A conversation with a reader begins thusly: "Does sociopathic behavior in an individual come from intense feelings of rejection from childhood? Could the lack of feelings or attachments to anything or anyone be a defense mechanism? And if they truly cannot feel love in the true sense of the word, why do they seek and pursue relationships?" My response:
Sociopaths feel love, just differently. I guess it would be like asking, why would blind people ever watch TV? But they do, they enjoy it for different reasons than you might, and sociopaths too find something worthwhile in love and relationships, not surprisingly. I would actually be more surprised to learn that there was any person who was completely uninterested in having some sort of a meaningful relationship. (Except maybe schizoids.)
With regard to your other question, I think most people now believe that there is a genetic connection to sociopathy, but that gene can either be turned on or not by environmental factors, e.g., as a defense mechanism, just like you say.
More like an offense mechanism, lol.
ReplyDeleteThe love question is a tricky one, especially since it is a catch all term that seems to be liberally applied to all manner of relationships: people claim to love their pets, their significant others, and their parents all in the same breath, though plainly they mean very different types of love in each of these instances. Further complicating the picture, apparently everyone plagued by this sentiment end up at one point or another making themselves utterly unhappy because of it, so not only is the whole concept an empty catch all for different kinds of relationships, but it is not even one that provides a stable enough benefit to justify its application to these relationships.
ReplyDeleteSo my theory is that it is just an imaginary delusion meant to reinforce relationships by providing a justification for overlooking the “beloved” object's obvious failings and transgressions. Using the love delusion you can overlook your parent’s negligence, your pet’s bad behavior, or your significant other’s disliked differences; so it allows the person doing the loving to forgive and forget things they find objectionable in favor of the things they like. However, the love delusion always fails as soon as the circumstances change and the beloved is no longer offering anything useful, e.g. the parents die, the pet runs away, the significant other moves on. Nevertheless, the delusion remains intact and causes the deluded all kinds of unhappiness.
People say that sociopaths are “crazy” for not loving, but if one looks at all the self-inflicted misery people put themselves through every day in the name of love, I find it hard to credit that not putting one’s self into this delusional state is “crazier” than doing so. This ties back into my theory expressed elsewhere about most feelers being essentially masochists: if they can’t find someone else to torture them, they’re perfectly happy to do it to themselves. It’s really pathetic and I really can see no reasonable argument against this opinion other than the junkies’ argument “ohhhh, but it feels so good....” Perhaps so until the delusion – or the fix – wears off and you need another.
But that’s just my theory and I’m an ass apparently, so whatever. However, ME writes: ”Sociopaths feel love, just differenly [sic]” and I guess I have to ask, how so? Or, more to the point, even if it were true, how would you know? What can you compare it against? I don’t mean that in the sense of the cliché “you can’t know light if there is no darkness” kind of argument since mental delusions like “love” are not perfectly paired to exact opposites (light/dark). You can’t make the argument that you’ve felt anger and somehow that means you know what love is. Further, we all know how to imitate love, or carry on as love-struck morons do, but have you ever had the desire to behave that way naturally without it being some part of a seduction or some other scheme?
If you can answer, please do, I’m curious. Outside of my theory described above, I couldn’t honestly define love at all, then again, apparently most feelers can’t either (which argues that my theory is right and it is a subjective mental delusion). I can – and do – have affinities for people, for cats, for my computer, for “The Onion” but that hardly means I’ve adopted some masochistic fetish for them and will torture myself once I lose access to them.
It is also the only thing in the world that keeps everyone from killing themselves.
ReplyDeleteNo, distance keeps everyone from killing each other since bullets only zoom so far and missiles are kinda pricy, while love can actually cause someone to kill another person for many different reasons.
ReplyDeleteSociopaths are not crazy for not loving. A lot of people don't love or don't even believe in it or resist it. S's are "crazy" because whatever logic they come up with to explain love, feelings, conscience and so on, they then take from that that it then makes sense or is logical somehow to use, torment and destroy people.
ReplyDelete'different reasons'
ReplyDeleteI don't know about you guys, but I treat love like a drug: something to ease the boredom a bit, that eventually screws you up in the end.
"something to ease the boredom a bit, that eventually screws you up in the end."
