Why Predators Are Able To Victimize Us And How To Stop It
Hi everyone. My internet connection was just recently re-established after being accidentally cut off for over a week. During this time I occupied myself researching a variety of subjects at the local library and planning articles and things.
I thought I'd post this here to see what ya'll think and encourage feedback to strengthen it for a general audience with very short attention spans.
This is the way it reads at the moment:
------------------------------------------------
The state of Georgia recently relaxed some restrictions on convicted sexual predators. This is now allowing them the right to take up residence just about wherever they want to. I've been hearing the discussions and debates on the issue from a lot of folks in my neck of the woods. I've also noticed something a bit disturbing about these discussions. People are talking about it in the same way that the media has framed the issue.
A glaring omission here, is any talk about how to raise awareness of predation in general and how to prevent these crimes BEFORE they happen.
This is my little contribution to the effort to raise the level of individual awareness and responsibility.
Catch Me If You Can
"Catch Me If You Can" was a 2002 film based on the real-life story of 60's con man Frank Abagnale, Jr. Even with no knowledge of the occupations, Abagnale passed himself off as a Pan Am pilot, a hospital physician and an attorney.
Abagnale knew, instinctively, what psychologists study formerly: "There is a deep-seated sense of duty to authority within us all".
According to Dr. Robert B. Cialdini: "Respect for authority is a shortcut through life that allows us to function more efficiently. Without a universal deference to our 'superiors' and to the experts, it would not be possible to construct a functional society." Also according to Cialdini: "A multi-layered and widely accepted system of authority confers an immense advantage upon society."
And "...the alternative, anarchy, is hardly known for its beneficial effects on cultural groups and one that the social philosopher Thomas Hobbes assumes would render life 'solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short." Consequently, we are trained from birth that obedience to proper authority is right and disobedience is wrong."
Abagnale and other shrewd operators can use this as a weapon of influence, exploiting
The Three Main Elements of Authority: "Title, Clothes and Trappings."
As one particular exploit, Abagnale chose the profession of attorney (Title), wore expensive, conservative suits (Clothes) and with fake diplomas on the wall (Trappings) was able to fool unsuspecting people into trusting him.
Symbols Of Authority
From the example above, we can understand why Dr. Cialdini also asserts: "We are often as vulnerable to the symbols of authority as to the substance." This had to be true for Abagnale because there was no real substance behind his impersonations at all.
Respect My A*thor*a*tie! Eric Cartman
We've all been children. And as parents, we want our children to be safe. We teach them to respect our authority for many reasons. When our kids love and respect us, they will listen to what we have to say. At least, we hope. From our child's point of view, most of us as parents, have 'been there, done that' and we can offer the benefit of our experience. There may even be times when our foresight prompts us to intervene when we see that our kids are inclined, pre-disposed or otherwise attempting to do something dangerous or potentially dangerous. The situation might call for some instruction now in order to get them out of harm's way until we can explain things more fully later.
So we all have been individually conditioned, for one reason or another, with deep down inclinations to respect authority. A survey of the news can show us that there are people who take advantage of this to hurt us and our children, but is there a little bit more we can explore? Aren't we safe in groups? Aren't the children safer when they're in groups? Well, the answer to that can be yes and no.
GroupThink As Authority
Writing in The Emotional Life of Nations, Lloyd deMause expands on Stanley Milgram's famous Obedience to Authority experiments and, in the process, shines a bit of light on why the individual can still be vulnerable, even in a group:
"Social scientists have been puzzled by Milgram's experiments, wondering why people were so easily talked into inflicting pain so gratuitously. The real explanation is that, by joining a group-the "university experiment"-they switched into their social alters and merged with their own sadistic internalized persecutor, which was quite willing to take responsibility for ordering pain inflicted upon others. Their 'struggle with themselves' over whether to obey was really a struggle between their social alters and their main selves.
The crucial element of the experiments was the existence of the group-as-terrifying-parent, the all-powerful university. Not surprisingly, when the experiment was repeated using children-who go into trance and switch into traumatized content more easily than adults-they were even more obedient in inflicting the maximum shock."
Although deMause is explaining how we can justify doing harm to others, his work is also valuable for explaining WHY we follow instructions to do so, even to the point of causing a fatality. And this harmful aspect of obedience to authority is what we're talking about here.
