Talk:Stockholm syndrome/Archive 1

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

This may be a copyright violation, and in dreadful need of a rewrite. --Brion 02:29 Sep 25, 2002 (UTC)

Trauma-Bonding is different from stockholm sindrome..the latter allows the captive to justify and identify with the motives of the captor,as he/she isn't the direct object of the crime but mearly collateral in reffering to the strict sense of the fraze stockholm sindrome.so i believe that Coleen stan should be removed from the examples as her kidnaping and subsequent sex slavery was the primary reasn for the actions of her captors not pecunary or ideologichal beliefs as in the hearst case —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.117.48.171 (talk) 18:14, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

See Powell, 1986 "Notes on the Stockholm Syndrome." Powell argues that this is not a psychological state at all but a point of view that develops in a social context. Psychiatrists and psychologists fail to transcend the common sense view that anyone who expresses hostility toward the police and sympathy toward captors must be "sick" and in need of some kind of cure. Powell notes specifically the pleadings of Kristin Ehnmark (Stockholm hostage) to Prime Minister Olaf Palme that hostages wanted police to cooperate with hostage-takers as a way out of the situation. Powell also cites the testimony and accounts of Patty Hearst herself to dispute the medical model of the Stockholm Syndrome. --Anonymous

Sometimes, the victim thinks of the captor as a strong individual, who up to some degree protected them (as they where not killed) when released in trauma their reaction is; 'like to would be as strog as the captor'. In thier mind the only figure who stood above their broken self image during the captivity was the captor. In this lies the answer too, a psychological search for their old self (hypnosis) can bring their old non wounded self image back. Altough this becomes problematic with long time captivity, then only long sessions might have some effect. It's not easy in these cases to accept one is missused by a criminal, while also in the age that one evolving his self image. Because then this self image is wrongly build up, a victim cannt easily replace that, only live on with it, and learn to adebt to what should be normal. Altough again psychologic help in these cases can still do a lot, and is required. Required as otherwise they will act on these wrongly build valeus and can do such harm to others.

The evolutionary hypothesis should be attributed to someone. I believe it, but it needs references. - Omegatron 23:24, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

The evolutionary explanation is an unfortunate edit for this article. The vast majority of commentary on the Stockholm Syndrome does not use this explanatory platform. (anonymous)

Agreed. It's also extremely overgeneralized, like much pop evolutionary psychology (ie the one minute sound bite on a TV breakfast show boiling a complex scientific article into "Men are better at blank, women are better at blank. Don't think, just generalize.")

Sorry, but there is no one-size-fits-all psychological theory that explains all humans and our actions. And if this theory were true, well - why do some people who are captive, but not others, experience Stockholm syndrome? (Did this writer even see the FBI figure showing that less than 10% of captives experience the syndrome?) Why do some people resist bonding with their captors, if they are fighting in the face of implacable, pre-destined behavior? Um, does free will ring a bell? The commonly-accepted wisdom is that we are shaped by a combination of genetics, environment, and situation.

Evolutionary psychology is also extremely controversial - two researchers were virtually booed out of a conference in the early 00s for suggesting that rape is a normal evolutionary response for men who could not find suitable partners. Male *and* female researchers were offended and questioned its validity.

This article makes a similar sweeping judgment without any proof or attribution. If you buy the logic, of those slaves who were taken over the Middle Passage, only those who would willingly be yoked and bonded emotionally to masters would survive; those who would rebel (such as Nat Turner, Sojourner Truth and Harriet Tubman in the US) would be killed. That implies that the descendents of those who survived would have the same psychological drive to fit in at all costs, and bond with those who oppress them. Except that these same descendants rose up to create the American Civil rights movement, and then the Black Power movement.

The author of this passage is ignoring other psychological explanations, such as outwardly changing behavior in order to survive (while inwardly rebelling - has no one thought of the average person who hates his or her job, doing only enough to get by, while secretly rebelling by stealing office supplies? grin). He or she is also, sadly, positing his or her theory as fact. Evolutionary psychology is only one theory, and there are many variables in play when considering how genes are shared down the line, or why people behave the way they do.

