This is one of the best examples of the very reasoning that leads to wrongful convictions. Jentz's story itself is shockingly horrible. The fact that This is one of the best examples of the very reasoning that leads to wrongful convictions. Jentz's story itself is shockingly horrible. The fact that she is an exquisite writer only helps to bring her experience to life in a way that makes it impossible not to be as curious as she about who ran her over, chopped her with an axe, and left her to tell the tale. Her writing style is that of a master mystery novelist, never allowing too many clues to be revealed before their time. No matter how skilled a writer she is, and how compelling her search for this mad man is, and how low a character the person she suspects has, anytime someone looks for justice, it has to be based on evidence, not hunches, rumors, or -- worst of all -- the ouija board device called a lie detector. Jentz pins most of her hopes on a technology that is not even remotely reliable, especially during the time period in which this crime occurred. Even in the 2000s, study after study showed that most investigators were worse than chance at detecting lies when using the either galvanic skin response methods or fMRI. It is not admissible in court because there is not a single reputable study showing its efficacy.
Sure we could all feel better by catching someone and punishing them, especially if they are a domestic abuser. Feels pretty satisfying to expose and punish that type of abuser. I will definitely agree with that. But, if they didn't actually commit the crime, and from all the "evidence" presented by Jentz, there is zero reason to believe beyond a shadow of doubt (there is a huge shadow of doubt), then while you get to punish one bad guy, you are potentially still letting the real perpetrator live in society.
Jentz abhors any talk of wrongful conviction. To her, if you talk like that, you obviously are not upset enough about the crime. But our justice system is broken. Sure, it doesn't seem like the worst thing to be wrong and punish a domestic abuser. If you are wrong, they deserved punishment anyway. But, how about the myriad black people who have done nothing wrong and are convicted because they seem "scary," all "look alike" to white people, or just seem suspicious? Studies using DNA evidence show that 25% of convicted black people are innocent of the violent crime for which they were imprisoned. Jentz throws around her Princeton education quite a bit in this book; yet, she doesn't do anything to investigate the effects of wrongful conviction or the bad "science" behind polygraphs. They are a joke. They are not yet real science. So use them at a party for fun, but never punish a person based on a technique that doesn't have a single efficacy study that supports it. I understand the general public's lack of awareness around the efficacy of lie detection. But by 2006, when this was published, there were plenty of sources showing it was not at all a scientific method. If she is going to talk so much about her Princeton education, I think she should make use of it.
She was also pretty harsh of her treatment of her friend who almost died and suffered amnesia because of the attack. Jentz thinks there is only one way to deal with the attack, her way. It didn't matter that her friend, who was also brutally attacked, had a completely different way of dealing.
I think what Jentz went through is extremely terrifying and I am positive I would be as obsessed as she is to find out who committed such an unforgivable act. I think the police did a terrible job of investigating. I definitely agree with her about that. But far too often police arrest the wrong person and force the evidence to fit. That is no better than not solving the crime. In fact, it's worse because it allows the real criminal to go free and far too often punishes an innocent person. The person she targeted was far from innocent of committing violent acts. I would lose no sleep if he ended up behind bars, whether or not he committed this particular act. But promoting the type of thinking that locks up the wrong person, does a lot of harm to a lot of innocent people and I would definitely lose sleep over them. I just think we all have to be a lot more careful before locking someone in a cage for the rest of their life if there is a likelihood they are innocent. ...more
This is an incredibly important book, for academics and non academics alike.
If you want to understand how effectively women around the world can be oThis is an incredibly important book, for academics and non academics alike.
If you want to understand how effectively women around the world can be oppressed, controlled, and even advocate for and choose their own oppression, this seems like an important book to read. Rachel Jeffs gives an account of being raised on a steady diet of religious ideology that taught her, from the day she was born, about her place in society. It didn't matter that outside her tiny, local environment lay a much bigger world, with options aplenty for women to be their own agents, develop their own identities and careers. Her tiny world was the whole world. It was all that mattered, and it taught her that females live to serve a god -- and therefore a human male prophet-- who makes all the rules and decrees, in absolute terms, that women should be extremely obedient; should not be educated; should sew, cook, clean, care for children; and above all serve as a mere body with which to reproduce children and serve the sexual needs of powerful men. At the same time, they must keep sweet and chaste. Good luck figuring out how that mindfuck, of completely opposite directives, can exist within a single brain.