ReplyDeleteSee, without love, what the fuck else is there to do?
Doesn't matter if it screws you up in the end, or you use it to screw someone else up in the end, or even what you definition of it is.
It's still the only reason for doing anything.
Ridiculous:
ReplyDeleteA debate over the definition of love by a bunch of disordered, scientist wanabees.
What a bunch of twisted prophetic nonsense! Who cares if love is a drug, or if people know how to use it, one better than another!!!
Who cares if it's just a delusion, or if it's a tangible thing!
Let all who want to dream life, dream it. What is it to you?
What I must say here; is the human mind is so much more powerful than any of you are giving credit. You all quarrel here with your egos in tact, like any other common human being. In this you are no different from anyone else.
All of you out to prove who is most detached than the other, and therefore; who is the superior human.
What I want to hear is people understanding that you can shape your own mind, and therefore change your experience of life... and that includes love and any other drug or delusion.
It is possible to teach yourself how to experience life on your own terms, and not see any of it as defeat, or losing, or just a means of curing boredom. I am on this journey...
and though I am not even half way; I have come a great distance.
If that is not your quest, then I say that regardless of your ability to feel love or not; you are cowards. You have given yourself a comfortable rock to hide under...
your disordered mind.
Amen.
ReplyDeletelove is key for domination.
ReplyDeleteall love is ultimately selfish. this is WAY more true for some than for others. Empaths can get addicted to Socio's infatuation with them, and call it love when it is more just like self-adoration. They like the socio insofar as the socio gives them what they think they want - attention. They'll do all sorts of junkie things for that attention to come back, to the socio's contrived advantage.
yeah, love is key.
love is like a box of chocolates.
ReplyDeleteyou give it to a woman to get sex.
"love is key for domination. ... Empaths can get addicted to Socio's infatuation with them, and call it love when it is more just like self-adoration. They like the socio insofar as the socio gives them what they think they want - attention. They'll do all sorts of junkie things for that attention to come back, to the socio's contrived advantage. yeah, love is key.
ReplyDeleteSpot on synopsis, and I completely agree. My earlier comment was more in respect to why no sane person should want to delude themselves with love; however I think we can all appreciate how helpful the delusion is in prey. :)
ESPECIALLY when that prey is your offspring.
ReplyDeletespring training i guess.
ESPECIALLY when that prey is your offspring.
ReplyDeleteI have no children that I am aware of, so on that point I wouldn't know.
what about you?
ReplyDeleteAh yes. It's always the "other" that has the delusion. This goes both ways.
ReplyDeleteWhat a silly game.
is it now?
ReplyDeleteThe goal is the playing and destruction of the other. It's not a silly game. Unless your an s I suppose.
ReplyDeleteQuestion: Do s's believe or know that they can do certain things that can fall below or out of the range of perception of some? I don't mean deceptive behaviors like lying or posing although that too. I mean that through various avenues of analysis, such as the study of eye movement reflecting thought, can they find spaces where ones awareness is emotion dimmed or simply not on and then confidently do fast often imperceptible actions as just one of a range of behaviors? If that makes any sense.
aspie, do you think you could rephrase your question a little better? I am sort of enjoying the whole Q & A thing, but I am not exactly sure what you're asking here.
ReplyDeleteI'm leaving the country I am in right now in a few days, so money is tight (and I don't have the time to take any more) and I'm finished with almost everyone here, so I'm online quite a bit for the next few days. I've been enjoying participating here and continuing the honesty experiment, so if you could clarify I'll answer if I can.
I think one thing the S possibly doesn't consider in his analysis of the other, is that you are not seeing ones true and complete nature because you are affecting it and changing it through manipulation and even just by looking at it. So the thinking and behavior you witness and interact with is not being looked at from an unbiased position or direction. You are seeing an N through the eyes of an S. So I think a lot of these insights are just falseness the s has created. You are just seeing a projection of yourself and using it in a way to validate yourself.
ReplyDeleteHi Dionysus.
ReplyDeleteSorry if that was unclear. I will try and clarify and refine the question and re ask it.
"I think one thing the S possibly doesn't consider in his analysis of the other, is that you are not seeing ones true and complete nature...