I've tried to edit it in such a way that it is clear this is one THEORY, not fact. The "million years" figure is especially suspect. Are we sure it wasn't half a million years? Or 200,000 years? Additionally, the commentary that it would be especially important for women - while there have been traditions in some cultures where brides are stolen, such as in Central Asia, there has also been a long and rather sad tradition of slavery, which involved members of both sexes. Saint Patrick is an example of a slave who adapted to his forced capture, including adapting his new culture's religion. There are absolutely no sources given at all here.67.10.131.229 07:27, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

I realize this is a relatively minor issue, but I removed Die Hard from the pop culture section; none of the hostages exhibit any trait of Stockholm Syndrome. (One character bargained amicably with the hostage takers, which, I assume, is why it was added. However, he did not defend them in any way, nor exhibit any bond with them.)

I think the reason it was added is because it was discussed in the news studio, although there was an (at least in part) intentional mixup between Sweden and Finland. So I am putting it back in. Bergsten 11:05, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Yes, it was discussed in the news article. To put it in proper context, if I recall correctly, the news anchor was an annoying fellow who caused problems for the protagonist. Thus, it's consistent that he was speculating about facts of which he was ignorant. Perhaps the city mixup represents his slipshod approach. Afalbrig (talk) 04:22, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

The paragraph about the fact that 92% shows no sign of the syndrome ends up saying "probably because most captures do not last long enough." The article in no way says that the syndrome must occur given enough time, it does however name other factors than the mere passage of time as more important (for instance whether mental or physical abuse is involved). I am thus removing that part. Bergsten 10:50, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

He mentions "Matlock" but not "Dog Day Afternoon"?

In a similar vein, maybe the Kim Ki-Duk film Bad guy deserves a mention. [Spoiler Warning] In it, a gang leader has a crush on a woman, who his gang then captures and takes to a brothel. In the end, even when allowed to return to normal life, the woman decides to stay the man's hooker. --Padvi 16:13, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

"Deserves mention" is a putting it a bit strong, I think. The cultural references section of this article is already quite silly. Why would somebody who looks up the article want to discover a list of arcania with often vague references to the syndrome?

Take the idiotic "Manny & Lo" bullet as an example. Maybe we need a separate article: "Stockholm Syndrome in Entertainment".

Can someone provide a source, preferrable a video clip, of the incident where some people alledgedly threw their Kim Il Sung badges. Thank you. --Bjornar 20:58, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Can someone at least reword it? It's a massive run-on sentence.

I wonder if a typical parent/child-relation reminds a bit about the Stockholm Syndrome? I mean, the child is very dependant on the parent(s) and most people claim that they love their family simultaneously as they don't love everyone else they meet in their life. What is the likelihood that almost everyone loves 1 or 2 persons with whom they have a certain relationsship while almost none love most other people they have tight relationsships with, be it teachers, co-workers, neighbours, class mates etc. Yes I know that people have relations with their co-workers, class mates and so on but the "love quote" there is probably less than 10% while it is almost 100% when it comes to parents.

Would be interesting with a professional comment on this in the article.

I see your point, but if the artificial love you're talking about comes from parents treating their children well, then it wouldn't be the same thing. So unless children of abusive parents love their parents more than others do, it's probably still an interesting phenomenon but one that have none of the properties specific to the Stockholm syndrome. And just to avoid any unlikely misunderstanding, this is not the professional comment you were looking for. Bergsten 17:54, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

But as far as I know the hostage keeper in Stockholm where never cruel or violent against the hostage. Of course, the situation could never be classified as relaxed or comfortable for the hostages but under the circumstances it could have been a lot worse. Therefore, again, I think there are similarities to an "average" parent-child relation.

This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.--al95521 05:46, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Could someone knowledgeable in this area please have a look at Trauma bonding and see if they are related. Improving Trauma bonding would also be helpful. DJ Clayworth 15:22, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

I recommend going ahead with the proposed merger. //Big Adamsky 20:32, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

This is not my encyclopedia but I do know something about the subject. So in case this helps -- I read both articles and the capture bonding article is basically about evolutionary psychology. Most stuff on the Stockholm Syndrome does not even reference evolutionary psychology. the Stockholm Syndrome article you do have is really a stub and needs much attention.