At this point, it might also be useful to mention something Dr. Cialdini stated while explaining the principle of social proof:
"In general, when we are unsure of ourselves; when the situation is unclear or ambiguous; when uncertainty reins, we are most likely to look to and accept the actions of others as correct." And it might also be useful to add that if a specific situation calls us to action and there is no other to look to for guidance in that situation, we tend to defer to that authority. Without a doubt, predators know that.
Now that we have some understanding of our previous conditioning and tendencies (early setup) we can take a look at how we can be set up for specific situations regardless of context.
The example I've picked to further clarify the Setup or "preframe" comes from the book "The Irresistible Offer: How to Sell Your Product or Service in 3 Seconds or Less" by Mark Joyner:
The Greatest Persuasion Secret in the World
"If you understand this one secret, you can dispense with just about every other book on the topic of persuasion and still get some great results in your life.
Keep in mind that I have been a lifelong student of persuasion, have written respected books on the topic, and have seen how persuasion plays out in many various contexts and battlefields. I can tell you, without question, that the following concept is the Holy Trump Card of all persuasion principles:
The Frame.
The Frame is not your message—it’s the message that precedes your message.
Huh? Stay with me . . .
Imagine for a moment that you are looking at a piece of art in a museum. What kind of assumptions would you make about it? The underlying presupposition is that the art is worthy of being in a museum. It must be good.
What if you saw the same piece of art being peddled by a street artist? Do you think your perception of it would be different? I mean, if he’s any good, what is he doing selling art on the street, right?
I heard possibly one of the best explanations of this principle from the most unlikely place once: a chick flick entitled Never Been Kissed.
Drew Barrymore played an undercover reporter who was sent back to high school to write about what life is like for teenagers these days. Barrymore’s character was a real dork in high school, and she discovered that she was still just as much of a dork when she went back undercover.
Her brother (played by David Arquette), an otherwise unsuccessful guy who was a popular baseball jock in high school, decided to enroll in the school and help her out. He quickly became the most popular kid in school and began his campaign to save his sister’s self-esteem. He told everyone that she used to be his girlfriend and that she dumped him. He spoke reverently about how great she was and within the matter of a day, she was quickly accepted as one of the cool kids.
He summed this up with one line: “Josey, if you want to be cool, all you have to do is get one other cool kid to like you.” When the other cool kid likes you, this preframes everyone else’s opinion of you.
Their contention was that even the cool kids were absolutely terrified of everyone finding out their secret: that they are just as dorky as you. The other cool kids give something acceptance and the green light: It’s safe to like it now without being found out.
I think it’s a pretty valid analysis."
When this stuff sinks in you can also start noticing how the preframe info affects the opinion of others.
Joyner continues with:
"For a fun experiment some time, try this with the wing man of your choice.
1. Go to an area far away from where you live.
2. Go to a bar or a club with your wing man five minutes behind you and strike up a conversation with someone.
3. Half the time, before your friend enters the bar, tell the person to whom you’re talking that your friend is a famous movie producer. The other half of the time, tell them that he just got out of prison for assault.
4. See how that affects how they react to him.
Wait a minute. Maybe you already know how this is going to play out without going through the trouble.
Do you now see the power of the Frame?
With the proper preframe, do you really think you’ll need any other persuasion tricks to attain your objective?
This is why Word of Mouth is the most powerful form of marketing in the world.
Warning: some people who first learn this principle use it to deceive people. When people find out you were lying, not only will you lose your Second Glass, but Word of Mouth will start to have the exact opposite effect on your life."
I suspect that the Frame is so powerful because it is very subtle and almost unconscious. It is also because we have associated the preframe information with something in our minds that we have already allowed to enter unfiltered. That is, if we develop trust with someone, information we get from them bypasses our mental filter and penetrates deep into the core of our beliefs.
If you don’t yet understand the power of this, I highly recommend paying close attention to your own mind.
Turning back to the issue at the beginning of this article, what is more important: determining whether or not a known predator is near and who they may be and how to keep them away, or how to protect ourselves from becoming victims? While we debate and argue that issue are we getting distracted from the real danger?