ReplyDeleteThat is sort of superfluous argument if you ask me as I don't believe there are any perceptual absolutes (I know, how very post-modernist... blah). You are as you perceive the yourself to be and others are as you perceive them to be and the two are rarely the same. I rather suspect I could sit along side a feeler and we could both assess a third person and we would have very different perceptions and neither of our perceptions would reflect the third person's perception of himself. It's all subjective, every bit of it.
“So the thinking and behavior you witness and interact with is not being looked at from an unbiased position or direction.”
ReplyDeletePerceptive comments aspie.
I’d agree that say person A’s nature is never completely on display to another. Hell, person A isn’t likely to see his own complete nature. And as far as objectivity goes, well, none of us do that perfectly on anything, which is why for instance peer review and separate groups being able to reproduce the results of someone else’s experiment are so vital to the scientific endeavor. But it does not therefore follow that the insights gleaned about person A from person S’s less emotional perspective have to be false and nothing more than mere projection. One doesn’t have to see everything or even be completely objective in order to gain useful understanding of another person. You need only see their weaknesses, a few essential truths that they hide from themselves, or notice how they wish to be seen, or what’s likely to make them feel anger, sadness, delight and so on, to be able to effectively manipulate them. Detachment, remoteness and even a certain amount of internal coldness are more than sufficient.
"One doesn’t have to see everything or even be completely objective in order to gain useful understanding of another person. You need only see their weaknesses, a few essential truths that they hide from themselves, or notice how they wish to be seen, or what’s likely to make them feel anger, sadness, delight and so on, to be able to effectively manipulate them."
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely and very well articulated. You only need so much information about anyone to interact with them on the terms you want to. That applies to feelers as well, look at how often they are apparently turned off by "too much information". The amount of information you need or want is solely determined by how you intend to interact with the target and the success or failure of your observations is illustrated by whether or not you successfully used them the way you intended to.
I guess it is what it is. The S brain enjoys manip and such and it is right and only natural for them, necessary for them just like breathing, no explanation required. We can discuss this and subtly try and be right but in the end, a crocodile is going to rip you to pieces and that is that. I guess it might be slightly angering to hear N's call the S's defective or to see someone who wants to help, with what seems like arrogance especially from the often logically challenged or self deluded or both.
ReplyDeleteIt appears awareness of sociopathy is growing. Do you think this will create problems or just make things more interesting or is that the same? :)
People say that sociopaths are “crazy” for not loving, but if one looks at all the self-inflicted misery people put themselves through every day in the name of love, I find it hard to credit that not putting one’s self into this delusional state is “crazier” than doing so.
ReplyDeleteI agree. Maybe that’s the empath’s way to thrill seek and feel alive? As the song goes:
”I'm just sitting here watching the wheels go round and round
I really love to watch them roll
No longer riding on the merry go round
I just had to let it go”
I think two people can love each other experiencing great joy without causing too much pain. The key is honesty and communication.
ReplyDeleteIn any case, the pain of losing a love or dealing with things we don't like in that context is practically an orgasm compared to the pain of the manips of an S.
I guess it might be slightly angering to hear N's call the S's defective...
ReplyDeleteAlthough it would seem others here may disagree, it doesn't both me at all for feelers to assume that there is something wrong or defective about me at all. Its only logical for victims, or potential victims, to see something as being "wrong" with those who prey upon them. Undoubtedly every sheep on the planet thinks that wolves must be the epitome of evil, though any objective observer understands that the wolves are just as essential to the overall ecosystem as the sheep are.
"It appears awareness of sociopathy is growing. Do you think this will create problems or just make things more interesting or is that the same?"
I personally think it is funny because it just muddies the waters and leaves people even less able to defend themselves. Nowadays it seems that almost anyone who has had a negative experience with someone else can declare that someone else to be a sociopath. That works out quite nicely since the entire concept is being diluted into a meaningless catch phrase. Its like calling "wolf" too many times, if every mildly unpleasant person in the world is declared a sociopath, there is a much broader field for the real ones to hide in.
