Re/Max
Reviews and Complaints

Is remax generally good though

Re/max Alberton, unethical and still signs of racism within the company.
Never deal with John de melo, narcissist and racist. And you get treated like a criminal because of ethnical group.

I dealt with Andrea and Neil as well. They were pushing me to buy a home I didnT like but it was their listing. The home I wanted was with Century 21 and they had nothing good to say about the selling agent and poor comments on the home. I was with my sister at an open house they had in Boxford and Neil kept checking out my sister making her feel uncomfortable so we left.

The resale of a timeshare is a legitimate business. Companies agree to advertise a timeshare for a fee on their websites. As with advertising, the membership doesn´t need to sell in order the fees to be legitimate. The difference between an honest timeshare resale company and a scam, is when the company falsely suggest they have a buyer waiting for their timeshare, or picture unrealistic, overoptimistic selling possibilities. I'm sorry you fell for this scam, next time always RESEARCH the company before doing any business with them, and NEVER pay an upfront fee to get rid of your timeshare. This is a good article about timeshare resale companies:

http://www.timesharescam.com/blog/92-timeshare-resale-companies-analysis/

What is their crime?

Ali Attar Jafari alias Amir Jafari, the mentally ill fraud [censored] and cop [censored] who prostituted his sister, Ferial; viciously attacked, punched and broke his mother's nose in India in 1985. The bump on the bridge of her nose still shows the violent assault. If he was a real man he wouldn't be exposed this way! He would have learned his lessons given the beatings he has been given by people, one of whom was Shabnam Shekarabi!

Psychological abuse, also referred to as emotional abuse or mental abuse, is a form of abuse characterized by a person subjecting or exposing another to behavior that may result in psychological trauma, including anxiety, chronic depression, or post-traumatic stress disorder.[1][2][3] Such abuse is often associated with situations of power imbalance, such as abusive relationships, bullying, child abuse and abuse in the workplace.[2][3] There were "no consensus views about the definition of emotional abuse." As such, clinicians and researchers have offered sometimes divergent definitions of emotional abuse. However, the widely used Conflict Tactics Scale measures roughly twenty distinct acts of "psychological aggression" in three different categories:

Verbal aggression (e.g., saying something that upsets or annoys someone else);
Dominant behaviours (e.g., preventing someone to have contact with their family);
Jealous behaviors (e.g., accusing a partner of maintaining other parallel relations).

The U.S. Department of Justice defines emotionally abusive traits as including causing fear by intimidation, threatening physical harm to self, partner, children, or partner's family or friends, destruction of pets and property, forcing isolation from family, friends, or school or work.[4]

In 1996, Health Canada argued that emotional abuse is motivated by urges for "power and discontrol", [3] and defines emotional abuse as including rejecting, degrading, terrorizing, isolating, corrupting/exploiting and "denying emotional responsiveness" as characteristic of emotional abuse.

Several studies have argued that, unlike physical and sexual maltreatment, an isolated incident does not constitute emotional abuse. Tomison and Tucci write, "emotional abuse is characterised by a climate or pattern of behaviour(s) occurring over time [...] Thus, 'sustained' and 'repetitive' are the crucial components of any definition of emotional abuse."[5] Andrew Vachss, an author, attorney and former sex crimes investigator, defines emotional abuse as "the systematic diminishment of another. It may be intentional or subconscious (or both), but it is always a course of conduct, not a single event."[6]

Subtler emotionally abusive tactics include insults, putdowns, arbitrary and unpredictable inconsistency, and gaslighting (the denial that previous abusive incidents occurred). Modern technology has led to new forms of abuse, by text messaging and online cyber-bullying.
Contents

1 Pathology
1.1 Prevalence
1.1.1 In intimate relationships
1.1.2 In the workplace
1.2 Characteristics of abusers
1.3 Effects
1.4 Popular and clinical perception
1.5 Cultural causes
2 See also
3 References

Pathology
Prevalence
In intimate relationships
Main article: Domestic abuse

Domestic abuse—defined as chronic mistreatment in marriage, families, dating and other intimate relationships —- can include emotionally abusive behavior. Psychological abuse does not always lead to physical abuse, but physical abuse in domestic relationships is nearly always preceded and accompanied by psychological abuse.[2] Murphy and O'Leary[7] report that psychological aggression by one partner is the most reliable predictor of the other partner's likelihood of first exhibiting physical aggression.

A 2005 study by Hamel[8] reports that "men and women physically and emotionally abuse each other at equal rates". Basile[9] found that psychological aggression was effectively bidirectional in cases where heterosexual and homosexual couples went to court for domestic disturbances. A 2007 study of Spanish college students (n = 1, 886) aged 18–27 [10] found that psychological aggression (as measured by the Conflict Tactics Scale) is so pervasive in dating relationships that it can be regarded as a normalized element of dating, and that women are substantially more likely to exhibit psychological aggression. Similar findings have been reported in other studies.[11] Strauss et al.[12] found that female intimate partners in heterosexual relationships were more likely than males to use psychological aggression, including threats to hit or throw an object. A study of young adults (N = 721) by Giordano et al.[13] found that females in intimate heterosexual relationships were more likely than males to threaten to use a knife or gun against their partner.

Numerous studies done between the 1980 and 1994[1][14][15][16][17][18] report that lesbian relationships have higher overall rates of interpersonal aggression (including psychological aggression/emotional abuse) than heterosexual or gay male relationships. Furthermore, women who have been involved with both men and women reported higher rates of abuse from their female partners.[19]

In 1996, the National Clearinghouse on Family Violence, [3] for Health Canada, reported that 39% of married women or common-law wives suffered emotional abuse by husbands/partners; and a 1995 survey of women 15 and over (n = [protected]% reported emotional abuse during childhood or adolescence, and 39% experienced emotional abuse in marriage/dating; this report does not address boys or men suffering emotional abuse from families or intimate partners. A BBC radio documentary on domestic abuse, including emotional maltreatment, reports that 20% of men and 30% of women have been abused by a spouse or other intimate partner.[20]

Straus and Field [21] report that psychological aggression is a pervasive trait of American families: "verbal attacks on children, like physical attacks, are so prevalent as to be just about universal". A 2008 study by English, et al.[22] found that fathers and mothers were equally likely to be verbally aggressive towards their children.
In the workplace
Main article: Workplace bullying

Rates of reported emotional abuse in the workplace vary, with studies showing 10%[23] 24%[24] and 36%[25] of respondents indicating persistent and substantial emotional abuse from coworkers.

