Mind if I give it a shot?

• MARILYN MANSON??? by MIKE ROHRBACH, 12/1/98
  • (...)
    
    • Last chance by Eric Rietzschel, 12/7/98
      
      

If I might offer my own personal connection.... This may or may not be the point Mike is making, but it does provide one possible mechanism by which we could make the leap from Marilyn Manson to Evol. Psych.

Focusing specifically on Marilyn Manson seems like something of a red herring to me. The underlying point of this to me is the point that youth are influenced by those to whom they turn as role models. This is unquestionably an adaptive and developmental characteristic, youth are developing autonomy from the family of origin, but in doing so, much first experiment with behavior modelled after others outside the family. And for some young people, the more opposite the behavior is, the more attractive it is. Over time, the well-adjusted young person will adopt some type of normative behavior that may include elements of the modelled behavior in addition to the behavior learned from the family. Which of course is strongly conditioned, as the family has much more influence over a child's development than outside role models. Unless of course, the child is role modelling outsiders before the age of three.

In the latter half of the 20th century, the media has facilitated a type of role modelling for youth that is far removed from what our HG minds have acted out for millenia. Role models tradionally come from others within the immediate community of the family of origin. But, with the advent of mass media, potential role models are everywhere, from all walks of life. Combine that overwhelming sensory input with the dysfunctional aspects of the hierarchical, patriarchal aspects of Western society (e.g., the obsessive need to control one's environment, which is carried out through acts of war and oppression), and you have a recipe for youth modelling some seriously dysfunctional behavior.

However, in a cruel twist that I intend to take up for further study, that same dysfunctional behavior does serve an adaptive purpose, it does facilitate the passage of genes from one generation to the next. (Genes obviously have no interest in future generations, so the fact that this behavior is also destroying the planet is beside the point.) So the youth not only have this dysfunctional behavior to model, but it is also behavior that, on some level, "clicks" as behavior to emulate. (Unconsciously, that is, for the passage of genes.)

Let me offer an example based on Mike's points about Marilyn Manson. Marilyn Manson openly uses forms of self-mutilation. There is a lot of debate in the psychiatric and neurobiological communities about why people self-mutilate or inflict other self-harm (e.g., eating disorders). My thesis (which is not yet fully fleshed out, so please bear with me) would be that self-harm is a byproduct of the adaptive nature of oppression. I believe that those who are being oppressed unconsciously inflict self-harm to advertise their oppression, to show that they are a part of the oppressive society. Therefore, as members of the "IN" group, in sociological parlance, makes them attractive to others of the "IN" group, and therefore better able to pass their genes onto the next generation. If a person from an oppressive society were moved into a non-oppressive society during the teenaged years, my guess is that the traits valued by the non-oppressive society would instead be emulated, again, so that person would have the opportunity to reproduce in his/her adopted society.

There is a lot of work to be done to develop this theory, but to the extent that I have been working on this so far, it also may offer a glimpse into the reasons why those who were abused as children are more likely to be exposed to rapists or those who perpetrate hate crimes, further endangering themselves, and often being victimized again as adults. Many of these people also mate with abusers.

Now I will admit that my feminism is showing a bit here, but I would suggest that we try to set aside our connotations of the word "oppression" in this context. Look at oppression simply as one of several possible modes for human society to adapt in order to facilitate the passing of genes. It also happens to be the mode that we use in Western society, and hence, those who attain some type of celebrity status in this society (bringing us back to Marilyn Manson) are going to emulate and provide role modelling for society at large, or subgroups of the society at large, that reinforces the very adaptations that have facilitated the passage of genes in that society.

Comments are welcome.

Elizabeth Rose

• Ultraselectionism? by Eric Rietzschel, 2/1/99