Not to mention that the vilification is so hyperbolic it means people expect monsters straight out of the bowls of hell, meaning a nice charming guy with a wonderful smile couldn't possibly be one of those "things" until its too late... :)
With this statement... People say that sociopaths are “crazy” for not loving, but if one looks at all the self-inflicted misery people put themselves through every day in the name of love, I find it hard to credit that not putting one’s self into this delusional state is “crazier” than doing so"
ReplyDeleteThe thing with that though is that you are not "not putting" anything. You have no choice in the matter as an S. You don't know this state and its interaction in an emotional complex. You don't know love, only logical pieces of it, you don't know the rich synergistic whole. You know pieces of a clock, but you don't know time. Likewise, we don't know "no conscience" and no love. And I guess we both come off to each other like what is he smoking, lol.
If that is not your quest, then I say that regardless of your ability to feel love or not; you are cowards. You have given yourself a comfortable rock to hide under... your disordered mind.
ReplyDeleteIt’s great that your searching - and most people aren’t - but when you’re on a quest it doesn’t mean that everyone else has to be too.
Why is it that while the sociopaths here accept that empaths have these sunami sized emotions, the empaths have so much trouble accepting that sociopaths don’t. Isn’t that just a bit ironic?
Zoe writes: "Maybe that’s the empath’s way to thrill seek and feel alive?"
ReplyDeleteI think so, and just one more expression of their masochistic tendency, so if one couples that with Aspie's comment: "In any case, the pain of losing a love or dealing with things we don't like in that context is practically an orgasm compared to the pain of the manips of an S." it would seem to suggest that we offer people a more thrilling and invigorating experience than even their own delusions (like love) can offer.
LOL, we can create a new advertising campaign: "Do you want a new, exciting experience that is more intense and thrilling than love? Com'on, give yourself over to your local sociopath for an experience you'll never forget..." :)
Joking of course, there wouldn't be near as much fun in it without the hunt and the seduction... victims throwing themselves at you for a thrill would probably get pretty boring pretty fast. The funny thing is, if you did run that advertisement I bet you'd get at least some takers anyway. :)
Dionysus you're hilarious.
ReplyDeleteQuestion.
ReplyDeleteLet's say you are an N and you suddenly realize that someone you know somewhat well is an S. You don't say anything to them about it and you can't really make moves to get away in the way you interact and they are not particularly bothering you anyway. First, can S's you think pick that up, maybe notice subtle changes in behavior? Can one act it off? What would you do if someone was clueless and even had say a clueless personality suddenly knew what you were? Would you be concerned or take action.
I should say.... Let's say there is an N who suddenly realizes that someone they know somewhat well is an S. The N don't say anything to them about it and he can't really make moves to get away in the way he interacts and they are not particularly bothering him anyway. First, can S's you think pick that up, maybe notice subtle changes in behavior? Can one act it off? What would you do if someone was clueless and even had say a clueless personality suddenly knew what you were and you found out? Would you be concerned or take action.
ReplyDeleteDionysus you're hilarious.
ReplyDeleteThanks. Regardless of what idiots and whimpering prey like to think, I know I am a pretty happy person with a good sense of humor and am having a fairly successful time of beating the boredom. In a few days I'm off to another country where I have a silly little masochist slut on call; a free place to stay for a few months for me and she gets to enjoy a little humility and the privilege of amusing me. Then I'm launching a new expedition to yet another country to see how well I can hunt in a different cultural context. Life is good and it is wonderful to have it so beautifully under control. It’s great to be “living the life” as it were.
[Sorry, I’m not usually so giddy, but I’ve been in my current location for about four months and have gotten a bit bored of it, so I am really looking forward to moving on in a few days. :) ]
"What would you do if someone was clueless and even had say a clueless personality suddenly knew what you were and you found out? Would you be concerned or take action."
ReplyDeleteI can't speak for anyone else of course, but I really wouldn't care as long as the person in question continued to behave properly and do as she was told. Obedience and submission is what matters, their opinions about it do not matter in the least.
lol
ReplyDeleteTo aspie: I’m sort of halfway and not the best one to answer, but if someone who was clueless and had a clueless personality suddenly knew “what I was” then they wouldn’t be so clueless would they? It would be annoying to have to pet them back to calm, or just funny. Depends.
ReplyDeleteOk, thanks guys.
