Criminology: Labeling theory

Looking into theories of academic criminology what caught my attention is that it overlaps so much with sociology and even psychiatry as they all deal with deviants, deviancy and deviant behavior – aka something that is rejected by society as abnormal. Another issue is that they try to look at the object of their research as if one would look at the ant colony trying to explain one ant’s behavior. Even though those theories are interesting and powerful, but they are somewhat incomplete as they treat human only as social animal with emphasis on communitarian principles.

Labeling theory”  or Social Reaction theory deals with formal and informal labeling and it’s influence on criminal, delinquent or deviant behavior. It is described as “one of the most important approaches to the understanding of criminality”. Labeling theory has been used by sociology and also applied in mental health sciences. What is labeling theory?

This theory states that the label of ‘deviant’, and the stigma that comes with such a label, is more a product of society than it is of the individual committing the deviant act. What is considered deviant in one society, or at one point in history, may not be considered deviant in another; ‘deviance is not a quality of the act the person commits, but rather the consequence of the application by others of rules and sanctions to an “offender”’. Labeling theory also suggests that once a person is labeled a deviant, he will be denied essential life opportunities because of this stigma, and thus will have a greater propensity to repeat his deviant behaviors. Finally, labeling theory holds that those fettered with an obdurate, stigmatizing label often find it easier to act in accordance with that label than to shed the deviant label. The effects of being labeled, then, are external, with constraints being imposed on the deviant by society.

It’s true – if there is no society there is no deviancy. Imagine the world where you are left all alone. No matter what would you do, there would be no-one left to judge you or your actions. It’s striking how similar are accounts of formally labeled criminals about their perception of formalized label stigma and informally targeted individual accounts. We practice labeling theory all the time from the moment we are born – this is bad and this is good. It’s not so much about linguistics it’s about emotional meaning of labels.

Modified labeling theory applied to mental patients, which deals with labeling from different perspective – how it affects the perception of being labeled and subsequent interaction with the society aka self-stigmatization:

Modified labeling theory indicating that expectations of labeling can have a large negative effect, that these expectations often cause patients to withdraw from society, and that those labeled as having a mental disorder are constantly being rejected from society in seemingly minor ways but that, when taken as a whole, all of these small slights can drastically alter their self concepts. They come to both anticipate and perceive negative societal reactions to them, and this potentially damages their quality of life.

Labeling theory is largely about formal labeling, dealing with real criminals and mental patients, but the stigmatizing invisible social processes that affect these people seem to apply to targeted individuals as well. The only difference is absence of formal label. At least criminal or mental patient is aware of his formal label (they’ve been arrested, sentenced or served time, institutionalized, etc) and can attribute negativity towards them as natural and spontaneous reaction for that label. Targeted individuals have no such luxury and have to deal with multi-layered social punishment directed at them, absent apparent cause or formal label. So self adoption of “targeted individual” label is interesting as to what purpose it serves. I guess such label helps to make sense of what is going on, but doesn’t really explain anything. It’s less stigmatizing than potential label of serious mental illness, terrorist, child molester, snitch, criminal, etc.. It also fulfills prediction where shunned person adopts alternative point of view and joins deviant subculture that shares these views as a lot of targeted individuals seek others that are in the same boat – organized stalking forums, blogs and communities of targeted individuals, so on.

Labeling is closely related to concepts of shaming, stigmatization (disintegrative or reintegrative) and discrimination and recently has been used as debasement penalties by judiciary. Debasement penalties are designed to lower the status of the offender in the community through humiliation. This can include the performing of menial and degrading tasks.

Labeling theory posits that a person’s sense of self and behavior that stems from self-concept are directly related to the labels and perceptions imposed on the individual in societal and institutional interactions. Such interpretation is closely related to symbolic interactionism theory and looking glass self concept.

