Law and Order SVU; it sounds right up their proverbial alley.

What's with the Michigan AG employing the wives of Supreme Court judges as staff to help him prepare cases for presentation--many of which before the Court:

"Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox has hired the wives of two Michigan Supreme Court justices, raising questions about whether the state's top law enforcement officer and the state's highest court appear sufficiently independent.

About a month ago, Cox hired Kathleen Markman, whose husband, Justice Stephen Markman, received $34,000 in campaign contributions last year from a political action committee controlled by Cox.

And in a no-bid contract in May 2004, Cox hired Lucille Taylor, wife of Chief Justice Clifford Taylor.

Both women are lawyers with long legal backgrounds, and their arrangements with Cox are legal. As the state's top lawyer, Cox's legal team typically appears before the seven-member Supreme Court more than anyone else. "

Moron isn't the word for this woman. She's been a victim of abuse, obviously, and that works a number on your head. And as RB pointed out, there may be other issues.

She's a product of her culture, which encourages women to be this way. Not too many years ago, the Walt Disney Company put out Beauty and the Beast. The fairy tale is far older than that and as Raging Bee pointed out many people buy into this myth.

I have known more than a few women who, after having been raped, turned into bar sluts. Are they stupid? Are they morons?

We might as well ask why people who observe this kind of behavior choose the unsympathetic route and call such women "Stupid"? Is there a part of such men that wants to feel superior to such women? I seem to recall a fairy tale about a frog who became a prince, but only after the prince became a frog.

This woman was not slapped around. She was not battered. She was shot. Four times. That makes it different from a typical battered wife.

I don't conceive of intelligence as a single measure of someone's overall aptitudes and I certainly don't think you can sum those things up in a single number. There are multiple forms of intelligence and every person has areas where they are highly adept and areas where they aren't. In one context, I may be a genius and in another a total idiot. So you have to read such comments as being applicable only in the context in which they are used. The woman may be perfectly adept at other things. She may be able to do math at an incredibly high level, or she may be brilliant at writing poetry. But in this context, she's an idiot.

As far as such decisions being the result of abuse, trust me when I tell you that I have more experience with such situations than you can possibly imagine. I've helped friends out of abusive situations many times, and attempted to help others out of them many more times than I succeeded. I am well acquainted with the psychology of abuse victims and I've been personally affected by it in a deeper way than I can possibly express (and those who know me well know the numerous situations I am referring to). But it seems to me that there is a point at which a person has to stop making excuses and look inside. And the point at which someone tries to kill you - and comes from a family insane enough to help him do it - is well beyond that point.

Mark, how do you know her previous history? How do you know she wasn't slapped and battered? Is somehow being shot with a gun not a form of battering? This sounds like bash the woman at all costs.

The guy's family was helping him and hasn't been put in jail, and we don't know what kind of extortions they're reaping on her. Do you realize that, after the abusive situation, things continue to happen? This is an abused woman, and all you guys are, to put it in a word, pricks.

Joel wrote:

The guy's family was helping him and hasn't been put in jail, and we don't know what kind of extortions they're reaping on her. Do you realize that, after the abusive situation, things continue to happen?

A) his father is in prison, sentenced for 3 years (and should be, of course). His mother got 3 years probation, and frankly that is outrageous. She should be in prison too.

B) things certainly "continue to happen" when you stay involved with the man who tried to kill you. They don't continue to happen if you get away from him.

This is an abused woman, and all you guys are, to put it in a word, pricks.

Nonsense. The guy who did it is a prick. In fact, I'd go much further. The guy who shot her is an inhuman monster and I wouldn't feel the least bit of sorrow if he was put to death, along with both parents for what they did. They're the bad guys. Pointing out that it's stupid to want to marry the inhuman monster doesn't make one a prick.

I would not say she's an idiot so much as she is in denial, as many people in destructive relationships are, even those who are very intelligent. I hope she wakes up.

"Stupid" is a satisfying but not ultimately very helpful or fruitful term for this woman. We call someone like this "stupid" because it is the best way we know how to emphasize what a horrible choice she made for herself. But this should not be confused with actually claiming her to be lacking in intelligence. Bad choices are often called stupid or idiotic despite the fact that a person's reasons for making them may have nothing to do with how bright they actually are.