Rachel Jeffs is the daughter of the self proclaimed prophet Warren Jeffs, who married and had sex with girls as young as 12. He sexually abused his own daughters who were even younger than that. Warren, like his father before him, was extremely effective at controlling the thoughts and actions of everyone around him. His number one tool, used by men all over the world to control the women and, to a much lesser extent, the other men in their groups, was religion. It's no surprise that Warren could convince so many to behave in extremely (read the book to find out how extreme) controlled ways -- such as only eating a severely limited type of food, marrying who you are told to marry (even if you are 12 and they are 50), have sex with only one man (even though he is married to and fucking many other women, confessing to thoughts that no one could possible know you think if you don't tell them, policing other around you who take the tiniest step out of line, and so on. Religion is super useful for generating this type of control over people. It has been for thousands of years. So, while interesting, it wasn't nearly as enlightening as the other mechanisms employed by Warren to so completely dominate the lives of others and bend them to his own personal will, for his own personal benefit.
Warren acted exactly like the alpha gorillas, described so eloquently in Frans deWaal's book. Frans deWaal is himself extremely sexist, so I really dislike having to cite him here, but the parallels can't be dismissed. deWaal's alpha gorilla took great pains to keep the males from being able to communicate. It was shocking to me how much time, effort, and energy it took for the alpha male gorilla to make sure the other males could not spend enough time coordinating a plan that would allow them to take his spot as alpha. Warren Jeffs followed that alpha male playbook to the letter. He shuffled his family around so they could not live near each other. He controlled their phone lines and phone use, so they could not even call one another. From hundreds of miles away, Warren could control who spoke to who, what truths got told, and what lies got kept, what information made it to the light of day. He used guards, men he trusted, to act as 24/7 police presence in his communities to make sure everyone was crystal clear on the fact that their every move was monitored. He so effectively isolated people, while at the same time spouting out decree after decree that said, "God has told me that (fill in the blank with the thing that Warren personally wants for himself or personally just gets off on punishing others with). No one questioned the orders given by Warren, no matter how obvious or how absurd they were, that they might not have been orders from God himself. You might wonder how people who join cults as adults can believe such crazy claims by the cult leader, but why the people in the FLDS believe such obviously false claims isn't something you will wonder reading this book. When you can raise humans from the time they are born to believe that they will be punished by an all powerful God if they do not spend their entire lives giving you your way, by cutting them off from the outside world, by filling their head with beliefs that are shared by every single person they interact with, it's the perfect breeding ground for getting hundreds or thousands of people to do whatever you want them to do. As a 50 or 60 year old man, you can fuck 12 year old pussy and call it a religious calling instead of rape or pedophilia. You can have people care for your every need and desire. And, if you are a straight up sadist, like Warren is, you can hand out punishment after punishment and cause great suffering to so very many people and sit back and get off on it. It's a brilliant gig for a psychopath if you can get away with it.
A while ago, I read Prophet's Prey by Sam Brower. Even though I had read about Warren before and followed the news, it was pretty shocking. I wish I had been reading this at the same time. If you are considering which book to read, Brower or Rachel Jeffs, I highly recommend reading both at the same time. R. Jeffs gave the reader a front row seat to what it was like inside that situation. Her writing is fabulous because it is clear to the reader that she is honest, still very naive, yet able to recount accurately the daily (insane) life in the FLDS. It doesn't even matter if she never reaches full awareness of the crimes of her father. She outlines them-- very matter of factly-- with incredible detail. I am sure the average person has many things from their upbringing of which they are unaware and may remain unaware of until they die. It's literally just a condition of being human. But, Rachel is certainly aware enough to be a powerful and credible source to unveil the exact mechanisms that have oppressed and harmed so many people around the world, because no matter where in the world the men who oppress others reside, they use a shocking similar game plan for doing so. I recommend that activists read this as a playbook, so they know what they are up against and know how to counter these unsavory yet effective strategies.
The thing I am most impressed by is the courage displayed by Rachel Jeffs, her sisters, and others who have escaped. It takes courage to speak up against harmful actions, especially when you will be punished in some way. It takes a monumental amount of courage to risk the loss of just about everyone you have known for your entire life, risk severe punishment (which is always looming and always present), risk being stalked, risk possibly being killed (because if someone is willing to stalk you that much, who is to say they won't physically harm or kill you), risk not being able to feed yourself or your children, and risk facing a world in which what you were taught from the time you were born is not reliable. As a result of having authored this book and shared her knowledge with the public, I suspect Rachel Jeffs will be viewed in the future as an important voice in not only the feminist movement, but also in future movements to eradicate the use of religion to control the masses. I cannot recommend this book highly enough.