Symbolic interaction theory analyzes society by addressing the subjective meanings that people impose on objects, events, and behaviors. Subjective meanings are given primacy because it is believed that people behave based on what they believe and not just on what is objectively true. Thus, society is thought to be socially constructed through human interpretation. People interpret one another’s behavior and it is these interpretations that form the social bond. These interpretations are called the “definition of the situation.” Another premise of Symbolic Interaction theory is the pygmalion effect. In Symbolic Interaction theory, Mead establishes the notion of the “looking-glass” self. This idea is that an individual will behave and act according to the view that society and others have for them. The pygmalion effect also leads into the idea of the self-fulfilling prophecy. Ethnomethodology, an offshoot of symbolic interactionism, questions how people’s interactions can create the illusion of a shared social order despite not understanding each other fully and having differing perspectives.

Another theory that some criminologists use to explain deviancy is affect control theory or ACT. Affect control theory (hereafter ACT) offers a dynamic model of social action that focuses on how people’s attitudes toward identities, behaviors, social settings, and emotions (i.e., the key aspects of social interaction) inform the actions that individuals take toward one another. As an interactionist theory, ACT views social situations and the cultural context within which they occur as important determinants of behavior, including its conventional and deviant forms. Specifically, ACT’s mathematical model of attitudes gives formal rigor to the basic interactionist principles that people act toward things on the basis of the meanings that these things have for them. ACT can predict how people will react in various situations. It is very thorough (archive.org): they talk about events like “grandfather rapes granddaughter” as an example of a social situation or “I attend a party and think that the Host is ignoring me” is a social situation too.

Targeted individual is at interesting position where he has insider perspective on a stereotyped or stigmatized experiences and beliefs and is active interpretor/creator of such reality while being an involuntary target of negative attitudes, behaviors, and beliefs that shape this reality. They have to make sense of what a hell is going on while breaking up old and adopting new concepts of society, community, humanity and possibly even self-identity.

Some insight into power of labeling and encouraged punishment provides infamous Stanford Prison experiment, which had to be cut prematurely. The participants adapted to their roles well beyond expectations, as the guards enforced authoritarian measures and ultimately subjected some of the prisoners to psychological torture. Many of the prisoners passively accepted psychological abuse and, at the request of the guards, readily harassed other prisoners who attempted to prevent it.

Consider the use of the label slut as described by Tannenbaum (1999). Tannenbaum writes that nearly every high school has a “designated slut.” This label, according to Tannenbaum, gets applied to some poor girl, based on a widely circulated, frequently false story of sexual activity. These make up the “facts” that qualify her for the label, stating that she has met the rules of application. She is ever after known school-wide by that appellation. Tannenbaum learned that, many times, the slut label and its accompanying story had been deliberately and maliciously circulated by another girl. The acceptance of the label by the community meant that the labeled girl4 had to endure being treated as a slut (a bad, weak, active person5); people felt free to harass, scorn, and abuse her publicly. This is clearly the process of stigmatization (Goffman 1963). It is remarkable, however, that it is regularly done through hearsay and innuendo alone (by a person who might be termed a labeling entrepreneur) but is universally and unquestioningly accepted by the community.

Another thing to consider is that just like few decades ago deinstitutionalization was initiated and largely transformed to community mental health programs, there is growing debate of various scholars about alternatives to incarceration including various community punishment alternatives, shaming, stigmatization and so on .  There are a lot more theories that criminology, sociology and social psychology uses to explain and make sense of the same topic of “deviancy” and “deviant behavior”.

Thomas Szasz is Professor of Psychiatry. His classic The Myth of Mental Illness (1961) made him a figure of international fame and controversy. He believes that there is no such thing as “mental illness”. The following is a quote from Thomas Szasz’s Mental Illness: Sickness or Status?

        “Being the member of a community, a religion, a nation, a civilization entails joining the cast of a particular national-religious-cultural drama and accepting certain parts of the play as facts, not just props necessary to     support the narrative. Thus, we in the West today accept as facts that the earth is spherical, that lead is heavier than water, that malaria, melanoma, and mental illness are diseases. As against this perspective, I maintain that while there are mental patients, there are no mental illnesses. There is no mental illness or madness either — in the bodies of the denominated subjects or in nature. Instead, there is a mental illness role into which a person is cast by his family and society, which he then assumes and plays, or against which he rebels and from which he tries to escape. Occasionally, individuals teach themselves how to be mental patients and assume the role without parental or societal pressure to do so, in order to escape certain unbearably painful situations or the burdens of ordinary life ( Szasz, 2006).”