Despite the various ways of tracking convicted predators, victimization still happens. What about the next predator that comes along? The only thing that will prevent victimization in the first place is awareness of the potential danger.
The problem is that we’re so tuned in to our own radio station so much that sometimes we are totally out of sync with the most important things. One of those important things is learning the tricks that are used to shape our thoughts and keep us focused on the magician's right hand so we don't notice what his left hand is doing. The media is good for that. Just read on and see.
In The Beginning Man Created Paradox
Any category can become partially or wholly identified with the attributes which go into or are excluded in making up said category and vice-versa. Confusing? (Think about the Symbols-As-Authority discussion above).
For example, causing the death of your own child is excluded from the arbitrary category "parent", so it is not a subject that occupies our mind. If it does cross our mind we tend to avoid recognizing it. It is not paradoxical if a parent kills it's child. Why? Being a parent first requires that you are a human being which, unfortunately, includes the attribute of killing other human beings.
In other words, the category "parent" doesn't exclude the reality of first being human. The same holds true for other paradoxes. The mistake of allowing a lower order category on the knowledge tree (parent) from erasing an earlier or more primal category (human) creates paradoxes.
So, what am I trying to say? It's simple really:
Do not be taken in by Paradoxes.
Don't let paradoxes be a blind spot! Only newscasters and other criminals make their living on paradoxes. Think about it. How many stories are created, sensationalized, dramatized and reported on the basis of a paradox?
How could a good Christian cheat us on the used car?
How could the chief of police be taking bribes?
How could a good American betray his country?
He is a minister, how could he beat his wife?
He is a priest. How could he sexually molest a child?
How could the Sunday School teacher have sex with his daughter?
If he loves animals how could he be a research scientist?
How can a doctor cheat his patients?
And on and on.
And we just eat it up don't we?
Well, I guess there's no law that says we have to. So maybe it's time to try something different. Maybe with the ideas in this article we can come to some visceral realizations that can shake us out of some complacency. Maybe if we spend less time in our self-absorbed pursuits we will have more awareness of our environment - it's beauty and it's potential dangers and what can be done to coexist in a network of mutual support. Maybe if we recognize our mutual interdependence, we can do a better job looking out for ourselves and the ones who mean a lot to us. Maybe if we all did that then everyone would be safer, feel safer and predators might not even have a chance to start anything with anyone.
That's a lot of maybe. But then, what was it that Mr. Deming said during the effort to rebuild Japan's economy after the atomic devastation?
"It is not necessary to change. Survival is not mandatory."
W. Edwards Deming
It's a choice.
*************
References:
*************
Robert B. Cialdini was the Regents' Professor of Psychology and W.P. Carey Distinguished Professor of Marketing at Arizona State University where he has also been named Distinguished Graduate Research Professor. He retired from academia in May 2009. He is best known for his popular book on persuasion and marketing, Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion (ISBN 0-688-12816-5).
Influence has sold over 2 million copies and has been translated into twenty-six languages. It has been listed on the New York Times Business Best Seller List. Fortune Magazine lists Influence in their "75 Smartest Business Books."
Also, "Yes! 50 Scientifically Proven Ways to be Persuasive" (ISBN 978-184668-016-8)
_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Cialdini
-------------------------------------
Irving I. Janus, Victims of Groupthink. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1982, p. 70. 169 Stanley Milgram, Obedience to Authority. New York: Harper & Row, 1974, p. 143.
A. C. Elms and Stanley Milgram, "Personality Characteristics Associated With Obedience and Defiance Toward Authoritative Command." Journal of Experimental Research in Personality 1(1966): 282-89.
Also:
Chapter 5, The Emotional Life of Nations by Lloyd deMause
_http://www.psychohistory.com/htm/eln05_psychogenic.html
-------------------------------------
The Irresistible Offer: How to Sell Your Product or Service in 3 Seconds or Less
Mark Joyner
_http://www.amazon.com/Irresistible-Offer-Product-Service-Seconds/dp/0471738948
-------------------------------------
Category (contextual definition):
Nothing but an arbitrary label to group specific attributes of objects and actions regarded as similar or different by selecting and ignoring attributes: qualities and quantities of the objects or actions being classed.
Edit: Spelling and/or other enhancements