I fear that some people will see this book as a guilty pleasure, because it is so shocking and salacious, like many true crime books. However, after reading this body of work, I hope it will be viewed by academics as something with which to educate the public about the mechanisms of control in societies. It is worthy of much study and discussion. I also think the audio version is a must. Rachel Jeffs, herself, narrated the book. Hearing her accent, which is clearly FLDS, really added to helping immerse myself in her experience. I wish I had put this at the top of my list a long time ago. ...more
Fascinating first hand account of what it is like to live with the type of synesthesia that causes numbers, letters, and words not only to have their Fascinating first hand account of what it is like to live with the type of synesthesia that causes numbers, letters, and words not only to have their own colors but to take on human emotions - the letters or numbers might not get along, they might feel upset or happy. Even more interesting, this person's synesthesia, which was something they hid from everyone because they were ashamed of being different from "normal" people, seems very dependent upon his own emotions. It was interesting enough just as a biography, but now I am driven to revisit all the different varieties of synesthesia. This guy should try to get an appointment with V.S. Ramachandran so that Ramachandran can do a follow up book and give us all the neuroscience related specifically to this person's variant of synesthesia :) ...more
Even though this book had some useful information about dealing with sociopaths-- mainly, do everything possible to disengage-- it was not what I had Even though this book had some useful information about dealing with sociopaths-- mainly, do everything possible to disengage-- it was not what I had hoped for. Stout's first book, The Sociopath Next Door was so good that I have been recommending it for more than a decade. I had been hoping for a followup to that book, but this just didn't live up to my expectations, which might just have been too high. ...more
Do yourself a favor and read Coming Clean by Kimberly Rae Miller instead. Because of its subject matter, this book had real potential, but even when rDo yourself a favor and read Coming Clean by Kimberly Rae Miller instead. Because of its subject matter, this book had real potential, but even when relating the most interesting parts there was very little insight or ability to bring a story to life and let that story connect with the reader.
This author tried to provide a sweeping history of her parents lives from the time they were born, with a focus on her mother who became a hoarder. Her mother had been a nun prior to meeting her father. Her father was a closeted gay man in the 70s who was trying very hard to get through life as a straight married man. When he finally came out, after wanting to kill himself because of his double life, he felt such hatred for himself. It was actually her mother -- the woman who was hurt by this news the most because it upended her life and sewed the seeds of chaos that would only grow from there -- who helped him find love and acceptance. The author herself went on to become valedictorian of her high school, study at Cornell, get a job at CNN and later the Today Show. With such credentials, I imagined she would be a great writer. But it all felt very shallow, despite the incredible material at her disposal. ...more
Beers and Gusoff have created a well written, thoughtful, complex, heartbreaking, insightful, and inspiring memoir of Katie Beers' 17 day abduction onBeers and Gusoff have created a well written, thoughtful, complex, heartbreaking, insightful, and inspiring memoir of Katie Beers' 17 day abduction on the eve of her 10th birthday. It was a hard book to put down. Often with books of this nature, authors write in simplistic terms. Think of the way Ann Rule tells a story in which every single word or action the criminal says or does is evil and every action or word uttered by other people in the book turns out to the be the criminal's fault somehow. I am always intrigued by the cases Rule writes about but always find her writing so disappointing. Gusoff and Beers avoided the Ann Rule trap and because of it, have written an exceptionally poignant account of Katie's life and kidnapping that is a real contribution to those of us who try to understand why people do what they do. I don't want to read about true crime merely for the sensation of it, though I like sensation. I want to read it because I want to know what humans are capable of-- at their best, their worst, and their in between. Gusoff and Beers allowed me to really sink my brain into this case.
The thing I found most interesting to read about was the life of Katie's mom. She seems to have been raked over the coals -- in the general media, in the courts, and, to a large degree, in this book-- for her shitty parenting. I could jump on the bandwagon and proclaim that I too want to signal to all that I am a law abiding citizen, great parent, and overall good person who would never treat a child the way Katie's mother treated her. But, I can't help but think that is because my life has been far too blessed, even during what I considered to be the worst times in my life, to not have to have made the decisions Katie's mom had to make. Katie's mother is accused of neglecting Katie and "allowing" her to have contact with not one, but two child predators. Because Marilyn was never home and because she "allowed" Katie to have contact with dangerous people, her daughter was taken from her. I am not suggesting Katie should have stayed with her mother. I think her being sent to foster care was the best possible thing that could have happened to a child who had endured so much in her young life. What I am saying is that I think it is possible to believe it was right to remove Katie from Marilyn's home without crucifying Marilyn, and the following is my argument for why.