The problem with merging capture-bonding was discussed up the talk thread and also on talk for capture-bonding. It is true that Stockholm Syndrome is not often explained in evolutionary psychology terms, but what other biology rooted explanation is there for this trait in humans? If you look at the trends on Google in the use of the term, it becomse clear that EP is far into the process of becoming the theoretical underpinnings for all of the social sciences.

Take a look here for example http://www.fathom.com/feature/35533/

Hkhenson 13:50, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

EP is far into the process of becoming the theoretical underpinnings for all of the social sciences? This a completely absurd statement. And the evolutionary psychology stuff in this article is no more accurate, comprehensive, or recent than psychoanalytic standpoints on the syndrome (and the Freudian stuff is mostly superficial too).

Is there a name for the psychological phenomenon wherein one who is used to a restricted or limited area of living or functioning chooses that even once the limitation or restriction is lifted? Such as when one is incarcerated for a prolonged period and "can't function on the outside" so commits crimes for the sole purpose of being put back into that controlled environment, or when an animal such as a dog has lived most of its life in a cage and chooses to stay in the cage even when the doors are left open. Is there a name for this as a "syndrome" as well? Thank you. Nagelfar 21:59, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

These could be aspects of the "Institutional Neurosis" described by Russell Barton in 1959 in his book of that name (Bristol: John Wright 3rd ed. 1976 ISBN 0 7236 0388 X). NRPanikker 23:41, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't intend to edit this article, no expertise here, but I do want to offer some thoughts.

First, it appears that there is some controversy about the article, but only those who go to the Talk page will discover that. Have you considered adding one of the "disputed" templates to the article?

Second, this article discusses SS much as it is in the public mind, as a bonding of the captive with their captor. However, I have read (perhaps in one of Connie Fletcher's cop books) that the Syndrome is two-sided, with the captor bonding with his captive, and that negotiators actually want the Syndrome to take place, as it makes it less likely that the captor will kill his hostage.

• • If you make the case (and I do) that SS/capture-bonding invokes a rarely turned on particular psychological mechanism, you might as well postulate that humans also have an instinct about how to invoke this mechanism in others. Such examples as are well known indicates that minor acts of kindness along with threats that put the survival of the captive at a serious preceived risk are most effective.

Third, the extensive analogizing to abusive relationships leaves the impression that SS is caused by abuse. A reader could draw the conclusion that a captor who viciously mistreats his hostages is more likely to induce the Syndrome than one who treats them decently. Is there any evidence to support that? I personally would go more with other theories, stressing shared danger and the like. --WacoKid 18:10, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

• • You might look into evolutionary psychology and the hunter-gatherer way of life incoporating capturing women as a way of life to see how these psychological mechanisms on both sides might have evolved. Keith Henson 00:26, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

• • • I would hardly describe the tendency to appease an abusive captor as "rare". How else do you explain Mother's Day?4.246.236.242 (talk) 20:53, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Although related concepts, capture-bonding has developed its own applications elsewhere since its inception. Hence, I sourced and cleaned the article. Also see: human bonding (for main page of human bond varieties).--Sadi Carnot 06:20, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

I've changed sentence that suggest Carroll as suffering from this syndrome to "alleged". What was her position before her capture? If she was anti-war previously, I don't think it's far to slap her this label. Moreover, her father insists that she was coerced into saying that. Bottom, the jury is still out there. __earth ^(Talk) 13:47, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Can Evey's relationship with V in V for Vendetta by Alan Moore be consided an example of Stockholm's Syndrome in books/movies? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shirley Ku (talk • contribs)

Perhaps... there was a risk for being kept captive by V, even thoguh he didn't really kidnap her. And please sign your comments with four ~ without spaces. Abby724 21:21, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Since Famous Possible Cases deals with actual living people, I feel that it falls under WP:BLP and needs to be scrubbed. I removed the Shawn Hornbeck section immediatly because that one was obvious.

