"Stockholm Syndrome" and C. Hooker's Slaves

[Perpetual_Edge]

This term has been used a lot in the media lately. I decided to research it's beginnings and became interested in the Cameron Hooker sex slave story of "K". Colleen Stan's 7 years of living in a wooden box with a bed pan along with daily beatings with an electrical wire, made me interested in the story even more. Then I hear that the "Story of O" was based on their bizarre love triangle. You see, Mr. Hooker's wife, Janice, was involved as well. In the end, she ended up cutting a plea bargain and gave the police all they needed to put him in prison. It seems she began having pangs of guilt after he began putting her in the box while he penetrated "K" every night.

Honestly, there must be a type of switch in a person's brain that allows them to endure and do whatever they have to do in order to survive. Then possibly, that "switch" cannot be turned off and the victim stays bonded with the captor. The ability to go into survival mode and believe what you are told is almost childlike. Don't we revert back to childlike ways when under long periods of severe stress? This guy had a bogus slave contract made by "The Company" and apparently, she would be tortured worse by them if she were caught trying to get away. You wouldn't believe what he had her believing. She had lost 20 pounds and began to lose her hair living in that wooden box. The Patty Hearst story had nothing on this one, in fact, the Hearst attorneys tried to use the "Stockholm Syndrome" in her defense to no avail.

The hostage situation at the bank in Stockholm, Sweden was, in my opinion, not even in the same category phychologically as many of the sex slave, kidnapping cases. But that topic is for another day!

 

[MasterPhoenix]

http://www.crimelibrary.com/criminal_mind/psychology/sex_slave/index.html

fascinating story

 

[myinnerslut]

i just read the entire story that MP posted... wow

it is people like that that give people like us a bad name

i cannot wrap my mind around people just going out and kidnapping someone with the purpose of making a sex slave with absolutly no consent.

 

[MasterPhoenix]

I read taht story a while back... yes, it gives us a really bad name

 

[subtleone]

http://www.crimelibrary.com/criminal_mind/psychology/sex_slave/index.html

fascinating story

Thank you, This is one of those stories that I had assumed to be an urban legand. It iis a fascinating story but myinnerslut is right it does colour us black

 

[Tuomas]

People get the wrong impression about Stockholm Syndrome. It's not that the hostages start agreeing with their captor because he has captured them, but because they have some sort of empathy with him, and/or fear of other people. In the case of the Norrmalmstorg robbery, the "victims" were not so much supporting Olsson, but were afraid of violence from the police.

Similarly, there are lots of people who adore The Butcher of La Cabaña (AKA, Ché Guevara), because of his ideology and personal carisma. In spite of the fact that he supported and carried out the sytematic violation of human rights, and wholesale slaughter of the people of Cuba, many of Cubans who were opressed by him hail him as a hero.

There is no "switch", as it were; the captives in Stockholm found Olsson "handsome" and sympathised with him because he was charismatic -not because they were his captives. Nils Bejerot coined the phrase to explain how some abductees can feel sypathetic or even defend their captors, as opposed to the traditional thinking that assumes victims will hate their victimizers.

However, this is a criminal term, reffering to victims andkidnappers, and has nothing to do with BDSM.

 

[Perpetual_Edge]

Well, I was basically talking about the Hooker case and further hostage situations that involve pain. I should have clarified, but yes, the empathy and fear factor is understandable. Apparently, when reading some of the psych. reports, there are 3 factors that lead to a person being more likely to bond with their captors. Do you know what they are?

 

[catalina_francisco]

This term has been used a lot in the media lately. I decided to research it's beginnings and became interested in the Cameron Hooker sex slave story of "K". Colleen Stan's 7 years of living in a wooden box with a bed pan along with daily beatings with an electrical wire, made me interested in the story even more. Then I hear that the "Story of O" was based on their bizarre love triangle.

I'm a little busy at the moment so won't comment on the rest of your post etc., but as I am one for facts and keeping the story straight, I had to spare a moment to ask you how the heck you get that the Story of O was written and based on the Cameron case when it was published in Europe in 1954 and the Camerons kidnapped their first victim in the US in the mid 1970's and he wasn't born until 1953? I've heard of early starters, but I think that might be a bit of a stretch of the imagination...not to mention I don't actually see a similarity between the two. It seems it is becoming more and more common for people to try and draw a connection between the lifestyle as practiced with consent, and the few cases which get media attention and are blamed on an SM lifestyle when there is no consent involved.

Catalina

 

[Perpetual_Edge]

I'm a little busy at the moment so won't comment on the rest of your post etc., but as I am one for facts and keeping the story straight, I had to spare a moment to ask you how the heck you get that the Story of O was written and based on the Cameron case when it was published in Europe in 1954 and the Camerons kidnapped their first victim in the US in the mid 1970's and he wasn't born until 1953? I've heard of early starters, but I think that might be a bit of a stretch of the imagination...not to mention I don't actually see a similarity between the two. It seems it is becoming more and more common for people to try and draw a connection between the lifestyle as practiced with consent, and the few cases which get media attention and are blamed on an SM lifestyle when there is no consent involved.

