Organizational Patterns in Argument
nursing
PRINTED BY: [email protected]. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
READINGS: Nervous Nellies · TAYLOR CLARK · People usually assume, in general, that women are naturally more nervous or anxious than men. In this research paper, which is based on the book Nerve: Poise Under Pressure, Serenity Under Stress, and the Brave New Science of Fear and Cool, Taylor Clark argues that scientists have demonstrated that women are not biologically inclined to be more anxious. Instead, they are socialized to be this way. While reading this argument, look at the ways Clark uses sources to back up his arguments. In the jittery world of anxiety research, one of the field’s most consistent findings is also perhaps its biggest source of controversy: Women, according to countless studies, are twice as prone to anxiety as men (Kendler & Prescott, 1999; Todero, Biing-Jiun, Raffa, Tilkemeier & Niaura, 2007). When pollsters call women up, they always confess to far higher levels of worry than men about everything from crime to the economy. Psychologists diagnose women with anxiety disorders two times as often as men, and research confirms—perhaps unsurprisingly—that women are significantly more inclined toward negative emotion, self-criticism, and endless rumination about problems. From statistics like these, some have even leapt to the Larry Summers-esque claim that women are simply built to be much more nervous than men—an idea that has outraged many women inside (and outside) the psychology community (Summers, 2005). According to new evidence, however, the outraged are right: When it comes to our preconceived notions about women and anxiety, women are unfairly being dragged through the mud. While women are indeed more fretful than men on average right now, this difference is mostly the result of a cultural setup—one in which major social and parenting biases lead to girls becoming needlessly nervous adults. In reality, the idea that women are “naturally” twice as anxious as men is nothing more than a pernicious illusion. Before we can unleash the vengeance of the furies on this falsehood, though, there’s some bad news we need to get out of the way first: a few recent studies have indicated that the hormonal differences between the sexes really do make women a touch more biologically inclined toward anxiety than men. One noteworthy experiment from last year, for example, found that female brains—well, female rat brains—get more rattled by small levels of a major stress hormone called corticotrophin-releasing factor than male brains (Valentino, 2010). Another 2010 study, at Florida State University, likewise revealed that male rats’ higher testosterone levels seem to give them a larger buffer against anxiety than female rats have (Hartung, 2010). (Don’t get hung up on the fact that these studies were on rodents; most of what we know about the neuroscience of fear actually comes from tormenting lab rats.) Just how big a role these biological factors play in human women’s anxiety isn’t yet clear. But one thing we do know for certain is that the way we raise children plays a huge role in determining how disposed toward anxiety they are later in life, and thus the difference in the way we treat boys and girls explains a lot about the heightened nerves we 328329see in many adult women. To show just how important this is, let’s start at the very beginning. If women really were fated to be significantly more anxious than men, we would expect them to start showing this nervousness at a very young age, right? Yet precisely the opposite is true: According to the UCLA anxiety expert Michelle Craske, in the first few months of infants’ lives, it’s boys who show greater emotional neediness. While girls become slightly more prone to negative feelings than boys at two years (which, coincidentally, is the age at which kids begin learning gender roles), research has shown that up until age 11, girls and boys are equally likely to develop an anxiety disorder. By age 15, however, girls are six times more likely to have one than boys are (McGee, Feehan, Williams & Anderson, 1992). 5 Why the sudden gap in diagnosed anxiety? Well, one answer is that as a flood of adolescent hormones sends these boys’ and girls’ emotions into overdrive, the difference in their upbringings finally catches up with them. After all, whether parents intend to or not, they usually treat the emotional outbursts of girls far differently than those of boys. “From a socialization angle, there’s quite a lot of evidence that little girls who exhibit shyness or anxiety are reinforced for it, whereas little boys who exhibit that behavior might even be punished for it,” Craske told me. In my book Nerve, I call this the “skinned knee effect”: Parents coddle girls who cry after a painful scrape but tell boys to suck it up, and this formative link between emotional outbursts and kisses from mom predisposes girls to react to unpleasant situations with “negative” feelings like anxiety later in life. On top of this, cultural biases about boys being more capable than girls also lead parents to push sons to show courage and confront their fears, while daughters are far more likely to be sheltered from life’s challenges. If little Olivia shows fear, she gets a hug; if little Oliver shows fear, he gets urged to overcome it. The result of these parenting disparities is that by the time girls grow into young women, they’ve learned fewer effective coping strategies than their male counterparts, which translates to higher anxiety. The sexes learn to deal with fear in two very different ways: men have been conditioned to tackle problems head-on, while women have been taught to worry, ruminate, and complain to each other (hey, I’m just reporting the research) rather than actively confront challenges. These are generalizations, of course; the fact that I have always been an Olympic-caliber worrier offers us just one example of how men can fret with the best