??? I do not understand the removal of the Hornbeck case? What does the above deletion note mean? I added the Hornbeck case back in light of the following link:

"Experts believe that Hornbeck may have been a victim of what is commonly referred to as "Stockholm Syndrome", wherein a captive forms a bond with their captor in order to preserve their own life, and then are unable to break that bond. The term came out of a 1973 incident in Sweden when an armed robber took some bank workers captive, held them for six days, and apparently "stole their hearts." (unreliable source - do not use) www.postchronicle.com/news/original/article_21259411.shtml This is just one of hundreds of news articles linking Hornbeck to a "possible" Stockholm Syndrome case. What is the justification for removing the reference?

"...the victims became emotionally attached to their victimizers...". Victimizers? Is this a word? Guv2006 10:36, 25 August 2006 (UTC) ipiyiyi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.66.64.51 (talk) 10:06, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

The lists for movies, tv, and music are way over the top here. They do not contribute to knowledge of the article. Listing one or two good examples that are well known and display an accurate portrayal of the syndrome are ok, but this is rediculous. Leppy 20:21, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

What about making a seperate list article? ⇒Bayerischermann ^- 03:59, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

It seems a lot like the trivia sections that Wikipedia is trying to eliminate. Mizunori 05:06, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

No, let's not have a separate list article. I am sick of seeing "pop culture" reference points in wikipedia articles. Can't the concept be understood as-is without the stupid references to which episodes Homer-f***ing-Simpson mentioned it in.

The following doesn't seem to be releveant to the article at all.

Kampusch was able to escape while she was vacuuming Priklopil's car, who apparently received a telephone call and moved away from the noise to hear better. The door was unlocked, and Kampusch bolted to a neighbor's house. Hours later, Priklopil committed suicide by throwing himself under a commuter train.

The following sentence has bad grammar.

What following sentence?

On another note - it took me a while to get what you meant. You mean, because she chose to escape, it does not sound like tru Stockholm Syndrome, right? Except this section of the article is about "alleged" cases of it, not proven cases, so it works, I think, though it could use some cleanup.

It's not so much that it isn't relevant (as she reportedly "mourned" her captor's death after hearing about it, indicating some level of Stockholm Syndrome), as that its potential relevancy to the rest of the reference to Kampusch's ordeal/mental state (in describing her alleged condition exactly) isn't established; that is, she actually chose to escape, so is it really full-blown Stockholm Syndrome? Was it a complicated set of circumstances where she did in fact develop a bond/affection for him, but nonetheless wanted to see her parents and friends from the outside world again (this could explain why she is "mourning his death" - it said she cried and everything, and apparently not out of relief, is the implication. Perhaps she feels guilty for having left, blaming herself for his suicide)? Or, is she simply not wanting to talk about whatever abuse he may have inflicted on her? Both seem plausible, given that she's refused to comment on whether or not he abused her sexually - and the article I read said:

"Police say she had "sexual contact" with her captor but have not elaborated.

Experts say Kampusch is suffering from "Stockholm Syndrome" -- a psychological condition in which prisoners begin to identify with their captors.

So it makes you wonder. However, it does say "experts" say she's suffering from Stockholm Syndrome, so it IS a well-known alleged case now of the condition. I hope it gets cleaned up as more details about the case become available. Runa27 21:24, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Why was my original entry about her having sex with her modified so heavily?

Kampusch had sexual relations with her captor, when she was asked whether she had been sexually abused, "she said everything she has done she has done voluntarily; he didn't force her." [3]

Was my reference no good? The way it is phrased currently makes it seem more unlikely and therfore less factual than the quote she gave here. Osirisx11 10:53, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Till there is no evidence for that, I think her syndrome is only in "our" minds. My 2. She's only sorry for the death of a man for what we know, but she never talked about sex or anything else, and many times said she would have cut his head, if possible, to leave that house. I would delete it, or at least explain the reasons for being there, instead of only telling his story. Suppositions (and gossip about other's misadventures) are not for an encyclopedia. 7 Sept.

Not mentioned anywhere on wikipedia other than this article. The link is invalid. Found one reference only on http://www.health24.com/mind/Cybershrink_says/1284-2864,37248.asp

Hey! It wasn't a news reporter that screwed it up by saying Helsinki instead of Stockholm in Die Hard! Its much worse than that - it was an expert psychologist guest on the show and the author of the book the black cop later mocks.

I'm correcting it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.77.201.109 (talk) 23:39, 22 December 2006 (UTC).