Keashly and Jagatic [26] found that males and females commit “emotionally abusive behaviors” in the workplace at roughly similar rates. In a web-based survey, Namie[27] found that women were more likely to engage in workplace bullying, such as name-calling, and that the average length of abuse was 16.5 months
Characteristics of abusers

In their review of data from the Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study (a longitudinal birth cohort study; n = 941) Moffitt et al.[28] report that while men exhibit more aggression overall, gender is not a reliable predictor of interpersonal aggression, including psychological aggression. The study found that whether male or female, aggressive people share a cluster of traits, including high rates of suspicion and jealousy; sudden and drastic mood swings; poor self-control; and higher than average rates of approval of violence and aggression. Moffitt et al. also argue that antisocial men exhibit two distinct types of interpersonal aggression (one against strangers, the other against intimate female partners), while antisocial women are rarely aggressive against anyone other than intimate male partners.

Male and female perpetrators of emotional and physical abuse exhibit high rates of personality disorders.[29][30][31] Rates of personality disorder in the general population are roughly 15%-20%, while roughly 80% of abusive men in court-ordered treatment programmes have personality disorders.[1]

Abusers may aim to avoid household chores or exercise total control of family finances. Abusers can be very manipulative, often recruiting friends, law officers and court officials, even the victim's family to their side, while shifting blame to the victim.[32][33]
Effects

English, et al.[34] report that children whose families are characterized by interpersonal violence, including psychological aggression and verbal aggression, may exhibit a range of serious disorders, including chronic depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, dissociation and anger. Additionally, English et al. report that the impact of emotional abuse "did not differ significantly" from that of physical abuse. Johnson et al.[35] report that, in a survey of female patients (n = 825), 24% suffered emotional abuse, and this group experienced higher rates of gynecological problems. In their study of men emotionally abused by a wife/partner or parent (n = 116), Hines and Malley-Morrison[36] report that victims exhibit high rates of post traumatic stress disorder, drug addiction and alcoholism.

Namie's study[27] of workplace emotional abuse found that 31% of women and 21% of men who reported workplace emotional abuse exhibited three key symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (hypervigilance, intrusive imagery, and avoidance behaviors). A 1998 study of male college students (n = 70) by Simonelli & Ingram[37] found that men who were emotionally abused by their female partners exhibited higher rates of chronic depression than the general population.

A study of college students (N = 80) by Goldsmith and Freyd[38] report that many who have experienced emotional abuse do not characterize the mistreatment as abusive. Additionally, Goldsmith and Freyd show that these people also tend to exhibit higher than average rates of alexithymia (difficulty identifying and processing their own emotions).

Jacobson et al.[39] found that women report markedly higher rates of fear during marital conflicts. However, a rejoinder[40] argued that Jacobson's results were invalid due to men and women's drastically differing interpretations of questionnaires. Coker et al.[41] found that the effects of mental abuse were similar whether the victim was male or female. Pimlott-Kubiak and Cortina[42] found that severity and duration of abuse were the only accurate predictors of aftereffects of abuse; sex of perpetrator or victim were not reliable predictors.

Analysis of large survey (N = 25, 876) by LaRoche[43] found that women abused by men were slightly more likely to seek psychological help than were men abused by women (63% vs. 62%).

In a 2007 study, Laurent, et al., [44] report that psychological aggression in young couples (n = 47) is associated with decreased satisfaction for both partners: "psychological aggression may serve as an impediment to couples development because it reflects less mature coercive tactics and an inability to balance self/other needs effectively". A 2008 study by Walsh and Shulman[11] reports that relationship dissatisfaction for both partners is more likely to be associated with, in women, psychological aggression and, in men, with withdrawal.
Popular and clinical perception

Several studies found double-standards in how people tend to view emotional abuse by men versus emotional abuse by women. Follingstad et al. found that, [45] when rating hypothetical vignettes of psychological abuse in marriages, professional psychologists tend to rate male abuse of females as more serious than identical scenarios describing female abuse of males: "the stereotypical association between physical aggression and males appears to extend to an association of psychological abuse and males" (Follingstad et al., p. 446) Similarly, Sorenson and Taylor randomly surveyed a group of Los Angeles, California residents for their opinions of hypothetical vignettes of abuse in heterosexual relationships.[46] Their study found that abuse committed by women, including emotional and psychological abuse such as controlling or humiliating behavior, was typically viewed as less serious or detrimental than identical abuse committed by men. Additionally, Sorenson and Taylor found that respondents had a broader range of opinions about female perpetrators, representing a lack of clearly defined mores when compared to responses about male perpetrators.