Catalina

Not my intention at all. I read that in the article from the crimelibrary.com. I believe Master Phoenix posted a link. Maybe I misunderstood because, it was the seventies and you would have to be a time traveller for this! I was not aware that the Story of O was written in 1954. I will go back and read it again.

 

[Perpetual_Edge]

Oh, and by the way, I am not trying to draw a correlation. I am usually an unbiased judge untill I have heard every side possible. No, I meant to only share what I had read and get everyone's opinion. So please, correct my words if they are wrong. I would hate to go through life with the wrong facts!! This is why I posted.

 

[myinnerslut]

I'm a little busy at the moment so won't comment on the rest of your post etc., but as I am one for facts and keeping the story straight, I had to spare a moment to ask you how the heck you get that the Story of O was written and based on the Cameron case when it was published in Europe in 1954 and the Camerons kidnapped their first victim in the US in the mid 1970's and he wasn't born until 1953? I've heard of early starters, but I think that might be a bit of a stretch of the imagination...not to mention I don't actually see a similarity between the two. It seems it is becoming more and more common for people to try and draw a connection between the lifestyle as practiced with consent, and the few cases which get media attention and are blamed on an SM lifestyle when there is no consent involved.

Catalina

actually, in the link posted by MasterPheonix it mentions that Story of O was a favorite of Hooker, and some of the things he did imitated that. mabye the connection was made there?

 

[lil_slave_rose]

this story was one Master and i read one night from the Court TV website. that is some crazy stuff and i can see doing whatever you have to to survive in a case like this. the thing i had a hard time understanding was AFTER she was freed, she continued to defend him, she continued to have contact with him and his wife i guess that's where the whole Stockholm syndrome comes in, but wow, i just couldn't imagine, he even took her to see her family didn't he? and while there she acted perfectly happy and didn't say a word to them.... or is that another story i'm thinking of? it's been a while since i've read the story, anyway, i just can't imagine how you'd come out of that situation i think i would just wish for my death as it would have to better than the hell i'm sure she endured. here in the town i live in there was a guy who kidnapped two women, he had them locked up in a house that was right next door to him and his wifes house. he was a guy who EVERYONE knew, and respected.

they had no clue of who he really was. he tortured these poor women and eventually killed one of them. the only way he got caught was that one of the women freed herself from her bonds while he was at work, and she tried to free the other as well but couldn't get her untied so she ran out of the house and into the road naked and someone stopped and called the police..what she didn't realize when she tried to untie the other woman was that she was already dead. this man had an 'underground tunnel' leading from his house to the house he had the women held in. it was awful and it shocked our little town, i think it even made national news.

his name was Bill Benefield and he was eventually put to death for the tortures of these two young women. the woman who escaped is still alive today but she STILL deals with alot of issues that stem from the torture she went through. he held these girls in this house for over a year! she is basically 'psycho' and who can blame her, but everyone who knows her is scared of her, because she just goes off for no reason sometimes and does things that are not right, so for me, i would not want to live that life, i couldn't handle it, i would just beg him/her to kill me!

 

[catalina_francisco]

actually, in the link posted by MasterPheonix it mentions that Story of O was a favorite of Hooker, and some of the things he did imitated that. mabye the connection was made there?

That is a lot different to the Story of O being written based on the Hooker case!! It also happens to have been one of my favourite books for the last 35 years, but it is based on consent and in no way promotes a message of snatching women off the street and imprisoning them in boxes in basements and houses for years, especially against their will.

As for doing things which imitated those in the book, once again it is a case of someone interpreting what they want, discarding those they don't, and using it to excuse their behaviour when really their behaviour came from a place inside them long before reading a particular book. How many of us here have had the desires we now indulge way before we began to read or even knew what sex or BDSM was or that they even existed? Look at the histories of many of the serial killers and they had tendencies toward what would become their signature acts from early childhood. The difference is theirs were based on killing and maiming the non-consenting, ours were for the most part things we desired to do with a consenting partner or as a consenting partner, even in situations of kidnap fantasies etc., where it is clear it is a carefully controlled fantasy which does not go where the dreamere does not want it to.

Problem is, when it happens these perpetrators are caught, and subsequently have to appear in court to answer for their crimes, it has become a popular method of law (and media) to look toward providing a reason based in written or visual media in an effort to not only provide a reason why they did as they did, but to try and remove some of the responsibility from the perpetrator and hopefully get them a lesser sentence. I would suspect the book might have been a favourite of his because it reinforced (in his mind) the desires he already had, not that from a perfectly previously pristine imagination he got the idea to do those things from the book and acted on them. The reason I feel so strongly about perpetuating this myth that people such as Hooker got their ideas from a book, is this is what the governments are backing their arguments with to prevent us doing what we want in our bedrooms and with consent, looking at what we want, reading what we want, and even in the case of the UK proposing we cannot even take photos of what we do and share them with others online or in print. It is one of the greatest arguments they use to support their push for heavy censorship of our lives on all fronts. I prefer to bring it back to fact so perhaps a few more people see through the fallacy of the censorship argument governments present as real.