Marilyn Beers, Katies mother, was very poor, lived in a poor neighborhood, had menial jobs, and ended up not having any help raising her children. That includes child support. I have so many friends who get $40K plus a year that complain about how they get no help. I think dad's should be doing 50% of the raising of children. So, don't get me wrong. I am not defending men who pay 40k+ a year and do less than half the parenting. What I am saying is that 40k+ a year would have made a hell of a difference in Marilyn Beers' life and in the life of Katie. Marilyn had no child support on which to depend. Nor did she collect income from the state. Marilyn could have gone on welfare. She certainly could have qualified, but she was too proud. Instead of going on welfare, she worked her ass off at not one, but often two jobs. When Katie was born, Marilyn was working as a taxi driver, doing 12 hour shifts. Having no other option, she took newborn Katie to work with her on those 12 hour shifts. This is a woman who chose to work instead of collect off of the state. Even working two jobs, she couldn't afford child care. Whose fault is that? Hard working Marilyn's fault?
Marilyn's mother was in her 70s and could only help out so much. What was a single mother, who is working 2 jobs supposed to do about also raising children. How often are men stuck with having to work 2 jobs *and* raise children full time? Marilyn made some poor decisions out of desperation. She allowed her best friend to come live in her house and help take care of Katie. This was a mistake. This woman and her husband, who are freeloaders who lived off of hard working Marilyn's income, are the people who should be raked over the coals in the media, the courts, and in this book (which they are). They beat Katie, used her as a maid, and the husband sexually molested Katie for years.
Like many children, Katie didn't tell her mother about the sexual abuse. Thus, Marilyn never "allowed" Katie to be around a sexual predator. Should she have known? Maybe. Should she have invested more time in trying to find out? Yes. But you try to be a full time mom, have 2 jobs, and have to deal with the caretakers of your child being unsuitable (meaning you have to expend time and money you don't have to find a new care situation). Add on to that the fact that Marilyn's best friend and her husband were attacking Marilyn's character all the time, calling her a bad mother, which she believed. She was more interested in beating herself up than she was in calling them bad caretakers.
Marilyn's best friend is the person who allowed Katie to get in a car with a known sexual predator. Marilyn's son (Katie's brother) told Marilyn that the predator was touching him. One word from her child and Marilyn cut off all contact with the predator. When she found out her best friend's husband was a predator, she cut off contact with him. At no time did Marilyn "allow" Katie to have contact with predators. She is guilty of being unaware. She is guilty of being far too busy working to parent either one of her children. There is no question about that. But to portray her as someone who welcomed predators in her home is unfair. The predators preyed on both Marilyn and Katie. In that way, she is a victim along with Katie.
It is clear Katie, and all children, need better parenting than someone as poor and hardworking (and naive) as Marilyn could provide. Katie needed a better set of live in caretakers, a better grandmother, a better community. My defense of Marilyn only goes so far though. She doesn't seem to have been able to learn much from her experience of losing Katie. Even when Katie was grown up, with children of her own, it doesn't seem that Marilyn tried very hard to be in Katie's life. I can imagine a tone had been set, in which Marilyn realized other people could care for Katie better than she ever could. I am just having a hard time imagining myself ever voluntarily giving up trying to have a relationship with my child.
Marilyn was not the only complex character in the book. To Beers' and Gusoff's credit, they did a great job of presenting as true to life a description of the characters as possible. The main predator's mind was so hard to understand. There were times when I truly believed he imagined, in some really fucked up warped way, that he was protecting Katie from her messed up life. It makes no sense how he could believe raping a child could ever "save" her, but it seems he might have actually believe this.
The writing in this story was exceptional and gripping. So don't pick this book up unless you have time to read it cover to cover....more
I seem to be in the minority of people who did not care for this book. There is an art to writing about a difficult childhood. It requires insight thaI seem to be in the minority of people who did not care for this book. There is an art to writing about a difficult childhood. It requires insight that goes beyond relating facts. I feel insensitive for negatively critiquing a novel that is mostly a factual account of this poor author's experience of extreme abuse. It was the same feeling I had when I gave a negative review of poor Jaycee Dugard's Book of Firsts. It somehow feels wrong to criticize the way someone writes about their difficult experience.