According to Walsh and Shluman, "The higher rates of female initiated aggression [including psychological aggression] may result, in part, from adolescents' attitudes about the unacceptability of male aggression and the relatively less negative attitudes toward female aggression".[11]

Hamel's 2007 study found that "prevailing patriarchal conception of intimate partner violence" led to a systematic reluctance to study women who psychologically and physically abuse their male partners.[47]

Dutton found that men who are emotionally or physically abused often encounter victim blaming that erroneously presumes the man either provoked or deserved the mistreatment of their female partners.[48] Similarly, domestic violence victims will often blame their own behavior, rather than the violent actions of the abuser. Victims may try continually to alter their behavior and circumstances in order to please the abuser.[49]

Simon [50] [51] argues that because aggression in abusive relationships can be carried out subtly and covertly through various manipulation and control tactics, victims often don't perceive the true nature of the relationship until conditions worsen considerably.
Cultural causes

Some scholars argue that hundreds or thousands of years of male dominated societies have created negative attitudes towards women among many men, and that wife abuse stems from "normal psychological and behavioral patterns of most men ... feminists seek to understand why men in general use physical force against their partners and what functions this serves for a society in a given historical context".[52] Similarly, Dobash and Dobash claim that "Men who assault their wives are actually living up to cultural prescriptions that are cherished in Western society--aggressiveness, male dominance and female subordination--and they are using physical force as a means to enforce that dominance", while Walker claims that men exhibit a "socialized androcentric need for power".[53][54]

While some women are aggressive and dominating to male partners the majority of abuse in heterosexual partnerships, at about 80% in the USA, is by men.[55] (Note that critics[56] stress that this Department of Justice study examines crime figures, and does not specifically address domestic abuse figures. While the categories of crime and domestic abuse may cross-over, most instances of domestic abuse are not regarded as crimes or reported to police—critics thus argue that it's inaccurate to regard the DOJ study as a comprehensive statement on domestic abuse because compelling evidence shows that men and women tend to commit emotional and physical abuse in roughly equal rates.) A 2002 study reports that ten percent of violence in the UK, overall, is by females against males.[57] However, more recent data specifically regarding domestic abuse (including emotional abuse) report that 3 in 10 women, and 2 in 10 men, have experienced domestic abuse.[20]

Some argue that fundamentalist views of religions, which have developed in male-dominated cultures, tend to reinforce emotional abuse, citing the Book of Genesis as an example of a text that has been used to justify men abusing women: "in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children: and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee".[58] Critics also suggest that fundamentalist religious prohibitions against divorce make it more difficult for religious men or women to leave an abusive marriage: A 1985 survey of Protestant clergy in the United States by Jim M Alsdurf found that 21% of them agreed that "no amount of abuse would justify a woman's leaving her husband ever", and 26% agreed with the statement that "a wife should submit to her husband and trust that God would honour her action by either stopping the abuse or giving her the strength to endure it." [59]

Many older and some not so old children's stories contain gender stereotyping, and music videos and computer games for children and teenagers have been criticised for continuing to portray men as aggressive and in control, while the females are there only for their sexual allure; women are portrayed as wanting to be chased and caught when they run away.[32]

Critics argue that legal systems have in the past endorsed these traditions of male domination and it is only in recent years that abusers have begun to be punished for their behaviour.[32] Some laws in past centuries have however specifically prohibited punitive wife-beating: "The Body of Liberties adopted in 1641 by the Massachusetts Bay colonists states, 'Every married woman shall be free from bodily correction or stripes by her husband, unless it be in his own defense from her assault.'[60] In 1879, Harvard University law scholar wrote, "The cases in the American courts are uniform against the right of the husband to use any chastisement, moderate or otherwise, toward the wife, for any purpose."[61]

While recognizing that feminist researchers have done valuable work and highlighted neglected topics[62] critics suggest that the male cultural domination hypothesis for abuse is untenable as a generalized explanation for numerous reasons:

Many variables (racial, ethnic, cultural and subcultural, nationality, religion, family dynamics, mental illness, etc.) make it difficult or impossible to define male and female roles in any meaningful way that apply to the entire population.[63]

Studies show that disagreements about power-sharing in relationships are more strongly associated with abuse than are imbalances of power.[64]

Research has not discovered that male privilege is a necessary and sufficient sole cause of abuse of women. On the contrary, peer-reviewed studies have produced inconsistent results when directly examining patriarchal beliefs and wife abuse. Yllo and Straus[65] argued that "low status" women in the United States suffered higher rates of spousal abuse; however, a rejoinder argued that Yllo and Straus's interpretive conclusions were "confusing and contradictory".[66] Smith[67] estimated that patriarchal beliefs were a causative factor for only 20% of wife abuse. Other studies failed to find a causal link between spouse abuse and traditionalist/conservative cultural beliefs. Campbell[68] writes that "there is not a simple linear correlation between female status and rates of wife assault". Other studies had similar findings.[69][70] Additionally, a study of Hispanic Americans revealed that traditionalist men exhibited lower rates of abuse towards women.[71]

Studies show that treatment programs based on the patriarchal privilege model are flawed due to a weak connection between abusiveness and one's cultural or social attitudes.[72][73][74]

Numerous empirical studies challenge the concept that male abuse or control of women is culturally sanctioned. Such studies show that abusive men are widely viewed as unsuitable partners for dating or marriage.[75] A minority of abusive men qualify as pervasively misogynistic.[76] The majority of men who commit spousal abuse agree that their behavior was inappropriate.[77] A minority of men approve of spousal abuse under even limited circumstances.[78] Furthermore, the majority of men are non-abusive towards girlfriends or wives for the duration of relationships, contrary to predictions that aggression or abuse towards women is an innate element of masculine culture.[79][80][81][82]

Dutton[1] argues that the numerous studies establishing that heterosexual and gay male relationships have lower rates of abuse than lesbian relationships, and the fact that women who've been involved with both men and women were more likely to have been abused by a woman "are difficult to explain in terms of male domination". Additionally, Dutton suggests that "patriarchy must interact with psychological variables in order to account for the great variation in power-violence data. It is suggested that some forms of psychopathology lead to some men adopting patriarchal ideology to justify and rationalize their own pathology".

