Poll for the Armchair Psychologists

[SMK]

Can Transference mean a person could transfer their childhood hopes of the ideal parent they never had onto another person?

YES, this will be sure to occur if there were real defecits in parenting, or no parent at all.....

 

[SMK]

I am not sure. Maybe.
I think of transference more like transferring emotions.

For instance, you could transfer your anger at your parents for not measuring up onto someone else...

Yes, it is transferring emotions. But it most likely happens when unconscious yearnings for a real parent - better than the one you had - ignite due to something in the "hook" (the person who seems to ignite this attraction)-- I can imagine Travis with his swagger and confidence and suits seeming like the "Daddy" who ought to have been there rather than perhaps a shell with flat affect (he certainly seems so now) In the same vein Jodi may have initially seemed like the soothing mother to Travis, who we know had parents who fell far below the ideal.

 

[lil_buddy]

Yes, it is transferring emotions. But it most likely happens when unconscious yearnings for a real parent - better than the one you had - ignite due to something in the "hook" (the person who seems to ignite this attraction)-- I can imagine Travis with his swagger and confidence and suits seeming like the "Daddy" who ought to have been there rather than perhaps a shell with flat affect (he certainly seems so now) In the same vein Jodi may have initially seemed like the soothing mother to Travis, who we know had parents who fell far below the ideal.

The question did not ask about an emotional response.
Definitions require precision, not paragraphs of word salad.

 

[OEJ]

The question did not ask about an emotional response.
Definitions require precision, not paragraphs of word salad.

I love you...but...

 

[SMK]

I love you...but...

Thank you for that.:blowkiss:

 

[OEJ]

2Hip2BSquare,

Protocol is that we give a synopsis of comments at the link and then provide the link. We can't quote word for word.

Interesting what you posted, though. As others have noted, Jodi didn't happen in a vacuum. The "stuff" is gonna come out eventually. Personally, I thought it was interesting to say the least that Jodi's sis was at the Grand Canyon on verdict day, and Mrs. Arias never made it to the courtroom, either. Personally, I found that unforgivable if for no other reason for the sheer gravity of the whole situation. Wasn't her fault, though, she said. Sound familiar?

 

[OEJ]

Absolutely: I never thought she was criminally abused or neglected, but rather that there was a toxic family dynamic. Agreed, she was likley as unable as she was unwilling.

I have a slightly different thought on this. I think Jodi gave permission to the predatory constructs along the way.

 

[Harmony 2]

Please do not sleuth family members or post the names of innocent associated parties. This thread is only to discuss the psychological aspects of the convicted person in the case.

Also, copying and pasting quotes from other sites is not allowed.

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

Excellent! Certainly makes the case that she is not BPD which I had finally thought she is. Lol

I still 100% believe that her childhood holds the answer. The fact that her parents do not testify to abuse means nothing.

As a teacher, I saw over and over again how parents vilified their own children and did not look to their own behavior at all. The child was at fault.

Jodi did not arise out of a vacuum.

If one reads about the families of alcoholics,there are roles that children play. I forget what they all are, but there is the perfect child, the clown, and the source of all problems.

I wonder if this type of categorization happens in all dysfunctional families?

And I will add most emphatically that I agree 100% with Dr. DeMarte that JA is primarily BPD and will add with overlap/comorbidity. It is very obvious if you've been around a BPD or have experience/education regarding it. It is as clear as a bell.
What many laypeople don't understand is the overlap/comorbidity part. What that means is that there are co-existing personality disorders that rear their ugly heads from time to time in someone that has a PD because they have learned what works for them under specific situations. So, with JA who has a primary dx of BPD, you will (from time to time) see Narcissistic Personality Disorder, Antisocial Personality Disorder, Hystrionic Personality Disorder, & Schizotypal Personality Disorder. They will intermingle/coexist/function together.
It is rare not to see this occur in people with Personality Disorders.
Professionals do not get confused on this. It's pretty "easy-peasy".

moo

 

[SMK]

ok tasty-honey-busty--you can disagree - you have had much success seducing all kinds of men I am guessing [?] is what it sounds like. [ ??] good for you honey. I'm just reporting what a smart, good looking young man taught me years ago about sex and i also have 2 younger brothers and 2 younger male cousins who would not be able to be led around by their penises...I am pretty sure.

