PDA

View Full Version : Violent boys in unsafe conditions less prone to depression



morfrain_encilgar
Wednesday, June 22nd, 2005, 03:22 PM
Violent boys in unsafe conditions less prone to depression

Researchers have known for some time that violent adolescents tend to become more depressed over time than other adolescents. And young people living in violent neighborhoods also are more subject to depression. But violent adolescent boys who also live in unsafe neighborhoods where they witness violent acts do not appear to get as depressed.

According to a new Cornell University study, being aggressive in the context of community violence could be an adaptive strategy that preserves adolescents' sense of control in a volatile and unpredictable environment. "This may seem counter intuitive, that violence in a violent context could be somewhat protective for psychological well-being among adolescent boys," said Raymond Swisher, assistant professor of policy analysis and management at Cornell.

To examine the interactive relationships among adolescent violence, street violence and depression, Swisher and Robert D. Latzman '03, now a graduate student in clinical psychology at the University of Iowa, analyzed data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, a nationally representative sample of 8,939 adolescents in grades 7 to 12; data on the adolescents was collected twice, once in 1995 and again in 1996.

The research, which was the basis of Latzman's senior honors thesis when he was an undergraduate student in the College of Human Ecology at Cornell, is published in a recent issue of the Journal of Community Psychology (33: 355-371, May 2005). It also was presented at the American Psychological Society's annual meeting in May 2004.

"The consequences of community violence are widespread," said Swisher. "Exposure to community violence destroys the notion that homes, schools and communities are safe places, and youths exposed to community violence have higher rates of emotional, behavioral and cognitive problems. Witnessing community violence has emerged as a risk factor for all kinds of problems, from depression and post-traumatic stress symptoms to suicidal behaviors, aggression and violence."

It was somewhat surprising, therefore, to find that acting violently could be protective against the effects of community violence, Swisher said. Violence was defined as getting into a physical fight, pulling a knife or gun, shooting or stabbing someone, seriously injuring someone or taking part in a group fight.

However, the protective factor was found only among males, and the older the males, the stronger the effect. On the other hand, adolescent girls who act violently tend to become more depressed, and the more violent their environments are, the deeper their depression, said Swisher, who noted that American adolescents are increasingly exposed to violence.

"While U.S. crime rates have declined steadily in recent years, adolescents comprise one segment of the population that continues to be plagued with the problem of violence," said Swisher. "So much so, that some consider violence a public health epidemic for today's youth."

The study was funded, in part, by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

morfrain_encilgar
Wednesday, June 22nd, 2005, 04:00 PM
This is pretty strong evidence gainst the popular point of view that violence is a sign of insanity. Before adolescent angst, children would be protected from exposure to violence. But in early societies, adolescent violence would be considered natural and initiation into manhood by violence would be a good thing. Its just todays society which is weak and refuses to accept human nature and tries to deny human nature with social programs, or turning to psychiatry. I can think of a few ways society should use these naturally violent people positively so they arent destructive to everyone else. The ancient societies didnt have these problems.

Oskorei
Wednesday, June 22nd, 2005, 09:15 PM
This is pretty strong evidence gainst the popular point of view that violence is a sign of insanity. Before adolescent angst, children would be protected from exposure to violence. But in early societies, adolescent violence would be considered natural and initiation into manhood by violence would be a good thing. Its just todays society which is weak and refuses to accept human nature and tries to deny human nature with social programs, or turning to psychiatry. I can think of a few ways society should use these naturally violent people positively so they arent destructive to everyone else. The ancient societies didnt have these problems.
Good point. Earlier societies also often had an understanding of the differences between some basic human types (expressed through caste-systems), and a way to channel these differences in a productive way.

Instead of being put in institutions, these kids should be taught the basics of honor and community from a young age.

Frans_Jozef
Thursday, June 23rd, 2005, 12:21 PM
Both of you put too much faith in certain idealistic portrayed traditional cultures, but underneath lurks and conspires the good old law of the jungle and some groups of individuals seize the opportunity to encapsulate these hidden and outragious forces into a system and enjoy all the advantage to the detriment of just people. How else would you explain the wailings of the undernourished and oppressed lower stratum of a population throughout the ages? The lament, the polemics and intellectual revolts of outstanding individuals in politics, religion, art and philosophy in your glorified and non-existant Traditionalistic paradises.

People are awful and nothing in the past, present and future will change this inbred nature. Sooner or later a snake turns up in paradise and the whole mess starts over again.

Frans_Jozef
Thursday, June 23rd, 2005, 12:27 PM
I can think of a few ways society should use these naturally violent people positively so they arent destructive to everyone else.
Me too. Use them for medical and psychiatric experiments in laboratories to test new drugs, vaccins...


The ancient societies didnt have these problems.Must have sound like the Gospel to the Messenian helotes...ahem.

Oskorei
Thursday, June 23rd, 2005, 12:46 PM
Both of you put too much faith in certain idealistic portrayed traditional cultures, but underneath lurks and conspires the good old law of the jungle and some groups of individuals seize the opportunity to encapsulate these hidden and outragious forces into a system and enjoy all the advantage to the detriment of just people. How else would you explain the wailings of the undernourished and oppressed lower stratum of a population throughout the ages? The lament, the polemics and intellectual revolts of outstanding individuals in politics, religion, art and philosophy in your glorified and non-existant Traditionalistic paradises.