Not to be confused with Antisocial personality disorder.
Avoidant personality disorder
Classification and external resources
ICD-10 F60.6
ICD-9 301.82
MedlinePlus 000940
eMedicine ped/189
MeSH D010554
Personality
disorders
Cluster A (odd)

Paranoid
Schizoid
Schizotypal

Cluster B (dramatic)

Antisocial
Borderline
Histrionic
Narcissistic

Cluster C (anxious)

Avoidant
Dependent
Obsessive-compulsive

Not specified

Depressive
Passive–aggressive

Sadistic
Self-defeating

Psychopathy

v
t
e

Avoidant personality disorder[1] (or anxious personality disorder)[2] is a Cluster C personality disorder recognized in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders handbook in a person characterized by a pervasive pattern of social inhibition, feelings of inadequacy, extreme sensitivity to negative evaluation, and avoidance of social interaction.

People with avoidant personality disorder often consider themselves to be socially inept or personally unappealing and avoid social interaction for fear of being ridiculed, humiliated, rejected, or disliked. Avoidant personality disorder is usually first noticed in early adulthood. Childhood emotional neglect and peer group rejection (e.g. bullying) are both associated with an increased risk for the development of AvPD.

There is controversy as to whether avoidant personality disorder is a distinct disorder from generalized social phobia and it is contended by some that they are merely different conceptualisations of the same disorder, where avoidant personality disorder may represent the more severe form.[3][4] This is argued because generalized social phobia and avoidant personality disorder have similar diagnostic criteria and may share a similar causation, subjective experience, course, treatment, and identical underlying personality features, such as shyness.[5][6][7]

Attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a psychiatric[1] and neurobehavioral disorder[2] characterized by either significant difficulties of inattention or hyperactivity and impulsiveness or a combination of the two. According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-TR), symptoms emerge before seven years of age.[3] There are three subtypes of the disorder which consist of it being predominantly inattentive (ADHD-PI or ADHD-I), predominately hyperactive-impulsive (ADHD-HI or ADHD-H), or the two combined (ADHD-C). Oftentimes people refer to ADHD-PI as "Attention deficit disorder" (ADD), however, the term was revised in the 1994 version of the DSM.

ADHD impacts school-aged children and results in restlessness, acting impulsively, and lack of focus which impairs their ability to learn properly. It is the most commonly studied and diagnosed psychiatric disorder in children, affecting about 3 to 5 percent of children globally[4][5] and diagnosed in about 2 to 16 percent of school-aged children.[6] It is a chronic disorder[7] with 30 to 50 percent of those individuals diagnosed in childhood continuing to have symptoms into adulthood.[8] Adolescents and adults with ADHD tend to develop coping mechanisms to compensate for some or all of their impairments.[9] It is estimated that 4.7 percent of American adults live with ADHD.[10] Standardized rating scales such as the World Health Organization's Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale can be used for ADHD screening and assessment of the disorder's symptoms' severity.[11]

ADHD is diagnosed two to four times more frequently in boys than in girls, [12][13] though studies suggest this discrepancy may be partially due to subjective bias of referring teachers.[14] Its symptoms can be difficult to differentiate from other disorders, increasing the likelihood that the diagnosis of ADHD will be missed.[15] In addition, most clinicians have not received formal training in the assessment and treatment of ADHD, in particular in adult patients.[15] ADHD management usually involves some combination of medications, behavior therapy, lifestyle changes, and counseling. Only children with severe ADHD symptoms should be considered for medication as a first-line treatment option. Medication therapy can also be considered for those with moderate ADHD symptoms who either refuse psychotherapeutic options or else fail to respond to psychotherapeutic input.[16]:p.317

ADHD and its diagnosis and treatment have been considered controversial since the 1970s.[17] The controversies have involved clinicians, teachers, policymakers, parents and the media. Topics include ADHD's causes, and the use of stimulant medications in its treatment.[18][19] Most healthcare providers accept that ADHD is a genuine disorder with debate in the scientific community centering mainly around how it is diagnosed and treated.[20][21][22] The National Institute for Clinical Excellence, while acknowledging controversies and criticisms, stated that the current treatments and methods of diagnosis are based on the dominant view of the academic literature and ADHD represents a valid clinical condition

Attention deficit disorder (ADD) is one of the three subtypes of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The term was formally changed in 1994 in the new Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition (DSM-IV) to "ADHD predominantly inattentive" (ADHD-PI or ADHD-I), though the term attention deficit disorder is still widely used. ADD is similar to the other subtypes of ADHD in that it is characterized primarily by inattention, easy distractibility, disorganization, procrastination, and forgetfulness; where it differs is in lethargy - fatigue, and having fewer or no symptoms of hyperactivity or impulsiveness typical of the other ADHD subtypes. Different countries have used different ways of diagnosing ADD. In the UK, diagnosis is based on quite a narrow set of symptoms, and about 0.5–1% of children are thought to have attention or hyperactivity problems. The USA used a much broader definition of the term ADHD. As a result, up to 10% of children in the USA were described as having ADHD. Current estimates suggest that ADHD is present throughout the world in about 1–5% of the population. About five times more boys than girls are diagnosed with ADHD. Medications include two classes of drugs, stimulants and non-stimulants. Drugs for ADHD are divided into first-line medications and second-line medications. First-line medications include several of the stimulants, and tend to have a higher response rate and effect size than second-line medications. Although medication can help improve concentration, it does not cure ADD and the symptoms will come back once the medication stops.

@MC Stupid. You are admitting that you as only one stupid Jobless internet troll are behind all these fake names... why don't you come out of your whole and show your face. You are clearly saying''''''' this will not stop""" because you give your self the right to speak on behalf of all these fake names and postings you do; this clarifies and proves who you are (we all know)... Smart people out there will see this. Jennifer is a real person whom you are scared of, because of the truths she says and she is a bright individual whom I am confident once said the best comment on your campaign of harassment's
I suggest you go home ! oops ... do you have one? ok don't cry... stay in your cave and in your darkness just make up some more names and open e-mails... enjoy your mental issues. people are getting more SUCCESSFUL while you are wasting the life you don't have on this.