ReplyDeletePeople deserve who they love.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVy8Dr_SxWg
It would be annoying to have to pet them back to calm,...
ReplyDeleteI really despise having to do that as well and generally won’t do it anymore (although there have been some exceptions). When I was younger I found myself having to do that sort of thing fairly frequently and consider it an affront. It’s almost a clever little role reversal forcing me to do things that I would rather not in order to placate their silly insecurities. I’m not their fucking shrink and resent having calm them down because I need something else from them. It’s an insult to the whole relationship and undermines my authority. Generally speaking I just won’t do it anymore, if they start acting out and misbehaving I’ll just apply some rather extreme degradation which either shocks them back into line or pushes them out the door. Either option is better than having to surrender my control of the situation to placate them.
The nature of the relationship has to be maintained, they exist to serve and amuse and when they fail in their task they cease to be worth my time or effort. It isn’t as though they’re hard to replace.
Do you guys ever think there is a "wrong person" for you out there? I mean someone one day that you will read wrong and reap or suffer disastrous consequences because of it? Do you think it possible for someone to not necessarily fool you for your s'ness but that is essentially cryptonite to the S in a sense?
ReplyDelete"I mean someone one day that you will read wrong and reap or suffer disastrous consequences because of it? Do you think it possible for someone to not necessarily fool you for your s'ness but that is essentially cryptonite to the S in a sense?"
ReplyDeleteAs we discussed on the other thread, I believe there are plenty of "wrong people" out there for me at least. As per our discussion of the nature of predators, it only takes a few attributes to avoid getting caught and plenty of people have them. All natural predators go after the prey that can be captured and exploited with the least effort and energy expenditure. So there are plenty of the "wrong people" out there. Further, as also related on the other thread, I have certainly run into victims that turned out to be disastrous for myself; there is always the risk of a mess.
Now if you meant am I concerned that there is a predator that targets us, I've never run into this or heard of such a thing. I'm pretty confident we're the top of the food chain. But if there was, I guess I would be curious to see how it worked and wouldn't care that much. Like the lions of Africa, we're fairly accustomed to being on top, so if a new uber-predator were to appear (as was the case of Europeans showing up for safari) I guess they would have no problem wiping us out. The weakness of being the best is that we're not too concerned with competition. :)
Thanks Dionysus.
ReplyDeleteNormal people who have had connections with S's talk about the S "stare". I saw it myself one time in my dealing with a friend. When I saw it, I gotta a little scared, and it felt like I had stumbled on to something he probably should not have wanted me to see. And it was from a distance too. A deep distance stare from a distance, and in a situation where something say sexually could have happened. I broke off eye contact and abandoned the scene, and thought it weird, but didn't think he may be different than I. Long time ago.
What is that about? Is it used to entrance and to then latch on a suggestion or lie to? It's probably nothing you think about right? It's just a natural part of the S behavior? Are these intensy things done and then followed up with suggestions to make them more stuck?
Normal people who have had connections with S's talk about the S "stare".
ReplyDeleteSorry, that is one I can't really comment on because I don't really get it. I have read about this before, but if it is something I do it must be subconsciously or at least involuntarily. Spooking the prey isn't very useful, so if there is something to it beyond someone's imagination as far as I know it isn't intentional.
From what I've read it often doesn't spook. Many find it sexy and hypnotic and alluring. I guess it would be just natural.
ReplyDeleteFrom what I've read it often doesn't spook. Many find it sexy and hypnotic and alluring. I guess it would be just natural.
ReplyDeleteMaybe so, I'm not really sure.
When walking into a bar or club or something I will frequently - and deliberately - zero in on one girl in the room from a distance as this tends to work much better than walking in and looking around aimlessly or scanning the crowd at the outset. But I don't do it with any sort of intentionally "intense" stare and usually as soon as our eyes meet I'll smile, so not too spooky.
Even if I have no interest in the girl at all it opens a good opportunity to at least chat her up for a few as I look around for someone better. Not to mention often times the girls that make better victims are the ones hanging out in the back or away from the dance floor, the ones with insecurities or other issues...