People are awful and nothing in the past, present and future will change this inbred nature. Sooner or later a snake turns up in paradise and the whole mess starts over again.
I am aware of the tendency towards corruption inherent in all systems where there is privilege. My main idea was to contrast the present society where there is little understanding of different human types, with the old Scandinavian society (in which the injustices never reached the extent of more southern societies, and where the amount of personal freedom seems to have been greater).

I do think that Evola somewhere says that the Traditional order of things comes naturally, and that use of force to achieve it is in itself a sign of decadence. This for me means that Tradition is more of an inspiration, especially for how I order my own life, and not so much something I wish to force upon other people. In this day and age, Traditional ideas are best combined with some sort of Anarchism I think.

Frans_Jozef
Thursday, June 23rd, 2005, 02:02 PM
I am aware of the tendency towards corruption inherent in all systems where there is privilege. My main idea was to contrast the present society where there is little understanding of different human types, with the old Scandinavian society (in which the injustices never reached the extent of more southern societies, and where the amount of personal freedom seems to have been greater). Traditional societies are aberrant in their social stratification: they lump people in categories based on a interconnection between craftmanship or skills and attributed wealth (or is absence) as if they solely define your personality.
It's a strategy of rule and divide to ensure the acquired prosperity of a class of people, amplify their powers and priviliges, harnessing them against any others' pretence.

In the mesolithic and among certain primitive cultures, people regard themselves solely as human, not in modernist sense though, but totemistic by which virtue each member through the Sippe is related to the divinity and typological discrimination few or absent.
However, there's room for the unique personality to excel and be venerated; his special properties would allow him to become chieftain or to go through life as the greatest hunter the world ever had.
Individuation occurs more naturally than in either which traditional society, heavy on myths where a hero appears to overthrow the concensus by wit and force. These societies are in constant fear for political instability and natural disasters; contrast this with the so-called primitives where inner strenght and balance of the tribe rules by economic mutualism, reduced materialism and a far less rigid codex of normalisations and moral stances.

The properties of a man don't need here a whole set of devices to protect or regularize them as in our societies nor are they prescripted and withdrawn by the dominant class from the individual to return it back to his owner in lease, but solely in benifit to the system. His properties are acknowledged and respected by the entire tribe. He can act spontanious and lives in symbiosis with his friends and relatives, bonded in the tribe, harvesting the fruits of his free, skilfull personality without oppression nor doning special rewards than this: allowing to be what he can and must be.

This is an idealistic view, of course, but what we regard in traditionalistic societies as superior to our liberal, materialistic society predates the civilisations and religious-cultural order which Evola, Guénon and other scholars admire and take as exemplary; the structures and revaluation of principles and moral codes are in itself corruptions of culture and eidos in pre-neolithic societies, very much like capitalist corporatism behaves like the old monarchies in the Ancient Régime, exploiting and asserting its hegemony over great tracts of lands and seas, continental if not on planetary scale, as a supranational entity which ramification in other dynasties of corporations.
The foreign bride for the king is replaced by foreign stockholders, new corporative kingdoms are born and the free nations defrocked of their autonomy and voice.
Nothing changed but the actors.

Frans_Jozef
Thursday, June 23rd, 2005, 10:39 PM
@Atlanto-med & Oskorei:

I would like to apologize that my rampant criticisms which might appear as personal attacks and generally offensive in style and tone.
I am of the pessimistic mould; the older I get, the greater my disenchantment with people, life, theories and ideals...in a way, I am blind or myopic, seeing only the bad shadowy things in our existence and immersed by this fatal outlook, everything appears futile, not the least centuries of intellectual drool.

I hope that both of you never will be stuck in my hellish vision.

your friend,

Frans_Jozef

morfrain_encilgar
Thursday, June 23rd, 2005, 10:41 PM
I would like to apologize that my rampant criticisms which might appear as personal attacks and generally offensive in style and tone.

They werent offensive nor taken personally, Frans.

Oskorei
Thursday, June 23rd, 2005, 11:05 PM
I agree with atlanto-med, they weren't offensive in any way. Rather, the last post was very good and read-worthy, and I will attempt a synthesis of the mesolithic ideal and Evolas golden age.

Evola at his best often approaches anarchism when he describes the pluralism and importance of personality and freedom in Traditional societies not yet corrupted and scleriose.

I wonder if the mesolithic era could be seen as equivalent with the Golden Age of Tradition. Evola claims that the remembrance in most myths of some sort of "communism" in the Golden Age is a distortion, but he is not convincing and gives no reason for it (other than his own personal equation I think).

Abby Normal
Friday, June 24th, 2005, 09:08 AM
These kids are "less prone to depression" for the same reason that lower-class minority children reportedly have "higher self-esteem" than their white middle-class counterparts, and it isn't because "acting violently can be protective against the effects of community violence".

Ring-a-ding-ding, does "false front" register with anyone? It's not difficult to hide symptoms attributed to depression.