@ Jennifer Saunders: who are you? That is not your real name. Go home. Come back when you have the courage to use your real names and tell Amir and his recruits to return the monies they have stolen or this will not stop. The information provided herein is from Durham Regional Police Service records. It is a mortgage fraud and forgery confession of Amir Jafari alias Ali Attar Jafari, mentor to Faramrz Attar Jafari of Re/Max Hallmark.

amir + faramarz have stolen feroz inheritance, they give us story that their father had nothing. we know what their father had what he sold what he bought, cash, condo, cars, dimond, gold. they lie that they spend on the father cancer medicine but that is paid by canada government, we have relatives in canada, we know. They have stolen feroz's inheritance cut between themselves, donot want to give it back. father died in 2005. amir had a power of attorney on father bank accounts date of july 7, 1997, he transferred father cash to his account, feroz showed us toronto bank statements. amir stole from all of them too not just feroz. they think we dont know

Hey Amir:

Face it, with all the information that we've been receiving on you, we can only conclude that you are any thing but a professional. Stop using obvious fake names and posting useless comments, you can't spin this or suppress it. Police record is your confession, it shows that you committed mortgage fraud, signature forgery while you were at Royal LePage, you used their fax machine to commit financial fraud.

We know that you were charged with Possession of Instruments of Forgery, Possession of Counterfeit Credit Cards and Fraud. We received your lawyer's account statement showing those charges at the office, still have them.

Elsewhere on the internet you have been accused of having committed Will fraud and inheritance theft.

Elsewhere on the internet, you have been accused of having fabricated evidence and laid false criminal charges without success.

Quit day dreaming and think, who in their right mind would sit down at the same table with an insignificant creep like you and talk as you so desire?

There is consensus that you do not meet the character requirement for real estate salespersons. You being in this job is potentially harmful to people. We don't understand why John still keeps you here. You have reached the end, do not push it. Go home. You have more past than future. No one trusts you and so you are finished.

Jennifer Saunders is AlexBd is Ali Attar Jafari alias Amir Jafari and/or his crime partner, Faramarz Attar Jafari, another salesperson at Re/Max Hallmark. These individuals have been posting comments elsewhere under fake names. These individuals seek to suppress the truth, mislead and cause noise in order to distract but it is not working, the evidence speaks for itself, amir Jafari has committed mortge fraud and signature forgery and must be avoided if you do not wish to become a victim of fraud. The age of the confession does not render it invalid, in fact it makes it more alarming that this guy has been committing fraud for so many years from behind the facade of a real estate salesperson. Faramarz has recently resorted to extortion not realizing that when he is in Lindsey jail doing time for criminal Extortion, Amir will be husbanding his wife, Nagmeh!

Psychological abuse, also referred to as emotional abuse or mental abuse, is a form of abuse characterized by a person subjecting or exposing another to behavior that may result in psychological trauma, including anxiety, chronic depression, or post-traumatic stress disorder.[1][2][3] Such abuse is often associated with situations of power imbalance, such as abusive relationships, bullying, child abuse and abuse in the workplace.[2][3] There were "no consensus views about the definition of emotional abuse." As such, clinicians and researchers have offered sometimes divergent definitions of emotional abuse. However, the widely used Conflict Tactics Scale measures roughly twenty distinct acts of "psychological aggression" in three different categories:

Verbal aggression (e.g., saying something that upsets or annoys someone else);
Dominant behaviours (e.g., preventing someone to have contact with their family);
Jealous behaviors (e.g., accusing a partner of maintaining other parallel relations).

The U.S. Department of Justice defines emotionally abusive traits as including causing fear by intimidation, threatening physical harm to self, partner, children, or partner's family or friends, destruction of pets and property, forcing isolation from family, friends, or school or work.[4]

In 1996, Health Canada argued that emotional abuse is motivated by urges for "power and discontrol", [3] and defines emotional abuse as including rejecting, degrading, terrorizing, isolating, corrupting/exploiting and "denying emotional responsiveness" as characteristic of emotional abuse.

Several studies have argued that, unlike physical and sexual maltreatment, an isolated incident does not constitute emotional abuse. Tomison and Tucci write, "emotional abuse is characterised by a climate or pattern of behaviour(s) occurring over time [...] Thus, 'sustained' and 'repetitive' are the crucial components of any definition of emotional abuse."[5] Andrew Vachss, an author, attorney and former sex crimes investigator, defines emotional abuse as "the systematic diminishment of another. It may be intentional or subconscious (or both), but it is always a course of conduct, not a single event."[6]

Subtler emotionally abusive tactics include insults, putdowns, arbitrary and unpredictable inconsistency, and gaslighting (the denial that previous abusive incidents occurred). Modern technology has led to new forms of abuse, by text messaging and online cyber-bullying.
Contents

1 Pathology
1.1 Prevalence
1.1.1 In intimate relationships
1.1.2 In the workplace
1.2 Characteristics of abusers
1.3 Effects
1.4 Popular and clinical perception
1.5 Cultural causes
2 See also
3 References

Pathology
Prevalence
In intimate relationships
Main article: Domestic abuse

Domestic abuse—defined as chronic mistreatment in marriage, families, dating and other intimate relationships —- can include emotionally abusive behavior. Psychological abuse does not always lead to physical abuse, but physical abuse in domestic relationships is nearly always preceded and accompanied by psychological abuse.[2] Murphy and O'Leary[7] report that psychological aggression by one partner is the most reliable predictor of the other partner's likelihood of first exhibiting physical aggression.