All these things mentioned are labels. We accept them as a society because it’s what we are taught when we are growing up but who’s to say that we are right. By labeling these people mentally ill, gives them a negative on themselves and others have a negative view as well. By doing so, it causes people to be isolated and act as they are labeled.

Punishment Vs Rehabilitation: Disintegrative and Reintegrative Shaming Rituals (local copy)

Delinquency and Violence as Affect-Control:Reviving the Subcultural Approach in Criminology

Symbolic interactionism (local copy)

Affect Control Theory (archive.org)

Wikipedia article about Stanford prison experiment

Intro into Labeling theory (archive.org)

Wikipedia article about Labeling theory

Advertisements

19 thoughts on “Criminology: Labeling theory

  1. Doing my best, but this is about as legit as I can explain it.

    Criminals who have actual crimes on their record they never admit they have a mental illness/deviant behavior conviction upon conviction. When people take justice into their own hands, they feel empowered, cause they feel they can control others(keeping them on a leash) for a told ‘worthy cause’ and it feels good for them to be an unwitting accessory to murder/suicide(punishable by civil code 646.9).

    What’s more, it works out for the individual since, the involved party’s addiction to ‘vigilante retribution’ gradually erodes their collective personalities, making the enthusiasts depraved, bitter,boring, irritable,jealous,violent,vengeful,adrenaline-drained, paranoid(under pressure to participate), and more prone to making clumsy mistakes themselves. The more they watch and laugh in generalized group-think at your unintended mistakes, they fail to see what they are slowly becoming, or have become. Do they want to do it? Not all. They could be a reflection of your ‘judgemental/picky’ nature.

    Why would our state/local/federal Government want to hurt themselves by stopping their own people into posting concerns out of their ability (mentally/emotionally) to correct themselves and their perceptions? They don’t, what they do stop is spreading overwhelming(if ever provable) conspiracy theories out of reach of our general ability to explain, much less rationally consider reforming in this timeline.

    The day you read the article from your Googled meta strings what came into your head? Objective memory. Fear is a choice, it isn’t an excuse. If you adhere to therapy and medication, you are FORMALLY attempting to get help without assuming your viewpoints are 100% correct. Now would a criminal(s) get formal help? NO!

    Why do we have SOME freedom to even post this? If ‘they knew what you knew’ beforehand, or if what you said mattered, wouldn’t they just stop you from posting by sending a memory-wipe?(assuming it’s not the paranoid info causing overwhelming information stress, and thus degenerative short-term memory loss?) .
    Just remember this:
    They don’t know, what you ASSUME you know.
    In other words, your intentions, are ruled by your choices.

    Think about the day you started CARING what people said about you, was it ALL your life, or just recently. The day you started caring is when you starting living for others, rather than focusing on you and your improvement.
    A dominant behavior, often expressed in movies is working past what was done to you, instead of venting it on others.

    To prevent more people from becoming paranoid and dangerous to the collective group.What you say gets monitored fine,(Police etc) but how you believe and act plays a part in what you do with that information.

    To see if our thoughts and behaviors are in tune with a humanly “manageable reality”, and if not, then your reckless choices and limited perceptions pave a way to get you medicated and contained before you become a danger to yourself and others. Medication will probably help you stop being a neurotic busybody with too much stimulation or lack of sleep. As paranoia is a degenerative disease, and the brain’s receptors can only hold out for so long before they become plagued with excito-toxins. Drinking coffee, on the other hand, it is highly beneficial. For those who are not allowed to drink it, should take low doses of caffeine pills(since you aren’t drinking coffee per se).

    Blaming or even mentioning the existence of a problem gradually merges it into reality, so yes, what you believe can affect your genes.

    Assess your own ability to solve problems without being ruled by your emotions. Consider thinking, and not base your actions on how you feel, and correct your exploitable and natural tendencies before you make it worse on yourself and others.