of them, and everyone knows at least one woman who appears not even to know what fear is. Still, these differences in upbringing clarify quite a bit about the gender gap in anxiety. Yet parenting doesn’t tell the full story of feminine nerves, because even if a young woman emerges from childhood as a relatively cool and resilient adult, she still has to do battle with social forces that seem bent on making her anxious. You may expect me to dwell here on the viselike pressure that contemporary culture exerts on women to look beautiful and young forever (one highly questionable survey found that women worry about their bodies an average of 252 times a week), but while this is a significant issue, the cultural biases about women and anxiety run deeper still (Alexander, 2009). We have an odd tendency to label women as anxious even when they aren’t. A recent, highly revealing study showed that even in situations in which male and female subjects experience the same level of an emotion, women are consistently seen—and even see themselves—as being “more emotional” than men. It shouldn’t be too surprising, then, that this bias holds for anxiety as well; we buy into the fretful-women stereotypes far too often. Another report, for 329330example, found significant differences in the way doctors respond to patients who report common stress symptoms like chest pain: Whereas men get full cardiac workups, women are more often told that they’re just stressed or anxious, and that their symptoms are in their heads. 10 It should be pretty clear by now that the claims about women being far more innately anxious than men are suspect, but before I depart in a blaze of justice, one final point is in order: Men are getting off much too easily in the anxiety discussion. Probably the most significant reason why women get diagnosed with anxiety disorders twice as often as men isn’t that they’re doubly fearful. It’s because anxious men are much less likely to seek psychological help. The flip side of being raised to always show strength is that men come to feel that going to a therapist is a sign of weakness or failure (think of Tony Soprano’s mopey resistance to the benefits of psychiatry), which is why men constitute just 37 percent of therapy patients, by some estimates. If nearly twice as many women seek help from a psychologist, then they’ll obviously be diagnosed more often with anxiety disorders. Troublingly enough, the evidence shows that while women deal with anxiety and stress by worrying, men are more likely to try to bury these feelings with alcohol or drugs—which offers one rationale for why men are at higher risk for “antisocial” disorders like alcoholism. So take heart, women of the world: You’re not necessarily bioengineered to be worry machines. The deeper truth behind the great anxiety divide is this: We all get stressed-out and nervous sometimes. Women are simply more honest about their anxiety, because they’ve been taught to deal with it through unencumbered fretting. Of course, I’m not about to declare that if we raised boys and girls exactly the same, eradicated the cultural anxiety bias against women, and frogmarched more men into therapy, the gender nervousness gap would magically disappear. We would almost certainly see, though, that this gap is far smaller than we think. References Alexander, H. (2009, November 23). Women worry about their bodies 252 times a week. Telegraph.co.uk. The Telegraph. Retrieved from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/6634686/Women-worry-about-their-bodies-252-times-a-week.html Clark, T. (2011). Nerve: Poise under pressure, serenity under stress, and the brave new science of fear and cool. Little, Brown and Company. Harting, R. (2010, September 1). Why does anxiety target women more? Florida State University. Retrieved April 27, 2011, from http://www.fsu.com/News-Archive /2010/September/Why-does-anxiety-target-women -more-FSU- researcher-awarded-1.8M-grant-to-find-out Kendler, K., & Prescott, C. (1999). A population-based twin study of lifetime major depression in men and women. Archives of General Psychology, 56, 39–44. McGee, R., Feehan, M., Williams, S., & Anderson, J. (1992). DSM-III disorders from age 11 to age 15 years. Journal of American Academy of Child Adolescent Psychology, 31(1), 50–59. Summers, L. (2005, January 14). Remarks at NBER Conference on diversifying the science & engineering workforce. Office of the President, Harvard University. Retrieved April 27, 2011, from http://classic-web.archive.org/web/20080130023006/ http://www.president.harvard.edu/speeches/2005/nber.html Todaro, J., Biing-Jiun, S., Raffa, S., Tilkemeier, P., & Niaura, R. (2007). Prevalence of anxiety disorders in men and women with established coronary heart disease. Journal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation & Prevention, 27(2), 86–91. doi:10.1097/01. HCR.0000265036.24157.e7 330 331 Valentino, R. (2010, August 20). Stress hormone receptors less adaptive in female brain. National Institute of Mental Health. Retrieved April 27, 2011, from http://www.nimh.nih.gov/media/audio/stress-hormone-receptors-less-adaptive-in-female-brain.shtml A CLOSER LOOK AT: Nervous Nellies · 1. In this research paper, Clark argues against the assumption that women are naturally more nervous or anxious than men. Instead, he is arguing that women are socialized to be this way. Where in the article does he use evidence from sources to prove his point? · 2. This essay can be considered an “argumentative” research paper. Where in the text does the author signal that he is arguing, not only explaining? Where does he reveal the main point (thesis) of his argument? What are three or four major arguments in support of his main point? What strategies does he use to argue for his position? · 3. Clark agrees that women are in general more nervous and anxious than men. Where and how does he agree to this assumption? What are the reasons he gives for these differences between women and men? What suggestions does he offer to lessen women’s tendencies to be more nervous or anxious than men? IDEAS FOR: Writing · 1. Write a two-page rhetorical analysis in which you explain why you find Clark’s argument effective or ineffective. Look closely at his use of reasoning (logos), authority (ethos), and emotions (pathos) to support his arguments. Your rhetorical analysis should not argue for or against Clark’s main point. Instead, explain why you find his argument strategies effective or not. · 2. Write a rebuttal in which you argue against Clark’s main point or one of his major arguments. You can argue from your own experience, but you should also back up your arguments with your own sources. Also, you can agree with Clark’s overall argument, but you could disagree with his reasoning or his suggestions for dealing with anxiousness in women. 