Why is the paragraph about the case shown on Court TV's 'Forensic Files' headlined Fictional cases? Doesn't that show purport to examine real crimes? If it is a 'fictional case' should it be moved to the extensive list of pop culture references? If it is an actual case, could someone please come up with a different heading?

Further, the show may demonstrate Stockholm Syndrome, but this synopsis doesn't, really. Was the wife held captive after her husband's murder? Did she become attached to her abductor? Mnoe817 00:47, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

In the text it says PH was held for two weeks before participating in a bank robbery; in the photo caption it says two months. Which is it?

Also, this article needs some reference to the fact that SS is controversial in psych circles, especially insofr as it is politically applied. Ethan Mitchell 02:24, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Somehow this "syndrome" does not strike me as something special. Vulnerable people need love, by whomever. High profile hostages feel more important, and learn something about the social conditions. I am sure people hate their captors in equal proportion.

I suspect that this term is useful for right wingers to explain how people sympathise with underdogs. Right-wingers dennounce this a irrational to fit their reason d'etre, as seen in [this article]. PLEASE don't be naive and fall for such manipulations. 124.197.4.8 02:33, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Kaspar Hauser? Oh dear. What next?

• There have been discussion about this term, especially its connection with the Normalmstorg incident - the reason? Because the robber was not so powerful and threatening, he was just delusional and mentally weird. He was young and seemed almost vulnerable and powerless, therefore the victims felt more attached to him and concerned that his whole life would be spoilt by the robbery (which failed in all senses), their reaction was more of a social awareness kind than some Freudian psychology. Yiwa 13:46, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Is there a reason that Fictional Cases and Fictional Uses are seperated? If not then I'd propose merging these sections.

Secondly, what does anyone think of the inclusion of Clarice Starling from the Book Hannibal as a ficitonal case of Stockholm Syndrome... it's never explicitly mentioned however there do seem to be elements of her situation that would fit this description. Elaverick 21:59, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Should the movie/book The Collector be included in the Fictional cases section? Chungalin 18:37, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

How about The Negotiator? --Motoma 18:56, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Another place where the syndrome is wrongfully referenced by Mulder in the episode X-files: Folie a deux, in the 5th season. Maybe under a trivia section? I believe it should be noted though, as a common misnaming, so people looking for the alleged "Helsinki syndrome", will still find it. Madskile 15:00, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Could we put a spoiler warning over the fictional uses section? It contains some pretty big ones, especially the one for Saw. Amanda becoming Jigsaw's apprentice is a surprise ending. And yes, this article did ruin the movie for me. Kingadrock 05:32, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I doubt that hannibal suffered from Lima syndrome as listed in the article. The movie shows that Hannibal liked her from the very beginning and even tells her why he respects her over other agents. Even Clarice herself knew why Hannibal would never hurt her... he would concider it rude.

Basically I think he had a respect and liking for Clarice long before her efforts to capture him would have even had the chance to create a Lima Syndrome senario.

I didn't delete it from the article because at least one person disagree's with me. If what I say makes sense then I suppose someone can make the executive decision.

Hi, I'm proposing this page should be merged with Capture-bonding. They seem to describe the same topic (if from somewhat different perspectives). The capture-bonding article even says, "This behavior came to be called Stockholm syndrome". And this article links back to this one as "an interpretation of the syndrome from the perspective of evolutionary psychology." I've started a discussion at Talk:Capture-bonding about the proposed merge. Please feel free to comment there. --Gpollock 19:39, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't think that the pages should be merged. Capture-bonding and Stockholm Syndrome are two totally different subjects. Citizen-13 06:38, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Citizen-13, Stockholm syndrome is a common idiom for referring to an historical event and describing certain instances of the general phenomenon of capture-bonding. Both are notable encyclopedic subjects in and of themselves. bradkittenbrink 04:22, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Disapprove I argee, both are different, they need to stay different Dep. Garcia ( Talk + | Help Desk | Complaints ) 16:33, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I just deleted a paragraph with a really dubious claim that Disney's movie version of Beauty and the Beast had Stockholm Syndrome as a theme. The supporting evidence (that Belle chooses to stay with a beast who had murdered a man coming to rescue her) is wildy inconsistent with the actual events of the movie. (In the movie the beast imprisons her but never actually harms or even threatens her; she starts to see his better nature in his unguarded moments; and Gaston, the alleged rescuer, falls to his death because he had just stabbed the Beast in the back!) If you are thinking of adding Beauty and the Beast back in, please find evidence that the actual creators of that movie were actually thinking of Stockholm Syndrome. And the original story arguably has underlying themes about marriage, not Stockholm Syndrome. Steveha 08:11, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Some of the people in the list were indeed kidnapped, but there's nothing in this article or the article about them to say that they had Stockholm syndrome.