  2. Thanks for your reply as it gives me food for thought trying to interpret it in some way and i can’t do it succinctly without some follow-up. About your question of when I started caring about what others think – I think it’s important part of growing up, being instilled in us as mechanism of survival in the society – “stop doing it – think of what others would say?”; “how does it look?”; “don’t wear this – it’s dirty, what would others think?”. With neurotic parenting it can become quite a burden for a child and translate into all kind of problems later in life. At the same time without some form conditioning of social norms kids would grow up acting like monsters and psychopaths. Too much of such conditioning will create neurotic personality. I see it in myself as subtle, automatic way to predict social situations, but I look at it as inefficiency of my attitude, not neuroticism. I guess I compensate insecurity with detachment and avoidance of close relationships. It could be attributed to introversion, but it’s not the source of problem as I see it, but weaker side of my personality that is being exploited throughout this process. This also could be called “fear” and as you say it and it is a choice. Almost undetectable cognitively, irrational, but a choice. While such processes could be harm producing, suppressing them could be destructive towards positive processes like intuition.

    I also agree with your argument about community that is being used to deliver punishment. Social processes that get activated and we all take for granted “you have nothing to worry if you’re not doing anything wrong” are quite scary, once you realize that all that surveillance is not part of investigation, but part of punishment. Dormant mechanisms of “scarlet letter” punishment are being revitalized and instilled into the psyche of community only complimented with some hi-tech gadgetry. Fixation on this bullshit diverts attention from own goals in life, reducing appearance of normal personality in todays society. My approach isn’t about blaming or finding who to blame (i might use blame as information extraction tool to push a button or two, but only indirectly and only towards people who operate on that level) – I try to look at it as puzzle, as mathematical equation with all kind of variables (including my own behavior). So I do not look at community as adversaries or enemies attacking me – it’s more like a theater with actors where I try to find leads towards a choreographer or script writer as there should be some sort of formal process behind all this. I try to speculate and think of what kind of rumor it has to be for people to behave in this way. Is there a point in all of this? Maybe it’s about making you look for pointless point that is not there, like forcing dog to chase his own tail.

  3. “At the same time without some form conditioning of social norms kids would grow up acting like monsters and psychopaths.”

    Does this conditioning process sound human to you? Please.
    Why would humans deliberately generate stress (adrenaline and cortisol) on a person with a conscience? Maybe they want change, a solution to be produced, just gradually.

    I know I’m not perfect, but there are many people who so much as reject an offer, issue a different and harmless belief and get this persecution.

    These manufactured victims cannot be expected to understand subtle if they are prohibited from developing a normal social life, more or less having the hindrance of a mental disorders like ADHD, psychosis, schizophrenia or paranoia, and thus being overwhelmed in a group-think setting.

    Adherence to the psychiatric model makes the person intellectualize their thoughts into a universally controllable pattern (part of the many symptoms of Schizophrenia level 7)

    Appealing to universalism is dangerous because it is used by the social ordinances to generalize people possessing certain belief systems,inadequacies, and behaviors, judging those as warning flags (I call false flags).

    The Mormons say the age of accountability is 8.

    Having a disorder at an age younger than that, I think this enforced conditioning as punishment (for trying to make friends) would only intensify the problem rather than correct it. These campaigns literally follow you, it doesn’t end, it continues until ‘fight or flight’ becomes ‘suicidal or psychotic aggression’.

    Your natural tendency for prudence (friend selection) is a healthy act of caution in and of itself.

    4.“you have nothing to worry if you’re not doing anything wrong” pretty much, it’s sheer ignorance, the participants know, they just think they are exempt if their behavior is good. The sponsors will always find a method to pry and bother the ‘unteachable’ to take the fall, and make them a public example of their instigated ‘anti-social’ behavior. They do not consider the fact that the person never understood the ‘subtle’ until the individual was bullied in a place where they were forced to take the abuse, this in my opinion is predatory- it forces the emotionally unstable to perform and act unstable, which is even more dangerous toward the community at large..