I always hope for a book to read like Jannette Walls's Glass Castle, in which she painstakingly attempted to understand her mentally ill mother and father, who were voluntarily homeless; or Kimberly Miller's Coming Clean, in which she spun a beautiful memoir about her life growing up with a parent who was an extreme hoarder and the other parent who enabled that; or Jenna Miscavige's Beyond Belief, in which she gave a rich account of growing up in scientology and focused heavily on the mindset of the adults who allowed children to be constantly abused. Even Kate Mulgrew's Born With Teeth had far more insight than this book.
This read too much like Mommy Dearest or Sybil, which both pandered to the simplicity that black and white thinking creates. Only in this case, the book lacked the more sensational bits that made Sybil and Mommy Dearest so addicting. I am not saying I don't believe the authors factually based novel interpretation of her life. It's just that every remembrance was constructed to show how horrible her mother was. Her mother was horrible. There is zero question about that. Given that fact, why write a book that is so contrived? For example, school was extremely horrible for the author (fill in all the reasons why-- *all* having to do with her mother), except right before she moved. Suddenly school was the best thing in the entire world. Why? So she could set up (contrive) why it was then so damaging for her mother to have moved her to another state. She could have written about how traumatic it was to move without the unnecessarily extreme set up of how perfect school had suddenly become. There were also inconsistencies that never rang true. Her mother was very paranoid about child services but did things that would have been a huge red flag to child services. My point is that the author constantly, and unnecessarily, reshaped events to get the maximum impact from her blame of her mother. Her mother was obviously mentally ill after her head injury. There is little question that she became very abusive. I would have liked it more if she would have written about the complexities of having lived through such an experience. Head injuries can change a person's life in such drastic ways. Considering the research on traumatic brain injury, this memoir had the chance to be extremely informative. Yet, it seemed to focus on reshaping every event to fit a narrative that would have been better expressed in a more complex and more natural manner. It would have been more powerful to relate events in a more balanced tone.
Very interesting story and one I am happy to have read because it provided me with new insights into cults. Particularly interesting was the fear manyVery interesting story and one I am happy to have read because it provided me with new insights into cults. Particularly interesting was the fear many of them had of being killed by other members. I often read about how scientology went about trying to silence its members. This seemed even worse. Also intriguing was her mother's need to pray about everything, meaning she used god as an excuse for everything she did or didn't do.
I probably would have given it 4 stars if not for the strong religious tone of the book. Anna herself uses god to justify all of her decisions, just like her mother does, but she never seems to realize it. I can imagine that if you are that steeped in a religious culture, it is very difficult to think critically enough to examine the stories religion promotes. Since the stories are not as bad as the extreme ones she had been sold as the profit's daughter, she readily accepts them and doesn't seem to be able to think critically enough about stories about Jesus. She will probably always draw her strength from a superhuman being in the sky instead of from inside herself and the real people on Earth. Given everything she went through, that is understandable. I was just hoping for more insight. ...more
Shockingly fantastic. Wright produced a wonderfully opinionated, extremely quick witted, and even more entertaining look at some of the worst breakupsShockingly fantastic. Wright produced a wonderfully opinionated, extremely quick witted, and even more entertaining look at some of the worst breakups through the ages. For her research, Wright reached way back to the age of Emperor Nero. Her down to Earth retelling of his relations with his mother, his lovers, and his citizens will forever be seared into my brain. Mostly this is because I felt as if I were having drinks with Wright as she talked about ancient history using the most comic and relatable style imaginable. There is little doubt you will actually want to hang out with her IRL after reading this. I get so tired of small talk and avoid most social gatherings for just that reason. Wright seems like she would be the cure to all social functions. The stories she chooses to tell, the insight and ferociously funny commentary that accompanies them just felt like being with the friend you always dream of meeting at a party but never do. If you want to be entertained with odd and interesting tidbits of information, told by an extremely skilled writer, then do yourself a favor and get this book.
Some highlights, told in a seriously disappointing manner that could never live up to the way the author spins a tale:
- Nero was a mama's boy whose girlfriend told him to grow a pair. He did. People were subsequently humiliated, tortured, and killed in the most fucked up ways possible.
- As bad as Nero is, the author hates Norman Mailer even more and will have no problem telling you why.
-Wright is sick of all the people who have protected mailer over the years and her argument for why will make you want her as the face of the #metoo movement today, so that she can help get the message to all of the people who still don't get it. She will do this with courage, conviction, solid points, and unwavering decisiveness, but will deliver it with humor so that it is better received. What a gift.