That off guard, occasional stare. Its probably a manifestation of the "scheming" going on inside the socio's mind at that moment in time, presenting itself to you in the eyes. (Even if the socio is "acting" as normal as ever).
ReplyDeleteCan you imagine constantly doing the exact opposite to everything you are thinking? It takes some rapid thought processes. Thats why to be a good liar you need a good memory.
That occasional look in the eyes i liken to the effects of the tongue salivating when you see your food. That intial anticipation when your seated and your dinner plate is under your nose, you have your meal right where you want it. Then you prepare to tuck in and satisfy yourself.
Thats my take on it anyway.
Tink :)
Perhaps during other times like when you need to fool them in light of contradictory evidence or when there is an opportunity to deepen the potential for pain creation. Maybe at some of those times it happens. Or perhaps we perceive it the way we do based on a number of individual factors.
ReplyDeleteThat makes sense. I definitely felt like I had seen something I should not have. And I sensed that he saw that I saw it. Some people talk about the stare and how they enjoyed it or felt controlled. I was wondering if it was something under control and part of charm or other functioning. I found it powerfully repelling.
ReplyDeletePerhaps during other times like when you need to fool them in light of contradictory evidence or when there is an opportunity to deepen the potential for pain creation.
ReplyDeleteWell, that is different and not something that would happen across a crowded room. I'll freely grant that once she is mine and starts to act out I can be very intense in pointing out her ignominy and demanding proper abasement. Maintaining submission requires a firm hand and an intensity of emotion in order to overcome their will and shock them into accepting their proper place in the relationship. So, perhaps in that context there could be a very intense "stare", but that is long after the initial seduction.
That intial anticipation when your seated and your dinner plate is under your nose, you have your meal right where you want it.
ReplyDeleteInteresting idea, though if this were the case it would not be a voluntary thing or something I would do intentionally. Seems rather crude, like drooling on your dinner... :)
Dionysus,
ReplyDelete"Seems rather crude, like drooling on your dinner...:)"
LOL your funny.
Thats exactly the way i think it looks!
Tink.
Thats exactly the way i think it looks!
ReplyDeletelol, well I certainly hope I don't do that; but if I do, apparently not too many people hold it against me. :)
I think it's true that the stare had a studying predatory feel to it. But what I think what was really unnerving about it was that had an odd spatial confusion quality to it. It looked like it was coming from a further distance than possible. Like it is just begging to be looked at to try and figure it out.
ReplyDeleteIt looked like it was coming from a further distance than possible. Like it is just begging to be looked at to try and figure it out.
ReplyDeleteNow you're sort of making me hope I can do this... lol, j/king. My style works just fine and no matter how intense a stare you can generate, I'm pretty confident you'll always do better with a winning smile, a twinkle in your eye, and some 'sincere' conversation on any topic she likes to talk about... :)
lol
ReplyDeleteBeware of the stare. :)
ReplyDeleteYou people are all so silly sometimes. no scratch that. most of the time.
ReplyDeleteOK, i get it, your a SOCIOPATH. and so what?
can you cure aids, cure natural disasters,can you create an atom, a planet, a star, can you create a human without reproductive means?
you all talk about this so called power you possess, the power to manipulate, cheat, lie, steal, deceive, observe for weakness and use it for your own advantage, dominate, stare, become the wolf, become the predator, kill and emotionally destroy your victim then move on to the next victim in another country or wherever, being smarter than your prey, having no conscience, being on top of the food chain. hooray, i guess you all deserve an honorary lifetime achievement award. give me a damn break. get over yourselves and your delusions of grandeur. bring the dead back to life then maybe next time i run across a Sociopath, I'll tremble with fear at such awesomeness of a genetically dominant being. i hope the sarcasm expert on this blog can decipher that last sentence.
hooray, i guess you all deserve an honorary lifetime achievement award. give me a damn break. get over yourselves and your delusions of grandeur.
ReplyDeleteMy, my, feeling a little inferior are we? LOL, joking.
You are, I presume, at least vaguely aware that you are commenting on a blog that bills itself openly as sociopath-friendly? Now put your little thinking cap on and tell me what you might expect to find on such a blog?