I had thought the same: Why were my experiences so different? When I was in my 20s and quite attractive I did have men turn me down due to being in other relationships, or feeling that my motives or the context were not right, etc. I recall telling my husband about these incidents, looking back, and telling him, "The myth of the man who will jump at any sexual offer does not stand the test of reality. It's only one side of the story of male sexuality" and he agreed, saying he could never be seduced (would never get in bed with a woman unless he really wanted to). Ah, well.....

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

My point was in correlation to JA being able to seduce TA with regularity, even if he knew from a cognitive standpoint that JA was bad for him.

Did she use her manipulations on him? Of course.

But I think we all do that to some extent or from time to time.

Unless we have a bunch of nuns here!!! :floorlaugh:

 

[human]

And I will add most emphatically that I agree 100% with Dr. DeMarte that JA is primarily BPD and will add with overlap/comorbidity. It is very obvious if you've been around a BPD or have experience/education regarding it. It is as clear as a bell.
What many laypeople don't understand is the overlap/comorbidity part. What that means is that there are co-existing personality disorders that rear their ugly heads from time to time in someone that has a PD because they have learned what works for them under specific situations. So, with JA who has a primary dx of BPD, you will (from time to time) see Narcissistic Personality Disorder, Antisocial Personality Disorder, Hystrionic Personality Disorder, & Schizotypal Personality Disorder. They will intermingle/coexist/function together.
It is rare not to see this occur in people with Personality Disorders.
Professionals do not get confused on this. It's pretty "easy-peasy".

moo

I have my new opinion from the site that is from kristinrandle or whatever. Don't have it front of me. That person is an expert , I guess.

I can believe that there are overlaps. I doubt if anyone fits anything to a tee.

But ASPD sure seems more fitting

JA never did any self mutilation, did she?

 

[SMK]

My point was in correlation to JA being able to seduce TA with regularity, even if he knew from a cognitive standpoint that JA was bad for him.

Did she use her manipulations on him? Of course.

But I think we all do that to some extent or from time to time.

Unless we have a bunch of nuns here!!! :floorlaugh:

Yes, we all do it, but in my case, it didn't work.... :dunno:

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

I have my new opinion from the site that is from kristinrandle or whatever. Don't have it front of me. That person is an expert , I guess.

I can believe that there are overlaps. I doubt if anyone fits anything to a tee.

But ASPD sure seems more fitting

JA never did any self mutilation, did she?

Yes, she had threatened suicide which is classic BPD. She had fits of rage from perceived slights that her mother talked about which is classic BPD. She had everyone walking on eggshells around her and manipulated even her attorneys and media which is classic BPD.
She mirrors everyone around her, even down to Wilm*tt and DeMart*, once again classic BPD.
For her to be primarily ASPD (aka a "Sociopath"), there would be a stronger sense or self combined with lies for the sake of a lie. Sociopaths show a history of theft, burglary, charisma, and lies, lies, lies. Many more men are diagnosed a Sociopath than women by and large.
JA is much frailer in who she is due to her core personality isn't formed or "gelled". She has a distinct fear of abandonment which accounts for her bizarre stalking behaviors with past boyfriends (ex. cutting telephone lines, slashing tires). She will have issues with boundaries like hacking into TA's facebook account.
While I have stated that I believe she has comorbidity with other personality disorders (such as ASPD), I have felt for a long time that she has a primary dx of BPD.
And yep, there's lots of so-called experts.

moo

 

[SMK]

Yes, she had threatened suicide which is classic BPD. She had fits of rage from perceived slights that her mother talked about which is classic BPD. She had everyone walking on eggshells around her and manipulated even her attorneys and media which is classic BPD.
She mirrors everyone around her, even down to Wilm*tt and DeMart*, once again classic BPD.
For her to be primarily ASPD (aka a "Sociopath"), there would be a stronger sense or self combined with lies for the sake of a lie. Sociopaths show a history of theft, burglary, charisma, and lies, lies, lies. Many more men are diagnosed a Sociopath than women by and large.
JA is much frailer in who she is due to her core personality isn't formed or "gelled". She has a distinct fear of abandonment which accounts for her bizarre stalking behaviors with past boyfriends (ex. cutting telephone lines, slashing tires). She will have issues with boundaries like hacking into TA's facebook account.
While I have stated that I believe she has comorbidity with other personality disorders (such as ASPD), I have felt for a long time that she has a primary dx of BPD.
And yep, there's lots of so-called experts.

moo

When I read all of this - all new and foreign to me, as I am not a DSM person - it all seems (especially the un-gelled self, and the fear of abandonment) that there is no person to blame.