A 2005 study by Hamel[8] reports that "men and women physically and emotionally abuse each other at equal rates". Basile[9] found that psychological aggression was effectively bidirectional in cases where heterosexual and homosexual couples went to court for domestic disturbances. A 2007 study of Spanish college students (n = 1, 886) aged 18–27 [10] found that psychological aggression (as measured by the Conflict Tactics Scale) is so pervasive in dating relationships that it can be regarded as a normalized element of dating, and that women are substantially more likely to exhibit psychological aggression. Similar findings have been reported in other studies.[11] Strauss et al.[12] found that female intimate partners in heterosexual relationships were more likely than males to use psychological aggression, including threats to hit or throw an object. A study of young adults (N = 721) by Giordano et al.[13] found that females in intimate heterosexual relationships were more likely than males to threaten to use a knife or gun against their partner.

Numerous studies done between the 1980 and 1994[1][14][15][16][17][18] report that lesbian relationships have higher overall rates of interpersonal aggression (including psychological aggression/emotional abuse) than heterosexual or gay male relationships. Furthermore, women who have been involved with both men and women reported higher rates of abuse from their female partners.[19]

In 1996, the National Clearinghouse on Family Violence, [3] for Health Canada, reported that 39% of married women or common-law wives suffered emotional abuse by husbands/partners; and a 1995 survey of women 15 and over (n = [protected]% reported emotional abuse during childhood or adolescence, and 39% experienced emotional abuse in marriage/dating; this report does not address boys or men suffering emotional abuse from families or intimate partners. A BBC radio documentary on domestic abuse, including emotional maltreatment, reports that 20% of men and 30% of women have been abused by a spouse or other intimate partner.[20]

Straus and Field [21] report that psychological aggression is a pervasive trait of American families: "verbal attacks on children, like physical attacks, are so prevalent as to be just about universal". A 2008 study by English, et al.[22] found that fathers and mothers were equally likely to be verbally aggressive towards their children.
In the workplace
Main article: Workplace bullying

Rates of reported emotional abuse in the workplace vary, with studies showing 10%[23] 24%[24] and 36%[25] of respondents indicating persistent and substantial emotional abuse from coworkers.

Keashly and Jagatic [26] found that males and females commit “emotionally abusive behaviors” in the workplace at roughly similar rates. In a web-based survey, Namie[27] found that women were more likely to engage in workplace bullying, such as name-calling, and that the average length of abuse was 16.5 months
Characteristics of abusers

In their review of data from the Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study (a longitudinal birth cohort study; n = 941) Moffitt et al.[28] report that while men exhibit more aggression overall, gender is not a reliable predictor of interpersonal aggression, including psychological aggression. The study found that whether male or female, aggressive people share a cluster of traits, including high rates of suspicion and jealousy; sudden and drastic mood swings; poor self-control; and higher than average rates of approval of violence and aggression. Moffitt et al. also argue that antisocial men exhibit two distinct types of interpersonal aggression (one against strangers, the other against intimate female partners), while antisocial women are rarely aggressive against anyone other than intimate male partners.

Male and female perpetrators of emotional and physical abuse exhibit high rates of personality disorders.[29][30][31] Rates of personality disorder in the general population are roughly 15%-20%, while roughly 80% of abusive men in court-ordered treatment programmes have personality disorders.[1]

Abusers may aim to avoid household chores or exercise total control of family finances. Abusers can be very manipulative, often recruiting friends, law officers and court officials, even the victim's family to their side, while shifting blame to the victim.[32][33]
Effects

English, et al.[34] report that children whose families are characterized by interpersonal violence, including psychological aggression and verbal aggression, may exhibit a range of serious disorders, including chronic depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, dissociation and anger. Additionally, English et al. report that the impact of emotional abuse "did not differ significantly" from that of physical abuse. Johnson et al.[35] report that, in a survey of female patients (n = 825), 24% suffered emotional abuse, and this group experienced higher rates of gynecological problems. In their study of men emotionally abused by a wife/partner or parent (n = 116), Hines and Malley-Morrison[36] report that victims exhibit high rates of post traumatic stress disorder, drug addiction and alcoholism.

Namie's study[27] of workplace emotional abuse found that 31% of women and 21% of men who reported workplace emotional abuse exhibited three key symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (hypervigilance, intrusive imagery, and avoidance behaviors). A 1998 study of male college students (n = 70) by Simonelli & Ingram[37] found that men who were emotionally abused by their female partners exhibited higher rates of chronic depression than the general population.

A study of college students (N = 80) by Goldsmith and Freyd[38] report that many who have experienced emotional abuse do not characterize the mistreatment as abusive. Additionally, Goldsmith and Freyd show that these people also tend to exhibit higher than average rates of alexithymia (difficulty identifying and processing their own emotions).

Jacobson et al.[39] found that women report markedly higher rates of fear during marital conflicts. However, a rejoinder[40] argued that Jacobson's results were invalid due to men and women's drastically differing interpretations of questionnaires. Coker et al.[41] found that the effects of mental abuse were similar whether the victim was male or female. Pimlott-Kubiak and Cortina[42] found that severity and duration of abuse were the only accurate predictors of aftereffects of abuse; sex of perpetrator or victim were not reliable predictors.

Analysis of large survey (N = 25, 876) by LaRoche[43] found that women abused by men were slightly more likely to seek psychological help than were men abused by women (63% vs. 62%).

In a 2007 study, Laurent, et al., [44] report that psychological aggression in young couples (n = 47) is associated with decreased satisfaction for both partners: "psychological aggression may serve as an impediment to couples development because it reflects less mature coercive tactics and an inability to balance self/other needs effectively". A 2008 study by Walsh and Shulman[11] reports that relationship dissatisfaction for both partners is more likely to be associated with, in women, psychological aggression and, in men, with withdrawal.
Popular and clinical perception

Several studies found double-standards in how people tend to view emotional abuse by men versus emotional abuse by women. Follingstad et al. found that, [45] when rating hypothetical vignettes of psychological abuse in marriages, professional psychologists tend to rate male abuse of females as more serious than identical scenarios describing female abuse of males: "the stereotypical association between physical aggression and males appears to extend to an association of psychological abuse and males" (Follingstad et al., p. 446) Similarly, Sorenson and Taylor randomly surveyed a group of Los Angeles, California residents for their opinions of hypothetical vignettes of abuse in heterosexual relationships.[46] Their study found that abuse committed by women, including emotional and psychological abuse such as controlling or humiliating behavior, was typically viewed as less serious or detrimental than identical abuse committed by men. Additionally, Sorenson and Taylor found that respondents had a broader range of opinions about female perpetrators, representing a lack of clearly defined mores when compared to responses about male perpetrators.

