Archive through August 26, 2002
TV ClubHouse: Archive: Archives Two:
Jason's decision and Stockholm Syndrom:
Archive through August 26, 2002
Babyruth | Monday, August 26, 2002 - 11:59 am     Maybe one reason Roddy respects Gerry is because he is the ONLY HG who hasn't been trying to get in Roddy's pants or on his best buddy list. They play chess, they talk, they make short term agreements. Maybe Gerry wasn't so far off in his Alpha Males description. |
Zachsmom | Monday, August 26, 2002 - 12:01 pm     I have to disagree Wavelength..comparing Jason/Roddy as Captee/Captor is very demeaning to those who have actually suffered such situations.. Perhaps you can tell me where the similarities are in this situation..considering the orginal poster did not point out the similarities nor any subsequent posters who agrees with this analogy.. |
Goddessatlaw | Monday, August 26, 2002 - 12:08 pm     Zachsmom - you are looking for evidence of a Roddy bashing thread here and it is not a Roddy bashing thread. No one has accused Roddy of anything - the only analysis to be had is what Jason and others' PERCEPTION may be of Roddy that causes them to either love him or be afraid of him. I would really like to see an intelligent and thoughtful thread like this survive. Calio put a great deal of effort into establishing it, and I would hope that we will all try to stay on the topic - which is Jason and whether he shows evidence of Stockholm Syndrome traits. |
Kmjm | Monday, August 26, 2002 - 12:16 pm     Although this cannot be full-blown Stockholm syndrome, I think it has some of the elements of it. The houseguests are virtually imprisoned and cannot get away from each other. This is very stressful and, as we certainly saw with Nicole last year, causes an emotional pressure cooker in which any weaknesses will surface. Roddy is mentally so much stronger than Jason and can survive and prosper in this environment by manipulating the emotions of others for his benefit. Notice how the houseguests who have resisted him the best are the most mature- ie Danni and Gerry? I think the jury is still out on Lisa, since he hasn't yet directed the full force of his personality at her. This doesn't make Roddy evil, but from the outside it is hard to watch him dominate others in this calculated way. He warps their reality by first tearing them down, and then forgives them for their 'sins' against him, earning their gratitude and loyalty. When they realize what he's done after they get out of the house, you just know they're going to feel like schmucks. |
Zachsmom | Monday, August 26, 2002 - 12:16 pm     I am NOT looking for evidence that this is a Roddy bashing thread. PLEASE show me the similarities that the situation that JASON is/was going through has anything to do with a person who has suffered Stockholm syndrome..I repeat..NO ONE has listed ANY similarities..and I find it very demeaning to those who actually have suffered the syndrome!!! |
Mystery | Monday, August 26, 2002 - 12:23 pm     Zachsmom, you can see similarities discussed in Goddessatlaw's first post. |
Wavelength | Monday, August 26, 2002 - 12:24 pm     Calio, during your research did you happen to find out how those people fared after their experience? I actually felt afraid for Jason's sanity when I saw him in the DR. |
Zachsmom | Monday, August 26, 2002 - 12:30 pm     No I cannot Mystery..because Roddy is NOT holding them captive..they aren't there against their will..this is where the analogy fails..I also don't see where they are seeking Roddy's approval either..Jason LIKES Roddy..they are friends.. |
Nutsy | Monday, August 26, 2002 - 12:38 pm     Just trying to see if I can draw some similarities ... From the original post: Virtually anyone can get Stockholm Syndrome it the following conditions are met: Perceived threat to survival and the belief that one's captor is willing to act on that threat So, Jason feels that Roddy is a threat to his survival in the BB house, and if Roddy were to become HOH, he would then nominate Jason. Is that the parallel? This is fun! The captive's perception of small kindnesses from the captor within a context of terror So, Roddy deigns to spend time with Jason and engage him in conversation, within the context of strategizing to keep himself in the game, and not on the chopping block again. Isolation from perspectives other than those of the captor Hmmm ... Roddy taking Jason aside, out of earshot of other HGs, or when the other HGs are asleep? Perceived inability to escape. LOL - they can't! Unless they press the panic button, or are evicted. |