- Didn't love Eleanor of Aquitaine before? You will now. I have read several books on Eleanor and have loved them all. What a life! Yet, somehow Wrights very short telling of her life was better than the richly detailed and much longer accounts I have read and treasured. I want Wright to feed me all of my history from now on! Eleanor was a badass of epic proportion and, imo, is the hero of this entire book.
- Debbie Reynolds and Elizabeth Taylor showed us how to get over a break up in the best possible way.
- You probably thought you were aware of how badly people act when they break up. After all, who hasn’t watch glen close boil bunnies? If you think you understand the full repertoire of bad behaviors following a breakup, you’re probably wrong. Wright will bring you up to speed, especially when recounts the day Caroline Lamb sent her bloody pubic hair to Lord Byron and they battled through public prose, much in the way rappers when they diss each other in song do. It was sort of what it might be like if Eminem's Kim responded to his psycho rants by going public with songs of her own.
- There was a creepy sex doll who literally traveled around town, in the upper crust of society, attending social functions and being treated like any other guest..... You are just going to need to read the book to fully appreciate how this could possibly be. ...more
I wasn't sure whether to give this 3 or 4 stars. Kessler never really gave a definitive answer on why some people are "captured" more than others. HowI wasn't sure whether to give this 3 or 4 stars. Kessler never really gave a definitive answer on why some people are "captured" more than others. However, I really enjoyed his approach to the question. Using the stories of people like Infinite Jest Author David Foster Wallace who committed suicide, Unabomber Ted Kaczynski, JFK assassin Lee Harvey Oswald, and others, Kessler attempted to understand if what makes someone kill themselves is similar to what makes someone kill others. In all the cases he examined, the minds of the killers (whether their target was themselves or others) could not stop being captured by obsessive thoughts. It made for a quick and interesting read, even if it was left wanting in regard to a full explanation. ...more
Captivating from the first page to the last. Warren Jeffs is an interesting study in abnormal psychology. He reminded me a lot of the alpha male apes Captivating from the first page to the last. Warren Jeffs is an interesting study in abnormal psychology. He reminded me a lot of the alpha male apes discussed at length by Frans de Waal. Absolute page turner. Mind-blowing. I highly recommend. ...more
It's possible that I have simply read too many books about the problems with the DSM because I wasn't as taken with this book as I was with the Book oIt's possible that I have simply read too many books about the problems with the DSM because I wasn't as taken with this book as I was with the Book of Woe. i would have given this 3 stars, but the content is too important for that.
Frances has first hand knowledge of the shortcomings of the DSM. The main question is how do we provide mental health services, which requires a diagnosis, without those diagnoses, which are often very subjective, becoming a harm themselves? The DSM has been wrought with problems since its inception. As time passed, more and more regulations and oversight were finally placed on content. That should be a good thing but there are so many voices from each side of the many sided debate that it becomes almost impossible to put out a worthwhile product. And so, even now, with the DSM V, society is still faced with the same problem they were faced with in the 1950s. Sure, we stopped pathologizing things like homosexuality, but what are we still including in the DSM in the name of helping people? What might we be leaving out that would be helpful. More important, are there problems, such as homosexuality, that are actually the problem of society and not of the individual? How will America's foremost mental health reference book be viewed 100 years from now? Frances provides food for thought that for which any mental health professional should be aware. ...more
I usually love books about how messed up the DSM, Big Pharma, and the social sciences are, but this book was terrible and here is why:
This author chosI usually love books about how messed up the DSM, Big Pharma, and the social sciences are, but this book was terrible and here is why:
This author chose a great subject, faults in the mental health industry, and set out to find as many examples to support his argument as possible. The problem was not that he lacked compelling information. On the contrary, he included some very solid and very damning evidence that highlighted serious corruption -- payoffs from pharma to doctors so they would needlessly prescribe drugs; DSM shenanigans that have been written about well and often; a rich history of "treatments" that did more harm than good (and how do we know we are not doing that same harmful behavior now); how "experts" have a large say in creating policy, informing treatment and medical practice, and informing law and morality; how capitalism and not science drives psychiatry, the file drawer effect where only positive results are published, and the lack of transparency in psychiatry and Big Pharma. All of these inclusions were valid and worth sharing with the public. Bravo for that.
