Would such a woman ever so much as weave a basket for her captor voluntarily?
Stockholm effect. IIRC, in studies of aborigines like the Yanomano, they find that kidnapped women are common in family trees and also that men have very high death rates from homicide, implying both that the women did indeed do more than basket-weaving for their captors and they are nontrivially likely to have a dead relative.
Would such a woman ever so much as weave a basket for her captor voluntarily?
in studies of aborigines like the Yanomano, they find that kidnapped women are common in family trees [...] implying both that the women did indeed do more than basket-weaving for their captors
Er… because do you think the Yanomano man is standing there, shaking the non-existent shackles, saying ‘weave a basket and bear my children!’ every minute of the day? Such guard labor would be impossibly expensive.
Some sort of voluntary ness is involved. They are not cutting the throat of their ‘husband’ while he sleeps, they are not poisoning the kids to spite him, they aren’t taking the first opportunity to slip away into the jungle, etc. The more days that pass, the more opportunities they are passing up. Hence, Stockholm syndrome. People can get used to pretty much anything.
Someone in a supermax can be truly involuntary: burly men at every point stand ready to force them to do something, will force them into the solitary cell, will force-feed them food if they go on a hunger strike, will call for doctors and powerful sedatives, and hard concrete and steel hem them in.
And Stockholm syndrome evolved (says evolutionary psych). Because clearly it’s in the woman’s (and her children’s) best interests to comply with captors & survive rather than rebel & be killed.
Stockholm effect. IIRC, in studies of aborigines like the Yanomano, they find that kidnapped women are common in family trees and also that men have very high death rates from homicide, implying both that the women did indeed do more than basket-weaving for their captors and they are nontrivially likely to have a dead relative.
How does this address the question?
Er… because do you think the Yanomano man is standing there, shaking the non-existent shackles, saying ‘weave a basket and bear my children!’ every minute of the day? Such guard labor would be impossibly expensive.
So the point stands. They can and do.
Oh, of course. It’s not like they’re chained to the ground, so they must be going along with it voluntarily!
There’s no such thing as rape in marriage, right?
Edit: Okay, I’m probably too angry about this to be especially rational right now. I apologize if I’ve misinterpreted your position.
Some sort of voluntary ness is involved. They are not cutting the throat of their ‘husband’ while he sleeps, they are not poisoning the kids to spite him, they aren’t taking the first opportunity to slip away into the jungle, etc. The more days that pass, the more opportunities they are passing up. Hence, Stockholm syndrome. People can get used to pretty much anything.
Someone in a supermax can be truly involuntary: burly men at every point stand ready to force them to do something, will force them into the solitary cell, will force-feed them food if they go on a hunger strike, will call for doctors and powerful sedatives, and hard concrete and steel hem them in.
And Stockholm syndrome evolved (says evolutionary psych). Because clearly it’s in the woman’s (and her children’s) best interests to comply with captors & survive rather than rebel & be killed.