bookworm474
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2008
- Messages
- 311
- Reaction score
- 1
I've mentioned a couple of times that the As as a whole have similarities to Mafia families. They take care of their own, play by their own rules, have their own sense of morality and ethics, punish their own, circle the wagons, value loyalty, etc.
I started reading Hare's (and Babiak's) Snakes in Suits: When Psychopaths Go to Work. Robert Hare is one of the foremost authorities on psychopathy. They clarify the distinctions between psychopathy, sociopathy and ASPD. It's the first time I've seen these distinctions made, but they are very useful, IMO. I've left out ASPD because I don't think it's relevant here.
I've mentioned more than once that I think that Cindy has strong narcissistic traits at the very least, and I still believe that, but was not able to figure out why the collusion on everyone's part, why the eagerness to lie on the part of the entire family, why the hostility against the entire world, why the circling of wagons, why the reprehensible and inappropriate reactions and behaviour. Why do they remind me of Mafia families?
The As' behaviour seems consistent with this description of sociopathy. It certainly might explain a lot! And raises a whole lot of questions as well.
If anyone wants to also argue against this idea, I would be interested to know the reasons the As behaviour does not seem consistent with this descriptions of sociopathy.
-----------------------
Good observations
The labels are not as good as the descriptions and elements of relationship in family and outside.
I read a book which I don't have in front of me, but from it I understood more about closed families. It was a sociological study of the poverty in southern Italy and how it was so hard to change the people there. They had to stick together to survive. So in a sense it is a kind of tribal system that had a fear of change and outsiders. Families had to send relatives up north to send money home.
Seeing a family through the media can't really be fair. They might not have been then who they are now, with all the pressure, distortion and having to defend themselves constantly not knowing how to handle it all. Many mistakes were made.
What has started to really bother me about the Anthonys and their pattern of losing, stealing, and depending on Cindy's job, is that the family became way out of balance. I will bet that the friction is over George not making the bread and that psychological effect on Casey, maybe Lee too.
There is a strange ambivalence about George. He has allowed himself to regress over the last few years, or he didn't get a good work foundation to keep Cindy from being dominant. It is like she is the male and he is the female psychologically playing with that imbalance of powers. If it has been that way for years, that has messed up Casey's understanding of many things creating the distortions that have gotten acted out.
Or it might have been created by Casey's manipulations forcing George to back off and let Cindy duke it out with Casey not realizing how far it could go. They should have been in family therapy years ago. I don't think George had enough of an effect on the females as they prefer fantasy to reason and all that goes with it.
It is subtle and they both are trying to find a positive philosophy with the baggage of what Casey has done with whatever they were ignorant about.
They have to work it out and their lawyer now is like re-parenting them which is great. They have to be really exhausted by now.