No evil , just a mass of infantile compensations, and to me seems to mitigate guilt.

I wonder if in a future society all of this will completely transform the concept of guilt ( no self means no volition means no one was home to be guilty).

Actually, in brain science, the idea that there is no self is now recognized: Dr. Susan Blackmore has said that death is an illusion precisely because the self is an illusion: There was never a self to begin with, and what does not exist cannot die.
"There is no spirit which survives body death. ..... These, like the very idea of a persisting self, are all illusions...." ...There never was any solid self and there is no one to die. With this insight fear is left behind." ( i actually find this horrifying )

 

[cosmos]

My idea on Jodi is that she makes other people feel her pain. So if her pain comes from an anger that has a large component of self-anger, then I figured it might be called "transference" only because it seems she is transferring the pain to others and Travis in particular got a massive dose of the anger.

Like when someone has a miserable day at work and they go home and want their family to feel miserable too. Except with Jodi it's at the core of her being, it's the only thing she does in life.

She intentionally staged the crime scene to make it appear that only a very angry person or persons could do something like that -- the rage of a person who brings a knife and a gun to a fistfight. Because she is in absolute denial of her own anger and was convinced that nobody could connect her to a crime of anger.

Even though I'm quite certain Travis could not hurt her physically, I do think it was necessary for Jodi to provoke him into making some sort of a physical threat, perhaps some kind of move towards her, before she could kill him. Maybe that's why it took her 13 hours at his house before doing it. Travis frustrated her by not getting angry enough sooner.

 

[SMK]

My idea on Jodi is that she makes other people feel her pain. So if her pain comes from an anger that has a large component of self-anger, then I figured it might be called "transference" only because it seems she is transferring the pain to others and Travis in particular got a massive dose of the anger.

Like when someone has a miserable day at work and they go home and want their family to feel miserable too. Except with Jodi it's at the core of her being, it's the only thing she does in life.

She intentionally staged the crime scene to make it appear that only a very angry person or persons could do something like that -- the rage of a person who brings a knife and a gun to a fistfight. Because she is in absolute denial of her own anger and was convinced that nobody could connect her to a crime of anger.

Even though I'm quite certain Travis could not hurt her physically, I do think it was necessary for Jodi to provoke him into making some sort of a physical threat, perhaps some kind of move towards her, before she could kill him. Maybe that's why it took her 13 hours at his house before doing it. Travis frustrated her by not getting angry enough sooner.

Interesting insights......

 

[thefragile7393]

I have my new opinion from the site that is from kristinrandle or whatever. Don't have it front of me. That person is an expert , I guess.

I can believe that there are overlaps. I doubt if anyone fits anything to a tee.

But ASPD sure seems more fitting

JA never did any self mutilation, did she?

Self-mutilation is only a part of it...not always will someone with BPD do self-mutilation. OR she could have done it and no one knows about it. Or you are totally right. Or she is just all of the above one big mess

 

[mollyf]

Self-mutilation is only a part of it...not always will someone with BPD do self-mutilation. OR she could have done it and no one knows about it. Or you are totally right. Or she is just all of the above one big mess

I think JA is too vain to self-mutilate—unless she got into a traffic accident from having her car's rear-view mirror trained on her own face. I would bet money that the only self-harm she did was done by her inability to see that harming other people would ultimately injure her own fine self.

 

[OEJ]

When I read all of this - all new and foreign to me, as I am not a DSM person - it all seems (especially the un-gelled self, and the fear of abandonment) that there is no person to blame.

No evil , just a mass of infantile compensations, and to me seems to mitigate guilt.

I wonder if in a future society all of this will completely transform the concept of guilt ( no self means no volition means no one was home to be guilty).

Actually, in brain science, the idea that there is no self is now recognized: Dr. Susan Blackmore has said that death is an illusion precisely because the self is an illusion: There was never a self to begin with, and what does not exist cannot die.
"There is no spirit which survives body death. ..... These, like the very idea of a persisting self, are all illusions...." ...There never was any solid self and there is no one to die. With this insight fear is left behind." ( i actually find this horrifying )

She has a personality. It's just disordered and she doesn't like it. She doesn't want that one. So, she's going to try and steal someone else's.