331 332 Serial Murder: A Forensic Psychiatric Perspective · JAMES KNOLL, MD · TV shows and magazine articles about serial killers are common in today’s media, but what do we really know about serial murder? To answer that question, forensic psychiatrist James Knoll reports on the scientific and medical research and reveals what we know and what we need to find out through further research. As you read, pay attention to the way that Knoll takes on myths and misconceptions about serial murder and the kind of research he uses to reach his conclusions. · ‘You feel the last bit of breath leaving their body. You’re looking into their eyes. A person in that situation is God!’ —Ted Bundy · Ressler: “Do you have any idea at all, of what would start bringing this type of fantasy to mind…?” · Dahmer: “It all revolved around having complete control. Why or where it came from, I don’t know.” —How to Interview a Cannibal Robert K. Ressler When law enforcement apprehends a serial murderer, the event is consistently the focus of unswerving media coverage. For local communities, the ordeal can be particularly shocking and upsetting. Residents living in a community that is exposed to serial murder may even experience posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms for varying periods of time (Herkov and Beirnat, 1997). Over the past three decades, our society has become fascinated by the phenomenon of serial murder as evidenced by the numerous books, movies and television shows on the subject. Yet, despite the high level of interest, there is no current theory that adequately explains the etiology of serial murder (Holmes et al., 2002). This is primarily due to the fact that serial murder is an event with an extremely low base rate and therefore is difficult to study via rigorous scientific methods (Dietz, 1986). While serial murder is a universally terrifying concept, it is an extraordinarily rare event. In a study of the frequency of serial sexual homicide, McNamara and Morton (2004) found that it accounted for only 0.5% of all homicides over a 10-year period in Virginia. In contrast to the sensationalized perception that serial murder is a growing epidemic, there is no solid evidence that this is the case. An analysis of homicide victims from 1960 to 1998 indicated that the percentages of female homicide victims have actually decreased (Schlesinger, 2001a). Because the victims of serial murderers are overwhelmingly female, these data fail to support the notion that serial murder is increasing in frequency. 332 333 Historically, the term serial murder may be relatively new, but its occurrence is not. In the United States alone there have been documented cases as far back as the 1800s. In 16th-century France, it is likely that myths such as “werewolves” were used to explain the deeds of serial murderers that were too horrifying to attribute to human beings (Everitt, 1993). In all likelihood, serial murderers have always been among us. 5 In 1886, psychiatry professor Richard von Krafft-Ebing wrote the classic Psychopathia Sexualis, in which he described the characteristics of individuals who appeared to obtain sexual gratification from acts of sadistic domination. The next major psychiatric contribution to our understanding of serial murderers was in 1970 when forensic psychiatrist Robert Brittain produced detailed descriptions of sadistic murderers he had encountered over his career. Beginning in the early ‘70s, media coverage of notorious cases such as Ted Bundy and the Hillside Strangler produced a sense of urgency to study and explain the phenomenon. Thus far, the study of serial murder has been somewhat hampered by lack of a unanimously agreed upon definition. However, most experts agree on the criteria that the offender must have murdered at least two victims in temporally unrelated incidents. This phenomenon usually involves a cooling off or refractory period between killings that varies in duration for each individual offender. To date, our greatest source of knowledge and data on serial murder has come from experts working in the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Behavioral Science Unit, now called the Behavioral Analysis Unit. To emphasize the sexual nature of the crimes, and to distinguish these offenders from others who murder serially for other reasons (e.g., contract killers), Douglas et al. (1997) have used the term sexual homicide. For each individual serial sexual homicide offender, the performance and meaning of the sexual element may vary. TABLE 1 Offender Traits
Source: Knoll J (2006) Researchers at the FBI gathered data from detailed interviews of 36 convicted serial murderers and were able to extract and analyze important personality and behavioral characteristics that helped distinguish different types of serial murderers. For ease of communication and conceptualization, the offenders were categorized into either “organized” or “disorganized” types (Table 1). These terms were initially meant to help law enforcement interpret crime scenes and can be understood as generally applicable concepts. They may also have appeal to forensic mental health professionals in that they |