However, the lack of balance on any issue bordered on absurd. He was nothing short of a zealot who cherrypicked every anecdotal piece of information he could get his hands on, threw it in a book along side of aforementioned arguments, and went on to spout his constant mantra about how pain is natural.
If I were to write this review the way he wrote this book, I would not have included one thing he did right. I would only point out everything he did wrong and then i would go through other people's reviews and include what they didn't like about his book, and then I would just throw a bunch of opinions in for good measure. This author didn't discuss any of the advances, real advances, that helped people who were genuinely suffering. (He *really* loves suffering and highly recommends it in every instance). For example, where was the discussion on schizophrenia and CBT? What about the advances in anti-psychotic drugs to treat schizophrenia, along with a better understanding of how dopamine is related to catatonic states? What about the advances made in PTSD once researchers found out that social support was a key determining factor in developing the disorder? These are a mere spattering of some subjects he could have chosen to include. There are many advances to pick from but this author was not interested in providing his reader with the latest advances *and* the problems that plague psychiatry. This guy ended up sounding much more like a scientologist or conspiracy theorist that a researcher or journalist, which was extremely off-putting.
Making matters worse, his discussion of epigenetics was abysmal. He clearly had a limited understanding of how genes work and how epigenetic modifications of genes work, which is a shame because there is an interesting discussion to be had about how epigenetics (methylation of chromatin and RNA snippets) contribute to expression of various genes. Not all genes are the same. Some are more fixed and some are more vulnerable to epigenetic/external modification. Also, it isn't yet well understood how epigenetics affects many mental health issues. Researchers are just beginning to parse all of that. His discussion was far too simplified. The same is true for his entire discussion of the biological basis for behavior. I tried to look up his education but didn't readily find anything. If he was educated in the sciences, it must have been a long time ago. I was stunned by how bad his biological basis of behavior section was.
I surely cannot recommend this book. To read books that take down psychiatry, I would instead read something more like the following:
- Sybil Exposed by Debbie Nathan (excellent takedown of fads in psychiatry/ how therapy can make things worse) - The Book of Woe, Gary Greenberg (in depth review of problems with the DSM) - The Memory Illusion by Julia Shaw (there are a few problems with a couple of the studies Shaw included, but it was far better researched than Cracked)...more
Without question, this is Sapolsky's best work yet. I have too many pages of notes to synthesize a review that could possibly do this book justice. ReWithout question, this is Sapolsky's best work yet. I have too many pages of notes to synthesize a review that could possibly do this book justice. Review to come when I have more time to write. Meanwhile, put this book at the top of your list! A+...more
This was a really enjoyable biography of Stalin's daughter who at times seemed dramatic, manipulative, and narcissistic and at other times quite humblThis was a really enjoyable biography of Stalin's daughter who at times seemed dramatic, manipulative, and narcissistic and at other times quite humble, genuine, and selfless. Despite compulsively psychoanalyze Svetlana throughout the book, I could never quite figure her out and was always insatiably curious about what it must have been like to have Stalin for a father.
The writing was fantastic and brought to life all the family and political dynamics in Svetlana's life. The author detailed some of the more interesting aspects of Svetlana's mother's life, still such a mystery to me, as well as her and Stalin's relationship with her mother's side of the family. We get a glimpse, but never fully get to know, what Svetlana was and was not aware of when her father condemned masses of people to the gulags. Her relationship with her children was every bit as interesting as her relationship with her father. Her defection was nothing less than sensational and even scandalous. I couldn't help but think about this book for weeks after I was finished with it. I scoured the internet for news of her 3 children and tried to learn anything I could that was not covered in the biography. (Her youngest child's life was the most intersting by far). Anytime a book causes me to research further or constantly think about the people who were the subject of the book, I am happy.
Essential reading for anyone in America who has Trump for a president or anyone across the globe who is affected by his presidency. So, basically a muEssential reading for anyone in America who has Trump for a president or anyone across the globe who is affected by his presidency. So, basically a must read for everyone around the globe.
I kept having to remind myself that this book was written prior to Trump becoming president because it seemed as if David Cay Johnston picked specific events in Trumps life, in which Trump used specific wording and behaviors, that perfectly parallels the events that have occurred since Trump took office.
Johnston, the reporter who broke many of the shocking Trump stories published in the New York Times over the last few decades, brings to life the unbelievable world of Donald Trump. To give his reader a good idea of how Trump learned about morality in business practices, Johnston recounted the life and business dealings of Donald Trump's Grandfather and father, whose dealings were as questionable as Trump's are now.