I will fix this, but I'm new to this topic. If someone thinks they could do a better job, or do it with more care, please do it before I get around to it. --Gronky 14:49, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

This article contains scant information on the nature of this theory or its genesis. Example lists are far in excess of what would be useful for illustration (no more than five or six examples). Suggest merger with Capture-Bonding, at least until a more detailed and researched article on the concept of Stockholm Syndrome can be developed. Stockholm syndrome is a term coined to describe the sympathy evoked in adults held hostage for six days, not children held for a decade or more. In fact, hardly *any* of the examples cited here bear much resemblance to "Stockholm Syndrome" as it is initially defined, as a sympathy that develops in adults during a short period of traumatic domination. ThaddeusFrye 15:57, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I've gone ahead and moved the "possible examples" of real and fictional SS to another page; however I feel that most of these examples should simply be deleted. Unless an example has been discussed as an example of SS by an expert (and is cited appropriately), placing it on a list of examples constitutes "original research" and as such is strongly discouraged by Wikipedia. My guess is that this list is full of misleading examples; however I have left the list intact, and simply moved it to a location where it does not overwhelm or interfere with the main article, which needs to focus more on the specific content and nature of this concept. ThaddeusFrye 16:23, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

The split-off article was nominated for deletion and according to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Possible examples of Stockholm Syndrome a trimmed list has been merged back. --Tikiwont 12:27, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

This part of the article reads like propaganda for one side in this matter, and makes quite broad claims, without any references to back it up. Perhaps it ought to be removed if no cited sources can be provided? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.100.124.218 (talk) 15:34, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

As a Taiwanese-American, proud of my Taiwanese heritage and fully aware of the historic evils of the KMT, I believe this section indeed stretches the definition of Stockholm Syndrome to absurdity. If domestic pogroms and violent civil strife are the hallmarks of S.S., then the Chinese are victims of S.S., then Native Americans who serve in the U.S. military are victims of S.S., etc. S.S. theory seems best designed to account for psychology of small groups at most, not whole societies or polities. Notice that of the "possible examples" given, this is the only one that names an entire nation as victim. I would remove this as one of the more shameless examples of DPP extremism. The fact that someone could apply this theory so sloppily, however, does indicate some internal weakness to the theory. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.33.252.150 (talk) 21:57, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

This article doesn't seem to make any distinction between Stockholm Syndrome as a defense mechanism and a person who honestly happens to feel that his captor is justified or in the moral right. For the sake of argument, say a group of militants took control of an auditorium full of college students and were protesting against the Iraq War, or abortion. Certainly there could be *some* people there who would have agreed with them anyway, and perhaps they would defend their captors and feel they were justified. Surely the possibility exists that this isn't a "syndrome" or a "psychological response" but an honest opinion? The article seems to lead to the conclusion that anybody who can see their captor's point of view is reverting to some basic survival instinct which must be corrected later. "Anonymous" stated this quite well under "Is there a cure?" (above), but I have been unable to find a copy of Powell's "Notes on Stockholm Syndrome" to verify it. Perhaps someone has a copy, or something similar? Thoughts? intooblv 05:32, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Or not... intooblv (talk) 04:39, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm unsure whether this is a genuine case,but didn't the hostages during this siege aid one of the terrorists to avoid the SAS (Who would of shot him on sight) and help him escape? Making him the only surviving terrorist.Wouldn't this count as a case of SS?Alot of people say that he was trying to "hide" as a hostage and that the real hostages didn't know he was there, but i've seen several interviews and read many accounts to the contrary,all by the hostages who insist they let him hide because he was the terrorist they "liked"

I deleted this Stockholm Syndrome example that is tagged on at the end: "Members of a Military-industrial complex who exhibit behaviors of Extremism in defending the ideology of their captors, in spite of dangers to themselves, their families, society and perhaps the world."

