The Gift of Fear

I read a small item the other day in the Oregonian, about how last week military helicopters performed some maneuvers in downtown Portland, unannounced. The article included the reaction of one woman whose high-rise was buzzed by one of the choppers, so close that she could "see the pilot's teeth," and additionally reported that the reaction of one of her guests was to cry.

"What the hell is there to cry about?" I said out loud, though I was alone in my kitchen. What kind of reaction is that? It pissed me off, as these sorts of weak and uninformed reactions always piss me off. When I mentioned the crying woman a few nights later, while we were having drinks with friends, Din said, "Well, if it were a crisis and they demanded a hostage, we'd know who to give them."

I remembered this while reading The Gift of Fear, a book I previously listened to on CD and which I seem to frequently refer to, especially when talking to my daughter, and her friends, about how each is responsible for her own safety; how she needs to listen to her guts, and that the best way to stay safe is to avoid the situation to begin with. The line I always recall, and which author Gavin de Becker says always draws him the most ire is, "The first time a woman is hit, she is a victim and the second time, she is a volunteer."

"Inevitably, after a television interview or speech in which I say this, I hear from people who feel I don't understand the dynamic of battery, that I don't understand the the 'syndrome.' In fact, I have a deep and personal understanding of the syndrome, but I never pass up an opportunity to make clear that staying is a choice. Of those who argue that it isn't, I ask: Is it a choice when a woman finally does leave, or is there some syndrome to explain leaving as if it too is involuntary? I believe it is critical for a woman to view staying as a choice, for only then can leaving be viewed as a choice and an option."

My daughter and her friends are not in any current danger of being hit; that's not what I worry about. What I worry about is their not listening to their instincts, for reasons ranging from being polite to being confused, ignoring the gut level things they know, what de Becker calls "survival signals that protect us from violence." For instance, reacting with tears to a helicopter flying past your window on a perfectly calm evening in a city where there is no war and where the threat of violence being delivered via helicopter is just about nil, is an extremely poor choice; it helps no one, least of all the crier. The only thing she's done (and I am assuming she is a she) is weaken her response system should there be an actual emergency.

No, what I worry about are the people who use signals to deliberately obscure what's actually happening. I am currently writing about con men, and how they know who's susceptible to the con and thus target them. It's the same with men who prey on women (as does de Becker, for the sake of simplicity and also because the stats overwhelmingly indicate it is so, I am going to state that men perpetrate more violence on women than the other way around): they seek a target whom they believe they will be able to rob, stalk, rape, murder; whatever it is they have in mind.

Because de Becker, who became famous during the OJ Simpson trial, has studied for thirty years the behaviors of perpetrators, he is able to break it down. I won't go into too much detail, but to say I am making copies of the chapter entitled, "Survival Signals" for my cache of teenage girls, a chapter in which in de Becker outlines some of the most common tactics, such as:

• Forced Teaming, wherein the stranger initiating contact begins to use the "we," as in, when approaching a woman walking to her car with bags, "We're carrying some heavy groceries, aren't we?"
• Charm and Niceness, wherein one should ask oneself, why is this stranger trying to charm me?
• Too Many Details: I love this one, because as a journalist, I encounter it all the time, the piling on of details in order to make the teller's story sound credible. "When people are telling the truth, they don't feel doubted, so they don't feel the need for additional support in the form of details," writes de Becker. "When people lie, however, even if what they say sounds credible to you, it doesn't sound credible to them, so they keep talking."
• Typecasting: Using a subtle put down, such as telling the grocery-carrying gal who's refused help, "There's such a thing as being too proud, you know." This, unfortunately, can spark her desire to show that, no, she's not too proud.
• The Unsolicited Promise: "The unsolicited promise is one of the most reliable signals because it is nearly always of questionable motive," writes de Becker. Why, after all, would a stranger be promising you he'll leave right after he gets you to your car/your door/the elevator? Because you're doubting he will. The promise seeks to remove that doubt.
• And for me, the biggie: Discounting the Word No. You tell the stranger no; he gets you to say maybe, or yes. Now he knows, you'll shift; he's in the driver's seat. If you say no once and mean it, it's done. If you shilly-shally, it can go on and on and on. This particular bit of advice I do already dispense to the girls, as in, "He won't stop calling me." I tell them, don't call back, period. If there's nothing feeding the fire, it will eventually go out.

I told Tafv, starting when she was very young: "If someone ever pulls up next to you in a car and says, "Get in or I am going to kill you," you run, scream, whatever, but whatever you do, you never get in that car. The threat of violence at this point is empty; he is trying to see if he can get you to do what he wants you to do." She knows this; she's a very smart kid and so are her friends; they don't take any bull. Still, they are 18, 19; at the age when they get nine or ten unwanted advances a day. Most are innocuous; some may not be. I know about this, having myself gotten that many advances a day as a teenager. Then in my 20s and 30s, it was maybe that many a week, or a month. Now, maybe it's a year, and it's not merely because I am in my 40s and now throwing off the beauty/hotsy-totsy pheromones as I once did, though there's that. It's because I don't look like someone who is going to fall for the lines. I am not going to waffle. I am not going to put myself in the position to be overtaken, robbed, raped. Some of this is as simple as not leaving my purse hanging over the back of a chair in a public place. Some of it is knowing when to run, as I did a few years ago when, while taking what I thought was a shortcut while jogging, I found myself within about 30 feet of a combative man; I turned around and took off. Always it is trying to be aware of where I'm walking, who's that up ahead? Why are my hackles raising? Listen listen listen to yourself; you're in charge of saving your own life.