Mystery | Monday, August 26, 2002 - 12:39 pm     These are the similarities as I see them and as, I believe, they have been pointed out: "Perceived threat to survival and the belief that one's captor is willing to act on that threat." Obviously none of the HGs are in danger of losing their lives, but their "survival" in the game is threatened every week. Jason's words and behavior demonstrate that he believes that Roddy is willing to save him from the threat of eviction. "The captive's perception of small kindnesses from the captor within a context of terror." Again, substituting the context of "terror" for the context of the BB house, Jason seems to have been persuaded by Roddy that Roddy is watching out for him. "Isolation from perspectives other than those of the captor" Jason is definitely isolated. Roddy is isolated in the same way, so they share a perspective, although unlike the captor/captee scenario, Roddy is not responsible for Jason's isolation. "Perceived inability to escape." Obviously none of the HGs can escape the house without forfeiting the money. |
Zachsmom | Monday, August 26, 2002 - 12:44 pm     Roddy isn't holding them Captive..they are all in there on their own free will..this is where all similarities die..these are all grown adults who thought they knew what they were getting into when they started this game..what they didn't plan on was becoming friends with each other..nominating and evicting gets harder and harder as the weeks go by and as fewer and fewer people are left in the house.. Nutsy..I did enjoy your post! |
Nutsy | Monday, August 26, 2002 - 12:44 pm     covers her paper so Mystery can't copy
 |
Jag2000 | Monday, August 26, 2002 - 12:49 pm     Zacksmom....please explain why Jason cried like a baby in the DR after his noms.? he was all for nom. Roddy until Roddy got to him just before he nom. Gerry and Amy. Was he afraid to disappoint Roddy by nom. him? I do not hate Roddy but I think he is playing mind games with someone who is not grown up enough to get what Roddy is doing. |
Mystery | Monday, August 26, 2002 - 12:56 pm     LOL Nutsy! (dang, thought she wouldn't see me...) Zachsmom, Jason and Roddy are adversaries in this game. Only one of them can win the big prize. They were not friends before BB and it's extremely unlikely that they'll be friends after BB. The fact that Jason might see Roddy as his "friend" is precisely the point that Caliogirl was making about the Stockholm Syndrome. People's perceptions are altered when they're placed in an environment where they feel a lack of control and where information from the outside is extremely limited. |
Zachsmom | Monday, August 26, 2002 - 12:57 pm     I cannot tell you why Jason cried in the DR. We don't see the entire DR session..only what BB wants us to see..and BB manipulates it in such a way to have us percieve what they want us to percieve..perhaps he was crying because he thought he was going to disappoint Danielle? He cried and was confused over his vote to evict Chiara after Dani played the opposite stint on him. I think Dani caused much more emotional turmoil on Jason than Roddy ever has. |
Wavelength | Monday, August 26, 2002 - 12:58 pm     I've watched Karen cry on BB1 and Bunky cry on BB2 but when Jason cried in the DR I felt uncomfortable and embarrassed for him. "Cried like a baby" is a perfect description. It just didn't seem normal. Even if there is no actual threat of danger I think someone with a very gentle character could percieve one. |
Nutsy | Monday, August 26, 2002 - 01:01 pm     Caughtcha Mystery! Zachsmom - I don't think anyone's making a case for it being "exactly" like Stockholm Syndrom, just drawing some parallels. Roddy may not be Jason's captor, but he is older than Jason, and someone Jason (for whatever reason) looks up to in the house. I think it's more the unspoken manipulative methods that are holding anyone captor. Or, I'm smoking something, and should share with the rest of the class! Hears her mom calling her ... awww heck, it's getting fun and I gotta go home! |
Zachsmom | Monday, August 26, 2002 - 01:04 pm     The fact that Jason might see Roddy as his "friend" is precisely the point that Caliogirl was making about the Stockholm Syndrome. Nope..they both came in on equal terms..Roddy has never forced Jason to do anything..in fact..Jason mislead Roddy previously..Roddy has never been in control over Jason..so there is NO similarities of stockholm syndrome..and I stand by statement that comparing the HGs to those who have actually suffered Stockholm Syndrome is demeaning towards them..there are no similarities..Roddy has no power in the house and that is another area of where this analogy fails..he is on equal terms with all.. |