1) military-industrial complex? 2) captors? 3) danger to the world?

It is editorial speculation rather than informational, and seems ideological. Furthermore, the citations do not support the assertion.

One of the citations for the example: http://mises.org/story/2749

This citation does not support the example. It only refers to Stockholm syndrome once, and does so only to analogize it to a phenomenon that the author asserts exists: "The mass belief in the general beneficence of democracy represents a kind of Stockholm syndrome writ large." Furthermore, this cited article is an editorial. It is polemical without providing original research. A few examples from the editorial: "The state is the most destructive institution human beings have ever devised — a fire that, at best, can be controlled for only a short time before it o'erleaps its improvised confinements and spreads its flames far and wide.

....

"State propaganda, statist ideologies, and long-established routine combine to convince many people that they have a legitimate obligation, even a moral duty to pay taxes to the state that rules their society."

The other citation links to a book on Amazon, without reference to any section or page: "The Complex: How the Military Invades Our Everyday Lives." Nothing in the book description or reviews indicate that the book provides evidence that supports the claim that "Members of a Military-industrial complex who exhibit behaviors of Extremism in defending the ideology of their captors, in spite of dangers to themselves, their families, society and perhaps the world."

71.0.80.60 (talk) 08:36, 6 May 2008 (UTC) Theodore101 (talk) 08:37, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Captivity in the orginal case lasted only a few days - some of the examples of possible cases were of people captive for years. Are there psychologial distinctions between these these? Autarch (talk) 18:52, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Says nothing, blathers on about Marxism and class struggle, but doesn't provide a single citation. Out it goes... 70.61.22.110 (talk) 15:10, 18 August 2008 (UTC)Ubiquitousnewt

I've often heard Stockholm syndrome used as an explanation for religion, specifically Abrahamic religions. Is there any clinical research on this topic to include in the article? Google results on the topic: http://www.google.com/search?q=stockholm+syndrome+god -- Christopher C. Parker ^{t c} 18:20, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Isn't "in-depth synopsis" an oxymoron? Unimath (talk) 13:40, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Hey! I just removed the criticism section, but moved similar, but more concise, content up to the top. I hope that isn’t seen as too provocative... I dislike “criticism” sections because they make the article look like its fighting itself, rather than having the article speak with a unified, impartial voice on a subject’s strengths and shortcomings. (That, and the caveat that Stockholm syndrome is a cultural phenomenon and not a real diagnosis seemed important enough to go up there.) Then again, it doesn’t seem like the stuff I put in about the reasoning behind the paper (the group of scholars and such) is the sort of thing that generally goes in the first paragraph. (I was trying to avoid weasel words or vague claims.) Then again again, I couldn’t think of any better place to do it. Perhaps a short discussion of whether Stockholm syndrome is cultural or psychological, with more references, would make for a good new section.

(One reason I didn’t want a “criticism” section here is because it seemed odd. What, criticizing Stockholm syndrome? They’re skeptical of the diagnosis, not criticizing the condition, however one goes about criticizing a condition.) Cherry Cotton (talk) 21:04, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't see how criticising the diagnosis of Stockholm Syndrome is incompatible with criticising Stockholm Syndrome. The condition would not exist without the diagnosis. EmilianaMartín (talk) 20:02, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Since she denies the claim that she suffered from the condition, can someone please tell me how including her example is a) Not an imposition, or b) Relevant to an already well padded-out section on potential cases. EmilianaMartín (talk) 20:02, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Spoiler Alert, the movie deals with a kidnapping of a youth who becomes attached to his captors. His captors are marijuana dealers in California who have a dispute with the youth's older brother. He appreciates his captors lifestyle of partying, casual drug use and sex. His captors become attached to him but ultimately give the order for him to be killed as he is seen as a liability regardless of his naive liking of them. Stockholm syndrome is a major theme of this movie and should be mentioned in the article.