Catalina

 

[Tuomas]

Well, I was basically talking about the Hooker case and further hostage situations that involve pain. I should have clarified, but yes, the empathy and fear factor is understandable. Apparently, when reading some of the psych. reports, there are 3 factors that lead to a person being more likely to bond with their captors. Do you know what they are?

I didn't read the Hooker case, since such things annoy me That's why I responded more on the Stockholm Syndrome part, so you could compare it with what you know about the Hooker case and come to your own conclusion.

The three factors identified by FBI researchers are:
-Significant length of time.
-Victim and kidnapper must remain in contact (i.e. not blindfolded, or kept in a separate room).
-Kidnapper must treat the hostage kindly, or "...at least not physically abuse or verbally threaten them." Thomas Strentz, "Law Enforcement Policy and Ego Defenses of the Hostage," FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, April 1979, 1.

Clearly this contrasts with the public perception of Stockholm Syndrome (SS), and with good reason, since there actually is no psychologic definition for SS. Some researchers claim SS is responsible for a myriad of ill-understood abuse scenarios, including date-rape, domestic violence and, of all things, "heterosexual dating on campus" (please explain to me how this last constitutes "abuse"), while most psychologists will associate SS with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).

We do have to remember that SS is an inherently criminologic explanation for a socially misunderstood phenomena; criminal environments are vastly different from our own, so to project what is an anomaly into the rest of life is wrong.

Another thing I should point out is perspective: people don't understand what the "victim" goes through. Sitting in your own house, watching an armed bank robbery on the news, it might seem inconcievable that 4 people will sympathize or "defend" their captor. In fact, maybe they aren't "defending" the robber in the least: people -and the press- are apt at exaggerating traumatic events, and many victims have come off as "defending" their captor when all they were doing was pointing out the truth.

 

[Perpetual_Edge]

The media love their dirty laundry and will phrase things to get the most response out of you be it negative or positive. I think that people want an easy answer and therefore will grab onto any psycho-babble available. That was not my intention. I do not feel that this case is indicative of a healthy sub/domme relationship, at any means.

 

[Etoile]

I highly recommend that anyone with an interest in this case should pick up the book "Perfect Victim" - it is an entire book about the Colleen Stan case. I read it several years back...I'm not sure if I was even into BDSM at the time or not. I don't really think people would see that story and turn it into anything about BDSM. It might come across differently in the Crime Library story, but the book makes it pretty clear that Cameron Hooker was a bit nutso and that kidnapping someone is not a normal part of BDSM lifestyles.

 

[lil_slave_rose]

I highly recommend that anyone with an interest in this case should pick up the book "Perfect Victim" - it is an entire book about the Colleen Stan case. I read it several years back...I'm not sure if I was even into BDSM at the time or not. I don't really think people would see that story and turn it into anything about BDSM. It might come across differently in the Crime Library story, but the book makes it pretty clear that Cameron Hooker was a bit nutso and that kidnapping someone is not a normal part of BDSM lifestyles.

the story on crime library didn't make it sound like it had anything to do with BDSM either, atleast the story i read didn't, it was pretty clear to me that it had nothing to do with this lifestyle and more to do with a crazy man that wanted to force someone into 'slavery' by threatening her with 'the company' i couldn't imagine the things she went through.....

 

[Tuomas]

that Cameron Hooker was a bit nutso

As might be expected of someone who had to endure an American High School with the name "Hooker"

 

[Pure]

comments,

i don't think the Strentz excerpt is a representative definition of the Stockholm syndrome, though here is the url of the whole article:

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/fbi/stockholm_syndrome.pdf

i think ms Stan's situation was not unlike Patty hearst's; she believed her life was in danger; she was helpless and violated. in that case 'identification with the captor,' kicks in; it helps keep the person alive. one becomes, in effect, a robot, a pure tool serving the captor as he wishes. the account in crime libe makes clear the price of violating Cameron's wishes.

as Catalina explained, and the posted account makes clear, Cameron apparently derived some of his scenes from the Story of O, not the other way around.

as Catalina suggested, there is great dissimilarity in the two stories, since the Story of O begins with her voluntarily undertaking a kind of initiation; at a couple points, O's captors, esp. Sir Stephen, make it clear that she may leave, and ask for voluntary submission; and she reaffirms the committment.

the story is a work of the imagination, of course; but what should be said, here, is that no crimes are depicted in this fantasy world. O, is not depicted as being under coercion.

(it's true during some whippings, her cries are ignored, and she was under restraint, but 'blanket consent' was secured before. afterwards she does not feel betrayed--she could expect to be pushed past her pain limits)


i think the essence of "O" has to do with love; the self abnegating kind, which saints are said to have for God. it seeks a kind of self negation.

the self-effacement of Colleen Stan is pretty much out of fear, terror, etc. she did apparently profess 'love' and perhaps felt it, but i'd say fear and terror explain a lot. this is entirely rational given that she was dealing with a sexually sadistic person causing her great pain and suffering and threatening her life. (Indeed, he'd killed a protesting victim before, though she probably didn't know this.)

I note that Cameron Hooker had the delusion of the criminal depicted in "The Collector." That he could turn a victim into a loving, but subordinate partner.