    It just seems maladaptive in any social situation, at work, school, college or in outside life.

    Who knows when tides will turn, if your ‘friends’ suddenly turn on you under pressure. If you could so much as have a separate belief that the majority do not tolerate and pull this ‘belief enforcement’ nonsense on someone.

    (There are people who get stalked in these campaigns for simply carrying intolerance or basic disagreement to something like homosexuality.) Behavioral coercion in the opposite isn’t justified- it becomes intolerance with a bad attitude, it’s group polarization for a former oppression buried in history, it does not solve, but it continues to accuse, heavily eroding the health of the accuser more than the victim.

    The accuser thinks that the victim deserves it, having played the victim to cope with their abuse, and using a means of controlling the unstable person and bestowing the same punishment they received at a young age or going through a painful event. This is done to enforce the person to get fair game and equal treatment, but such auditing only stresses them out more by bringing others down with them.

    Like anyone who takes personal responsibility, I do the same. I don’t take other people’s personal responsibility into my hands, that would just overwhelm me.

  4. When I was talking about conditioning I was talking about processes that are considered normal in upbringing the child. Nagging mother could be source of neurosis for a child, but it will not be considered an abuse in the bigger picture. It might be portrayed – she is a strict mother or similar. It is about obedience and compliance, with good intentions having written all over it, but a lot of times such conditioning only brings out results by destroying something inside the child. In any way it’s a different topic. So when you asked when I started caring what other people think – i tried to say we all care what other people think (at least to some level) all the time we like it or not. We are social animals we use this model of thinking to keep in line with established social norms.
    It’s hard to talk about motives and reasons trying to explain this phenomena. I know for a fact that my conscience is clear. At the same time I know that people are pretty much convinced of something bad and awful that I must have done. Not so much that, but as if based on that. Sometimes I think maybe this whole thing isn’t so much about targeted individual, but more about community. How rumor is propagates, how does it grow legs, spread, modify and so on. Even though for TI might appear he is the center of it all, but in reality it might be the other way around. Heat has to be generated, but not overheated, it has to be maintained at manageable levels. It can’t get out of hand – if some neighborhood kid writes about it on the internet: bubble of bs can easily burst. Is it about certain people knowing just what they need to know or limits are imposed in a different way? Where spontaneity ends and controlled begins?

  5. I see your point, thanks for explaining.

    Anyway, can you come up with a guess as to why you are being persecuted, post, chat, behavior, belief, conversation, spouse?

    Is it my business? Absolutely not. It’s yours. Just sayin’ 😉

    We may never know what is done to discipline the child, only to have that child behave, observe others behavior, call kindred spirits and force that mandate on others who do not meet the criteria. There’s bound to be jealousy, teaching a kid not to want. There’s a sort of paradox, when these groups of ‘grown up’ children see a TI and try to force their behavioral norms, beliefs and attitudes on them assuming the TI isn’t mature enough to grow on their own.

    If you teach a child they cannot have what they want, either they will live their lives working to make it happen, or live the life they are expected to live by everyone’s standards.

    There needs to be a system of course, I have no doubts about that. But imagine a system without persecution campaigns, rather an encouraging tone “We would like to monitor you, your internet use, and your daily activities with your consent, for the safety of our community.” Would have sufficed. But subtle does not cut it, subtle makes me think this is some kind of undermining activity, not knowing whether it’s from legal authorities or not (unwarranted). Well Hunger Games portrayed this governance.

    Most people do not play ‘games’ and prefer a direct answer. Like Katniss, a compliant, efficient, and obedient citizen. The majority of the players, were depraved, spiteful and aggressive, while she sought to work with the people who wanted to make the best out of life and finding a means of surviving regardless of how hard things got. Of course, this is a complete fantasy, although highly acclaimed.