Thanks, D. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deverell (talk • contribs) 16:16, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Have any of these items been covered by a reliable third party source, such as to warrant inclusion in the main article? I hate to see people keep adding more and more trivia to this poor article. JBsupreme (talk) 07:22, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I totally support removing entries where it's throw-away references, which is most of them. Some are total original research too. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 21:42, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

• In the HBO series The Sopranos, Big Pussy (Sal) Bompensiero becomes disenchanted with Tony's dismissiveness of him, and so actively begins contributing to the FBI's investigation of the Soprano family that his FBI handler refers to Sal as a "Junior G-Man" and reports his concern that Sal has the worst case of Stockholm Syndrome that the FBI Agent has ever seen.

• In the February 1, 2009 episode of the Sally Forth comic strip, Sally's daughter suggests that their mother-daughter bonding while cooped up indoors by the cold weather is really just a case of Stockholm Syndrome.

• In the movie Die Hard, there is a scene in which there is a reporter and a psychologist discussing about the hostage situation taking place in the Nakatomi Plaza. The psychologist then says that some of the hostages might develop the Stockholm Syndrome, although he refers to it as the "Helsinki Syndromme".

• In Episode 7 (titled Five Brothers) of Season 3 of The Unit the team must rescue a journalist from captivity. During his rescue, the journalist begins to exhibit behaviors of stockholm syndrome leading the team leader to note that the journalist has become "Stockholmed."

• The Stockholm Syndrome was mentioned in a Series of Unfortunate Events, the tenth book (The Slippery Slope).

• On the episode called "Insane in the Mainframe" during Season 3 of Futurama (originally airing on 04/08/01) Roberto the bank robbing robot takes the Planet Express crew hostage and threatens to kill Bender. Bender pleads for his life claiming that he's developing Stockholm Syndrome.

Roberto: "I'm gonna kill you, you...you no-good fifty-sixing..."'

Bender: "Don't kill me yet! I'm starting to come down with Stockholm Syndrome...handsome!"

• In the episode "The Good Wives' Club" of the TV show NCIS, a kidnapped victim attacks one of the NCIS agents and then attempts suicide as they rescue her from her underground prison once she learns that her kidnapper is dead.

• During the Simpsons episode Blame It On Lisa, the Simpsons travel to Brazil, and Homer is kidnapped. When the family pays the ransom, Homer is reluctant to leave, prompting his captor to remark that he has "the Stockholm Syndrome."

• Swedish rock band Backyard Babies have an album called Stockholm Syndrome.

• Stockholm Syndrome was mentioned in The Gang Gets Held Hostage episode of It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia. In this episode, DeAndra turns on her friends Charlie, Mac, and Dennis and sides with the McBoyles. Meanwhile, Dennis begins to exhibit many of the same traits as their captors, thus another example of this phenomenon.

• "Stockholm Syndrome" is the title of a song released by Yo La Tengo on the album I Can Hear the Heart Beating as One released in 1997.

• It is also the title of a song by Blink-182 on their self titled album released in 2003.

• It is also the title of a song by Muse on the album Absolution released in 2003.

• The Spanish movie Atame features a kidnapped girl who falls in love with her kidnapper, who is also in love with her.

• In the anime "Black Lagoon" the main character, Okajima Rokuro, joins the Lagoon Company, willingly, even after they kidnap and threaten to kill him. He even uses the phrase:

Rock(Okajima): "I guess this is what they call 'Stockholm Syndrome'.."

• In The World Is Not Enough, James Bond accuses Elektra King of suffering from Stockholm Syndrome after he noticed a shared key phrase between her and her former kidnapper, when in reality the opposite happened.

• In the stealth/action video game Metal Gear Solid, Snake speculates that Otacon suffers from Stockholm Syndrome when he becomes attracted to Sniper Wolf, a ruthless killer who mortally wounded the heroine (Meryl).

• In Malcolm in the Middle, Malcolm tells Reese that he is coming down with Stockholm Syndrome when he lets the people who took over their house hit golf balls at him.

• In the book Artemis Fowl, by Eoin Colfer, Stockholm Syndrome is mentioned.

• In the novel Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six,Stockholm Syndrome is mentioned during before the setup of a mission

• Walt Disney's Beauty and the Beast, Belle becomes emotionally attached, and in turn, falls in love with her captor, the Beast.