According to Walsh and Shluman, "The higher rates of female initiated aggression [including psychological aggression] may result, in part, from adolescents' attitudes about the unacceptability of male aggression and the relatively less negative attitudes toward female aggression".[11]

Hamel's 2007 study found that "prevailing patriarchal conception of intimate partner violence" led to a systematic reluctance to study women who psychologically and physically abuse their male partners.[47]

Dutton found that men who are emotionally or physically abused often encounter victim blaming that erroneously presumes the man either provoked or deserved the mistreatment of their female partners.[48] Similarly, domestic violence victims will often blame their own behavior, rather than the violent actions of the abuser. Victims may try continually to alter their behavior and circumstances in order to please the abuser.[49]

Simon [50] [51] argues that because aggression in abusive relationships can be carried out subtly and covertly through various manipulation and control tactics, victims often don't perceive the true nature of the relationship until conditions worsen considerably.
Cultural causes

Some scholars argue that hundreds or thousands of years of male dominated societies have created negative attitudes towards women among many men, and that wife abuse stems from "normal psychological and behavioral patterns of most men ... feminists seek to understand why men in general use physical force against their partners and what functions this serves for a society in a given historical context".[52] Similarly, Dobash and Dobash claim that "Men who assault their wives are actually living up to cultural prescriptions that are cherished in Western society--aggressiveness, male dominance and female subordination--and they are using physical force as a means to enforce that dominance", while Walker claims that men exhibit a "socialized androcentric need for power".[53][54]

While some women are aggressive and dominating to male partners the majority of abuse in heterosexual partnerships, at about 80% in the USA, is by men.[55] (Note that critics[56] stress that this Department of Justice study examines crime figures, and does not specifically address domestic abuse figures. While the categories of crime and domestic abuse may cross-over, most instances of domestic abuse are not regarded as crimes or reported to police—critics thus argue that it's inaccurate to regard the DOJ study as a comprehensive statement on domestic abuse because compelling evidence shows that men and women tend to commit emotional and physical abuse in roughly equal rates.) A 2002 study reports that ten percent of violence in the UK, overall, is by females against males.[57] However, more recent data specifically regarding domestic abuse (including emotional abuse) report that 3 in 10 women, and 2 in 10 men, have experienced domestic abuse.[20]

Some argue that fundamentalist views of religions, which have developed in male-dominated cultures, tend to reinforce emotional abuse, citing the Book of Genesis as an example of a text that has been used to justify men abusing women: "in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children: and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee".[58] Critics also suggest that fundamentalist religious prohibitions against divorce make it more difficult for religious men or women to leave an abusive marriage: A 1985 survey of Protestant clergy in the United States by Jim M Alsdurf found that 21% of them agreed that "no amount of abuse would justify a woman's leaving her husband ever", and 26% agreed with the statement that "a wife should submit to her husband and trust that God would honour her action by either stopping the abuse or giving her the strength to endure it." [59]

Many older and some not so old children's stories contain gender stereotyping, and music videos and computer games for children and teenagers have been criticised for continuing to portray men as aggressive and in control, while the females are there only for their sexual allure; women are portrayed as wanting to be chased and caught when they run away.[32]

Critics argue that legal systems have in the past endorsed these traditions of male domination and it is only in recent years that abusers have begun to be punished for their behaviour.[32] Some laws in past centuries have however specifically prohibited punitive wife-beating: "The Body of Liberties adopted in 1641 by the Massachusetts Bay colonists states, 'Every married woman shall be free from bodily correction or stripes by her husband, unless it be in his own defense from her assault.'[60] In 1879, Harvard University law scholar wrote, "The cases in the American courts are uniform against the right of the husband to use any chastisement, moderate or otherwise, toward the wife, for any purpose."[61]

While recognizing that feminist researchers have done valuable work and highlighted neglected topics[62] critics suggest that the male cultural domination hypothesis for abuse is untenable as a generalized explanation for numerous reasons:

Many variables (racial, ethnic, cultural and subcultural, nationality, religion, family dynamics, mental illness, etc.) make it difficult or impossible to define male and female roles in any meaningful way that apply to the entire population.[63]

Studies show that disagreements about power-sharing in relationships are more strongly associated with abuse than are imbalances of power.[64]

Research has not discovered that male privilege is a necessary and sufficient sole cause of abuse of women. On the contrary, peer-reviewed studies have produced inconsistent results when directly examining patriarchal beliefs and wife abuse. Yllo and Straus[65] argued that "low status" women in the United States suffered higher rates of spousal abuse; however, a rejoinder argued that Yllo and Straus's interpretive conclusions were "confusing and contradictory".[66] Smith[67] estimated that patriarchal beliefs were a causative factor for only 20% of wife abuse. Other studies failed to find a causal link between spouse abuse and traditionalist/conservative cultural beliefs. Campbell[68] writes that "there is not a simple linear correlation between female status and rates of wife assault". Other studies had similar findings.[69][70] Additionally, a study of Hispanic Americans revealed that traditionalist men exhibited lower rates of abuse towards women.[71]

Studies show that treatment programs based on the patriarchal privilege model are flawed due to a weak connection between abusiveness and one's cultural or social attitudes.[72][73][74]

Numerous empirical studies challenge the concept that male abuse or control of women is culturally sanctioned. Such studies show that abusive men are widely viewed as unsuitable partners for dating or marriage.[75] A minority of abusive men qualify as pervasively misogynistic.[76] The majority of men who commit spousal abuse agree that their behavior was inappropriate.[77] A minority of men approve of spousal abuse under even limited circumstances.[78] Furthermore, the majority of men are non-abusive towards girlfriends or wives for the duration of relationships, contrary to predictions that aggression or abuse towards women is an innate element of masculine culture.[79][80][81][82]

Dutton[1] argues that the numerous studies establishing that heterosexual and gay male relationships have lower rates of abuse than lesbian relationships, and the fact that women who've been involved with both men and women were more likely to have been abused by a woman "are difficult to explain in terms of male domination". Additionally, Dutton suggests that "patriarchy must interact with psychological variables in order to account for the great variation in power-violence data. It is suggested that some forms of psychopathology lead to some men adopting patriarchal ideology to justify and rationalize their own pathology".