It's very possible that she is mentally ill-- that's different from being simply stupid. It's possible that she is so psychologically messed up by her relationship with this man that she can no longer make choices that are in her own best interest-- that's different from being stupid.

My point is that if you are at all interested in WHY something like this happens, simply saying "She is stupid" doesn't cut it. It pretends that we are all individual autonomous rational beings who are capable of choosing the best for ourselves, therefore there is no better explanation for when somebody fails to do that. It's akin to saying the boyfriend is "evil" and not bothering to go any further. Words of condemnation are just rubbish when it comes to explanation.

I don't know the details of the shooting--it might have been an accident (I doubt it, but it is possible)--but holding her hostage for six days without medical care was unconsionable.

There's a saying in Narcotics Anonymous: "You're not responsible for your disease, but you are responsible for your recovery." This woman's circumstances are not her fault, but sooner or later one has to think for oneself, identify a problem, and take positive steps to finding, and implementing, a solution. As horrible as one's situation may be, sympathy and respect are wasted if one refuses to do one's own part to remedy it.

Refusing to think of ourselves and others as rational adults with free will are not "empowering" and do no one any good. In fact, they only reinforce the message of helplessness that deters and belittles all efforts toward self-betterment. (Gretchen: when you belittle the notion that we are capable of choice and rational thought, whose side are you taking?)

PS: why are words of condemnation "rubbish?" Is it not useful to point out a distinction between right and wrong actions?

Well, there's truth to the statement that some people deserve each other. I'd venture this to be one of those cases. Maybe there won't be someone to call the cops the next time this happens and they won't have a chance to spread the madness onto whatever children they have.

Raging Bee: I wasn't aware that I needed to take a side. The simple fact is, however, that people do not share a capacity to be rational and make decisions based on "free will" (whatever that is) simply by virtue of being human. I don't say this with any aim to empower or disempower, but rather to acknowledge that each person's decision-making ability is affected (or more strongly, produced) by factors both inside and outside of the body that need to be recognized. We're not little islands, and realizing that does not make us weak or incapable. On the contrary, it is the refusal to recognize these factors that does this. Once you understand "Okay, so this is what cause me to think this way," you can be mindful of it (literally) and take more control over your own thoughts. If, for example, you know that seeing other guys hit on your girlfriend when you have been drinking can spark you to become irritable and perhaps fight with her later about this, you can sit down and work though the reasons for that and find a way to stop it from happening.

PS: why are words of condemnation "rubbish?" Is it not useful to point out a distinction between right and wrong actions?

I said that words of condemnation are rubbish when it comes to explanation-- please read the whole sentence. Saying "This is wrong" does not do anything to convey why someone does it, or how to stop them from doing it in the future. Expressed with enough emphasis, it may even get in the way of such efforts. Often if people are sufficiently repulsed by the severity of an act, they even respond negatively to attempts to understand it, because they are perceived as justifications.

I think there are good points being made on both sides here. My post was not really intended to work as an explanation, of course, it was just a gut reaction to a very disturbing situation. And no doubt that gut reaction was at least partially shaped by my own history of trying to help friends overcome such tendencies and watching them go back to vile and abusive men over and over and over again. There is a point at which one becomes so frustrated with it that one opts for the clarity, even if oversimplified, of outrage. And that's perfectly legitimate on one level, but it's also correct that it's a very one-dimensional response and it's not terribly helpful. So thanks to everyone for their comments.

Words of condemnation can also reinforce the fact that if you do something that is wrong, no one will care why you did it, or listen to any sob-story or explanations, so you'd better take corrective action yourself before looking to others for sympathy.

You just made my point for me, raging bee. You equated explanation with justification.

Why on earth should we not care why people do things that are wrong? Do you assume that they will just go away, that there is no reason to try to figure out a cause in order to eliminate it?

Why on earth should we not care why people do things that are wrong?

I'm not saying we should not care; I'm saying we should let the perpetrators know that they won't get any slack or sympathy until they are seen taking positive steps to correct the wrongs. An addict who comes to NA or AA will get plenty of sympathy, and plenty of opportunity to explain why they got addicted; but they will also be asked, early and often, "What are you doing about your problem, and how can we help?" It is, in fact, stated in writing that that is their first priority: "We are not interested in what you have done in the past, how much or how little you have...We are only interested in what you intend to do about your problem and how we can help."

It's not about not caring; it's about focus.