As are, as is the case, your loved ones: I was going yesterday to the houseboat of a man I needed to interview for an article, and told Din as much.

"Who is he?" he asked, not keen on my walking into a the house of a man I did not know. I told him, I believed it was okay; the man was 72, and I was going on business. That I would be fine. Still, when I was getting dressed, I did not put on some cute platform sandals that would have looked nice with my outfit; I put on my Vans, because you never know when you're going to need to run.

Comments

[hillary]

The downside of having politeness and the need to be liked so ingrained that it is a reflex is that we can be polite in situations that do not warrant it, and need the approval even of strangers behaving inappropriately. I've definitely seen men do this too, but it is more often women, who tend to be more deeply invested in pleasing others.

The marvelous Alice Bachini-Smith visited me recently, and made what I thought was a stunning set of observations about her adopted home of Texas: that everyone there is unfailingly polite, which is wonderful, and that underlying and informing the politeness is the knowledge that pretty much anyone could be packing heat, including the mom putting her groceries in the car. I mention this by way of pointing out that politeness and weakness needn't be related--we can have a social contract that includes elegant behavior where and as appropriate, with strength and assurance as the underpinnings.

[Sue]

Great post, Nancy. I can't wait to read your piece on con men. I recently ran into one of those guys on the bus who started out overly friendly and then turned slightly menacing when I wouldn't talk to him. After a minute, I looked at him and said "really, can you blame me?" Like what kind of stupid asshole does he think I am? Those guys prey on the fact that women feel compelled to be nice in order to be accepted.

[Brett]

Enjoyed your post and can't wait to read the con man article. Anyone interested in human behavior would enjoy a book written by this psychiatrist Anna Salter who has interviewed numerous criminals. Her insights into how they think are amazing. The chapter on how to tell a liar is worth the cost of the entire book itself. A good liar, or one without conscience, shows few outward signs. Finding inconsistencies in the story is the way to catch them in a lie. In fact a psycopath smiles broadly when lying to your face. They are giddy with joy at the prospect of decieving the clueless victims.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Predators-Pedophiles-Rapists-Other-Offenders/dp/0465071732

[Nancy Rommelmann]

Thank you, I am reserving the book now. As for my article: the magazine I am writing for most often does not have their content online yet. This may change. Sometimes they link a pdf.

As for psychopaths: when I interviewed John Wayne Gacy, for five hours, he never ceased smiling, joshing, teasing. He never came clean (to anyone) about all the boys he killed. My theory: he was a consummate narcissist; he understood right from wrong but knew the rest of us were just too stupid to understand that he, only he, was allowed to rape, torture and murder 39 boys. What was the point of admitting it, when the rest of us could not possibly appreciate his privilege?

[Brett]

Didn't realize you spoke with Gacy. Must have been revealing. Insightful comment on his personality. I will read that article. Anymore tidbits on Gacy that didn't make the article? I love the study of human behavior as I was a Psych major myself. Just discovered you two years ago and have read some of your past articles but missed the one on Gacy.
(just realized I posted Amazon UK -- ooops!)

Oh, and in the interest of getting it right, Salter is psychologist not a psychiatrist as I mentioned above.

[Nancy Rommelmann]

The Gacy article is from 1994, pre-internet. If I recall, I typed it out in order for it to be online and during the transfer, it has a few weird glyphs. What you also miss are the Polaroids, of Gacy with his arms around me, and the photo he signed to my then-four-year-old daughter.

As far as human behavior: I am partial to the piece I wrote about Nancy Safanov, "Who She Took With Her." As for other Gacy insights: there are many in the piece. Thanks for reading.

[MJ]

Hm, perhaps this is why weepy and generally overly emotional women bug me. Because I'm watching and listening to the drama of how life is so unfair because they can't afford weekly manicures and child care, or something on Oprah was so sad, etc. and I keep wondering "what is she going to do with a real problem?" and "I sure hope I'm not around when something real strikes and she melts into a puddle."

Cold of me maybe, but one does learn in life when emotions and reactions are and are not called for.

[dgm]

Great post. I've been meaning to read de Becker's book, although admittedly I've avoided it because I know it will lead to creepy dreams. Having said that, though, I'm the type who listens very closely to my intuitions about people and situations and who is not so much worried about coming across as nice. When it comes to encountering strangers--especially men who are a little too charming or friendly, I'm not here to make friends. Whenever I'm out running and a car slows, especially a van, I take pains to look the driver in the eye and make sure he knows I am also looking at his license plate. On many occasions, perhaps just by coincidence (who knows?), the driver speeds up.

With my kids, who are 5.5 (son) and 10 (daughter), I sometimes play a game where, after we've been out at a store or something I'll ask, "what was the cashier wearing?" or "That man in front of us in line--what was on his t-shirt?" I try to get them to notice details about their surroundings. After these and other efforts, I found them both talking to a strange and suspiciously friendly man at the pool the other day. Every thing about the man said "creep," especially the part about how he happened to be so interested in looking at bunnies outside the gate and calling them over. I watched the whole thing go down so that I could use it as a teachable moment. Sigh.