Not to be confused with Antisocial personality disorder.
Avoidant personality disorder
Classification and external resources
ICD-10 F60.6
ICD-9 301.82
MedlinePlus 000940
eMedicine ped/189
MeSH D010554
Personality
disorders
Cluster A (odd)

Paranoid
Schizoid
Schizotypal

Cluster B (dramatic)

Antisocial
Borderline
Histrionic
Narcissistic

Cluster C (anxious)

Avoidant
Dependent
Obsessive-compulsive

Not specified

Depressive
Passive–aggressive

Sadistic
Self-defeating

Psychopathy

v
t
e

Avoidant personality disorder[1] (or anxious personality disorder)[2] is a Cluster C personality disorder recognized in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders handbook in a person characterized by a pervasive pattern of social inhibition, feelings of inadequacy, extreme sensitivity to negative evaluation, and avoidance of social interaction.

People with avoidant personality disorder often consider themselves to be socially inept or personally unappealing and avoid social interaction for fear of being ridiculed, humiliated, rejected, or disliked. Avoidant personality disorder is usually first noticed in early adulthood. Childhood emotional neglect and peer group rejection (e.g. bullying) are both associated with an increased risk for the development of AvPD.

There is controversy as to whether avoidant personality disorder is a distinct disorder from generalized social phobia and it is contended by some that they are merely different conceptualisations of the same disorder, where avoidant personality disorder may represent the more severe form.[3][4] This is argued because generalized social phobia and avoidant personality disorder have similar diagnostic criteria and may share a similar causation, subjective experience, course, treatment, and identical underlying personality features, such as shyness.[5][6][7]

Amir Jafari alias Ali Attar Jafari and Faramarz Attar Jafari, etc.: your comments under several fake names further validate your knowledge of your mortgage fraud and signature forgery. Faramarz is Amir's crime partner. Your collective displeasure with your criminal histories found online is noted. Incidentally, the psychiatry labels you throw around without understanding their meanings accurately describe yourselves. You are ignorant because you have not completed any university program in any discipline anywhere; you do not have the merits to get in and the required IQ to move along.

So you are just two of the many “dime a dozen” real estate salespersons, with a couple of dipstick easy courses you took to get a licence which every Joe and their grand mother has got. Start by taking ESL, English as a Second Language course and quit lying to yourselves. Most importantly, quit fraud, return what you have stolen from others.

wow...Look what I found ! wow ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyxRYP_rr0Q

This looks like him too ...

Didn't this guy used to work with York Regional Police money Launderer Reza "ray Ray" Behroozian? He was the "accountant" at the scam place that used to be called Toronto Auto Station.

The guys who helped Reza "ray Ray" Behroozian scam millions was also named Ali / Amir Jafari. I remember he looked like this guy. Just a little fatter.

He's part of the Maleki-Raei and Behroozian crime family. He won't get charged with anything . Trust me on that. They have dirty cops Maurizio Gentili #1133 and Mark James Charlebois #815 running to every justification to save their ###. I will post the documents I ave later on if you like. Their wives and family give blow jobs to these old dirty cops and they profit with the family.

Reza "Ray Ray" Behroozian is also a pedophile. He lives at 57 May In Richmond Hill. Here is his picture.

This guy Ali Jaferi registered the bank accounts for Toronto Auto Station.

I agree, Hooshang/Ferouz Attar Jafari most likely suffers from schizophrenia and needs professional help.A mental institution is the best place for him to get treatment.

this firooz guy is mentally ill, look at the names he fabricates to post the comments.
it is good to know all the above comments after the beautiful comments of different people he obliviously attacks them with
different fake names in which you can check and see yourself that they have been posted all on the same day and just with minutes
different than each other just by clicking on the name beside the picture box in the light blue bar.
Isn't that something? can't you tell these are all the same person.. and guess who?

@ b.ham.g: What are the full names of those ex-girlfriends?

@ b.ham.g: keep your sister and our ex-girl friends (that is if they give you time of the day) put them on your desk!

@ b.ham.g or Faramarz or Amir: Never mind your ### you sore losers, why don't you tell us about your own wife and male lovers?

The people who run RE/MAX Avalon Park have never been anything but professional and top notch in my book and I have to deal with them all the time being a tenant that has rented from them for over a year and a half now. This post sounds like a disgruntled brat who did not get their way when they stomped their feet. You didn't get approved for a house? Your poor thing! No doubt you found your big girl panties, put them on and found a place to live after all. Maybe you should work on your credit instead of getting pissed at RE/MAX!

We are sorry to hear you had a bad experience and that your application was denied. We have a strict policy and our landlords know we follow these guidelines which is to ensure the most thorough process. It sounds like you were not denied but requested to put an additional security deposit which is different. Sounds like you opted not to pursue the rental because of the deposit requirements which is understandable if you could not afford to do so. The door you entered may have a sign but it also had a sign that states "Please use Front Door, this is not an entrance." I am glad you did not walk off with files because we do have cameras all over our office which captures every door and the parking lot. Regardless, we do not wish anyone a bad experience and hope you found a rental.