  6. I could come up with timeline of events that lead to it. Manufacturing of the rumor itself. I was kind of in the “Rear Window” situation and in a way was observing at least part of it. The cultural setting also complicates pinpointing the culprit as driving force could be simply based on hatred of the group that I’m being placed into. Nevertheless I do not think this vigilante group would be attacking without some sort of external push in form of authoritative confirmation of the lies providing legitimacy for action. External push could come from people who would benefit directly from my demise or the process itself. Overall it seems that OS/GS could be employed as substitute for “soft” assassination in modern world. Who cares if gun control is implemented, guns will not protect anyone against such tactics.

  7. Technology doesn’t matter, everyone is controlled by spiritual forces.
    Remember this has been going on since Roman times.

    They are either paid, unwittingly controlled or forced to do it. Feasibly? Maybe they are paying off a drug possession fine, or a government loan through public service. Bottom line is, they don’t really have a choice- especially if they have family to take care of. Slander just makes it all the more easier and justified to participate. For the most part, they don’t want to.

    It’s beyond silent assassination:
    The whole purpose of this is to wind up people with particular contradictory belief systems and attitudes, scapegoat them as a generalized problem, then the public gradually begins generalizing those people sharing those attitudes as a danger to others. How these wound up shooters end up with guns? I have no idea, probably planted on em. Just like police entrapment, they get a person to do a bad thing to another person, make that person take/sell drugs and report/arrest.

    If a person stressed to their limits was that off, chemically or perhaps drugged and trauma-programmed, their alter consciousness could be used to carry out the commands without question. I cannot understand why any person would resort to murder, unless they snap or are programmed, or they cannot see that the people participating (friend or foe) might be controlled by witchcraft.

  8. “Who cares if gun control is implemented, guns will not protect anyone against such tactics.”
    If the program is geared toward small minorities, discreditable.1 out of 100 people, the homeless, town prostitute, etc. If everyone knew about it the word subtle will be useless.

    “External push could come from people who would benefit directly from my demise or the process itself.”

    You have that part correct, they pay large sums for these persecution campaigns, it’s a way of entertaining the people who could afford observing and altering behavior (preferably for a greater cause).

    I would avoid advocating gun control, considering what alternatives will be used if people are not allowed to use firearms to protect themselves.

  9. We can only speculate about other people why are they doing this or that. How much is it influenced by group mentality, how much is it conscious choice and what part is just standby based on the uncertainty of the situation. I doubt any of the residents from immediate community are aware of all aspects of it. Hard to say about money. People with right connections have access to public resources.

  10. Who doesn’t speculate? Especially these days. It’s a movement within itself.

    Well it is still a contract-based activity(oaths etc), being a voluntary/involuntary accessory to cyber-crime, provoked mass-murder/suicide(Civil Code 646.9) of an individual(s), not only that, it’s a complete neglect of due diligence, which affects the essential community trust between citizens and police. As innocents in the area, or at their jobs are prepped for participation, and those that refuse are threatened. They think they are the law, or at least an extension of it, well they are not immune to to consequences of their own sins.

    Not only that, the hierarchy system of threats to family only seems to enable the bystander effect to continue unabated through prodding, negative reinforcement and justification. A false sense of civic duty and fear of losing security, jobs, privileges. Of course, money cannot replace a person- which is why they keep them alive. To study their responses, obtain more intelligence since they are unable to produce positive results on their own. At that point the question isn’t who THEY are, but what THEY are as a paranoid group mind.

  11. Money pays for education can aid in social status, and connections.

    Nevertheless, connecting to waste state/federal public and human resources, on a single person, the potential for blame-shift is limitless. Think about fusion centers, lodges, supercomputer databases,universities, research centers, NGOs, innumerable group-think galleries.

  12. I’m not so assertive or certain about overall mechanisms of community participation. There are way too many dimensions to think about and target has very limited perspective, especially knowing that they are usually somewhat socially aloof and introverted to begin with. What is clear that power is not in the hands of community, the imaginary problem is being solved for them by using them. So if problem and threat is fake, but community believes that it’s real – it acts as if it’s a real problem. Target obviously reacts accordingly. They could even ask for help with the problem (perfect scenario where one who spread rumors is asked to help with the object of the rumors).