Bluie | Monday, August 26, 2002 - 01:18 pm     Zachsmom, Somehow Roddy has got to you too. You are blind to his manipulations because you want to believe he is for real. It's as plain as day, the guy is a ruthless cold hearted manipulator. He's not sweet, kind, caring, concerned, or loving. I definitely agree, he's the captor and the other hg's are suffering in various degrees from his subtle abuses, and have bonded with their tormentor. |
Goddessatlaw | Monday, August 26, 2002 - 01:24 pm     I disagree that there is anything demeaning toward those who have suffered Stockholm Syndrome represented by this thread. The Syndrome is just that - a cause and effect phenomenon which has been studied and documented as relevant to some people who have found themeselves in imperiled circumstances which are or are perceived to be out of their control. To suggest that a true hostage situation has taken place within the house is clearly outside the scope of this discussion. The discussion is whether there are similarities between the situations which gave rise to the definitional category of Stockholm Syndrome and the traits ascribed thereto, and the microcosm of events which are taking place within the house which have caused behaviors which may or may not be similar to that of those suffered by Stockholm Syndrome. The discussion is not to demean, degrade, or diminish the suffering of those who actually have experienced a Stockholm Syndrome event. It is a true phenomenon, not a dread disease to be hidden and ashamed of or a taboo subject to be swept under the rug. Frankly, I would think someone who truly experienced Stockholm Syndrome would welcome a forum where more people could discuss and become informed of the cause and effect related to the Syndrome - if nothing else to promote understanding. If someone in the house were complaining of aching knees, we would discuss whether we believe they had arthritis. Would this be considered demeaning to arthritis sufferers? |
Zachsmom | Monday, August 26, 2002 - 01:30 pm     The discussion is not to demean, degrade, or diminish the suffering of those who actually have experienced a Stockholm Syndrome event. It is a true phenomenon, not a dread disease to be hidden and ashamed of or a taboo subject to be swept under the rug. Frankly, I would think someone who truly experienced Stockholm Syndrome would welcome a forum where more people could discuss and become informed of the cause and effect related to the Syndrome - if nothing else to promote understanding. How do you not know you aren't discussing it with such a person right now? |
Goddessatlaw | Monday, August 26, 2002 - 01:33 pm     You know what, I don't Zachsmom - if you are, then please identify yourself as such and explain what it's like to be you so that we might be more fully informed of the ramifications of the Syndrome. If not, maybe we can call Patty Hearst for a tie breaker. |
Caliogirl | Monday, August 26, 2002 - 01:34 pm     Wow! I go for lunch and look what happens. Thanks guys for defending me . I would like to point out hat I did put a disclaimer in my original post that "Disclaimer: I'm in no way suggetsing that BB3 can even begin to compare to the trauma of being held captive or being abducted or any other horrific scenario." so I'm disinclined to apologise to to Zachsmom for any offense in the comparison. I also said "I admit it's not a true comparison -- though there are definite similarities." which have been pointed out by several other posters. I was hoping to get an interesting discussion going and I thank those of you that participated in that vain. Personally my favourite part of the game is watching the effect that situation has on each person. Bunky lost it at one (or more) point last year as have some of the HG's this year. It doesn't make any of them bad people. Everybody has a different threshold for different things. It's fascinating to see these people unravel and for what reasons. I really don't see why there is such a level of animosity surrounding this thread for some people. |
Shortnsweet | Monday, August 26, 2002 - 01:36 pm     In many social situations the "In" group tries to set themsleves apart from the others. I think that Roddy and Chiara and their group did this. Danielle has commented on the fact that she and Marc and Jason were "forced" together because they were not part of the group. I think that Jason just wants to be accepted by the "cool kid" (Roddy). And that is why Jason has a "crush" on the "cool girl" (Chiara). |
Wavelength | Monday, August 26, 2002 - 01:46 pm     Welcome back Calio. It's a very thought provoking subject which leads to strong opinions. I posed a question to you earlier as to whether you found out how people do after their experience. Seems like Bunky is OK. |
|