Despite proclaiming to be a self made man, Trump was unquestionably a trust fund kid who believed the rules never applied to him. When he broke the rules as a kid, he got sent to reform school. As an adult, he was continually rewarded for breaking the rules. Time after time, Trump demonstrated that the rules don't apply to him. He told dangerous lies that jeopardized his real estate and casino licenses. Yet, time after time, the very people entrusted to enforce the laws helped Trump get away with his lies and criminal business practices. This book is one of the best examples I can point to for anyone wanting to understand how money allows the rich to carry out criminal actions, while being poor puts individuals at much higher risk for receiving devastating and life-changing punishments for carrying out the same bad actions.
The best thing about Johnston is that he does not write from the gut. Rather, he provides an unbelievable amount of facts to support each statement he makes about trump. Johnston quotes Trump directly, quotes from various trial records, quotes from various interviews in the public record, details individual forms that Trump filled out. Exceptional reporting. Trump would, of course, call Johnston "overrated" and probably a "loser" as well because these are terms he uses for anyone who provides unflattering facts about him.
Johnston was also quite skilled at providing insights and real life detailed accounts of Trump's actions and words to drive home the insight. For example, he pointed out that Trump has a habit of cutting off anyone who tries to bring up his past (connections to mobsters, past lawsuits, past relationship issues, past lies, past aliases, and the like) while at the same time drudging up decades old dirt on the *spouse* of his running mate-- not even his actual running mate. It's hard to get more hypocritical than that.
As an aside, you won't read any line like, "It's hard to get more hypocritical than that " in this author's book. My review will undoubted be more sensational and emotionally fuel than Johnston's book. He chose to deliver his scathing portrayal of Trump using a measured, pragmatic, and solidly journalistic approach.
There are so many shocking entries in this book. Each page seemed to bring a new shocking moment. In the interest of not ruining the book, I will related only a few.
Trumps view of immigrants:
Trump needed to tear down a building he owned. At the time the building needed to come down, Trump claimed to be worth 3 billion. Turned out he was 3 billion in debt, not worth 3 billion. Being very short on cash, Trump was in a pickle. Instead of going with a company that could take down the building properly, he hired a guy who he knew had illegal immigrants working for him. During the day, they brought in a modest number of immigrants to work *by hand,* without the aid of the necessary demolition machines, without hardhats, without masks even though there was asbestos, all for a very modest sum for the number of workers doing back breaking work. To make matters worse, at night, when inspectors were not likely to come into the building, 200 immigrants were working with sledge hammers -- for the same total pay *to be split by all* that had already been agreed upon for the small group of workers. Trump was getting a steal! IMO, it's pretty terrible to exploit the desperation of workers to that level. But in Trump's opinion, it wasn't enough exploitation! He figured, they are illegal. If I let them work like slaves and give them no money, no food, and no other compensation, what can they do, sue me? (Remember *this* is our president, our leader!) He refused to pay the illegal immigrants after they broke their backs for him, to help him take down his building and to help him save money. There is a lot more to this story and Johnston tells it far better than me. But my take home point was that, clearly, all immigrants should be slaves who serve the rich.
Trumps self serving fake publicist:
Trump pretended to be publicist John Miller. Miller, who just started working for Trump, knew intricate details about Trumps actions and inner thoughts. He portrayed Trump to be the most sought after lover and husband. You will get to hear the riveting story of who gets to be the second Mrs. Trump. John is Trump's middle name btw and when he used a second alias to again build up his image in a truly preposterous manner, he again used the name John. Come on Trump; you can do better than that. Johnston relates the many "John" stories and it's hard to believe anyone would be this vain and this stupid, but to know that it is the leader of the free world makes it that much more shocking and appalling. The alias stories were really addictive. I couldn't put the book down.
Trump's predictable denials:
One of Trump's go to moves when he is associated with someone who is of questionable character but who he has very close ties to, he likes to say, "I don't know them. I couldn't pick them out of a crowd." Recently, Trump even tried saying he didn't really know Jared Kushner that well. LOL. He needs to learn some new tricks. It's easy to draw a line back to all the people Trump spent *lots* of time with, had many dealings with, and even rented his own personal space to, took many meetings with, went to public places with (in a very small crowd) who he now "barely knows."
Johnston details all the Trump tricks. If you want to know what they are, I recommend reading this book. After reading myriad stories, facts, and various details Johnston has recounted about Trump, it's fairly easy to predict what he will do in just about any circumstance.
Loading...