  13. I’ll go tell a ‘sane’ person to help me stop an unexplainable and covert eugenics program, Organized stalking, shills, and all other State sponsored Private investigators. Try asking a lawyer, doctor, psychiatrist. Lawyers get scared, doctors play along, psychiatrists immediately do their job by handing out medication and a label diagnoses.

    Observe Mark Rich’s thehiddenevil.
    He went out raising awareness, asking for help, giving out flyers to multiple people in regards to organized stalking and electronic harassment, and reacted to his psyops giving his perpetrators the same treatment. Anyone, so much as federal witnesses get this treatment, with no relief whatsoever. Those who call the police, write to DOJ, FBI(FOIA),State Departments,even writing to the Senate/Whitehouse get their threats intensified, not only that, the police ‘can’t do anything about it’ cause they may be threatened themselves. It’s an H.R. and funding ordeal. Coincidences turn into normal everyday life.

    Mark was attacked more viciously. Of course, how do they expect Targeted individuals to react. They underhandedly decided to take the behavioral norm of their special interest group and judge people by their past conduct, (how they treated others) or stimulate schizophrenia through the use of electronic means- based on undesirable work performance. They themselves are being treated the way they presently judge others by ridiculing, threatening, and shaming them from potential slander and preconditioned alertness of a TI threat via Threat assessment team.

    Bottom line, take away their outlet, take away their power. For instance, deleting accounts involved in all social media programs in regards to personal life/profile.

  14. If target accepts gangstalking definition as it’s given on the internet and applies it blank point on his own life and tries to relay such information asking for help – he has to be prepared for rejection and failure.

    You have also account for some degree of sensitization, paranoia and hypervigilance that is already present and influencing cognitive and emotional state. What if organized stalking stopped right now, how long until you can get all the wounds licked and drop that emotional baggage? Would you be able regain concentration and focus on your life or would it still haunt you?

    I don’t think it can be accomplished by some outsider, unless that man is the key man and knows exactly what is going on and what should be done. Is there precedent of solving such cases? It’s like Al Gore knocking on your door and asking you to help him stop global warming. First nobody knows how to help with such thing. I guess to be taken seriously is the least you could expect of someone. Or asking to help with something specific.

  15. I’m pretty sure the real reason is not something anyone would want to look up, provided it is a worldwide phenomena. They are not ready for what can, or worst case, cannot be explained without some normalcy bias. And the only hyper-vigilance that can be seen are people doing their given tasks, paid or not by anonymous callers. Keeping concentration, would require desensitizing,spiritual healing, and also proper nutrition and problem-solving activities, write things down to prevent cognitive dissonance and positively build short-term memory. Get plenty of sleep, multi-vitamins, take sleeping pills every 1-2 days.

  16. “You have also account for some degree of sensitization, paranoia and hypervigilance that is already present and influencing cognitive and emotional state. ”
    I do not deny that TI judgement could be clouded by the extensive filtering done to eliminate disinformation,misinformation and mass quantities of info overload probably designed to distract a person depending on how impressionable the individual is. You have to take into consideration that shills can be paid to spread disinformation in blogs and web sites designed to keep the subject reading for days,weeks,months, or even years. Provided search strings entered from your objective memory used to describe the situation “following” “stalking”, gradually feed the user with a top-index with a slang result “gangstalking”.
    It has everything to do with conduct and reaction in an official and unofficial sense.

    “What if organized stalking stopped right now, how long until you can get all the wounds licked and drop that emotional baggage? Would you be able regain concentration and focus on your life or would it still haunt you?”
    For others, not sure. I just pray that they will be able to heal from this horrible treatment.
    If Organized Stalking ended, life would continue as usual, no more interruptions of daily activities, work, school, meetings, and relationships would be un-“altered” and free from undermining influence.

    One can only observe, but still at least it is speculation. I can also guarantee that reading through other people’s losses, speculations and experience was a lengthy and depressing read.

  17. Why? Its think it’s quite interesting and valuable exchange. On your last comment you touched on shills and b.s. information that targets are faced with when looking for resources trying to explain what is happening. It’s not often that you come upon original thoughts and ideas on it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s