Hmmm, let’s see. Virtually by definition one would expect to find people proud of their accomplishments, people who think rather highly of themselves, and people that have a different understanding of appropriate behavior and acceptable social norms. Further, one would also expect reasonably intelligent conversation, perhaps a bit of wit and charm, or at the very least humor. Finally one would expect to see all of these characteristics combined and fused together.
So now, what precisely are you on about? I do believe if you’re looking for whining and whimpering, shame and self-abasement, plaintive pleas for pity and pathetic denial of our natural skills and abilities that you should be over on one of the victim’s forums. There you can sit around and whimper and bemoan your weakness and stupidity all day and join silly love circles and cry on each other all night.
Prey is as prey does, it lays down to be fed upon. Perhaps if this very simple and obvious truth is too much to handle you should reconsider whether this is the blog to spend too much time on.
Otherwise, though, feel free to toss in your own jokes, boasts, or questions. :)
God of wine, women, and song:
ReplyDeleteGood reply to Jesus Freak Anon. I like the way you think mon amie.
What triggered your predator/prey philosophy? Was there some kind of breaking point where you were like fuck it, I gotta be me?
To Zoe:
ReplyDeleteYou have misunderstood what I have said; not surprising AT ALL.
My comment had nothing whatsoever to do with non-acceptance of the small field of emotions in which a sociopath plays.
But I DO think it's entertaining as hell, that so many people with such a small window to look out of everyday; come here to debate on lands for which their eyes have never gazed upon.
The debate was about love. Something I'm fairly sure is hard enough for a "feeling" person to define. Ridiculous as hell for a non-feeling person to try. :)
Even more ridiculous is how you use this site not really to discover anything more than how good it must "feel" to be able to stroke yourself in public! I mean you all just sound like a bunch of swinging dicks to me.
But Zoe... feeling or no... I am not a fool. You do NOT accept empaths; or come here for acceptance from them. You all keep coming here to prove your superiority. That is my beef hun... To me; you are nothing but a bunch of silly narcissists. But I AM enjoying the show... So PLEASE... DO keep performing. ;)
"You all keep coming here to prove your superiority. That is my beef hun... To me; you are nothing but a bunch of silly narcissists."
ReplyDeleteThing is, though, I'm pretty sure these things you say are considered compliments... which does not help your case.
Also, you are reacting just how an S would want you to. Clearly you are frustrated, and have most likely had a bad experience with an S and feel the need to fight back.
ReplyDelete"But I AM enjoying the show... So PLEASE... DO keep performing. ;)"
This last sentence just seems tacked on to make it look like you aren't really bothered, for pride's sake or whatever, but it seems a bit disingenuous.
"of our natural skills and abilities "
ReplyDeletehaha. you and daniel are patting yourselves on the back for what a common dumb criminal can also do.
good night losers.
Thanks Daniel. One really has to wonder what precisely this person would expect to find on a blog that openly declares itself sociopath-friendly. Silly people. Anyway...
ReplyDeleteWas there some kind of breaking point where you were like fuck it, I gotta be me?
Yeah, there really was. When I was young I pretty much fit the profile and spent a long time being quite obnoxious. However, when I was about 24 I got on this whole “I want to be normal” trip and was sincere about it. I read a hundred and one various self-help books, voluntarily signed up for a shrink, and really put forth a strong effort. I think rather highly of my abilities and that includes my ability to influence myself and my own behavior and thoughts too, so I just assumed it was a matter of my own will. I did an absurd amount of self-analysis and got into self-hypnosis as a means of trying to overcome my very weirdly selective memory. I really gave it a good go.
While I learned and pieced together some of the ways that I ended up becoming the way that I am, when it came to tangible results the whole process was a disaster. I trained myself to imitate a lack of confidence and really worked hard at trying to “shame” myself into becoming “good” on the operating premise that if I thought of myself badly I would – being naturally arrogant and assertive – naturally behave “good” in reaction. It was a weird line of reasoning but it seemed to make the most sense. The end result is I just made myself miserable. Then I would lapse back into my “bad” behavior which in turn “shamed” me back into the “good” with even more suppression and repression of my natural personality. In effect, I made myself utterly miserable for no good reason at all.
All of this was also complicated by my unconventional sexual tastes and sadistic tendency, which I firmly believe is not an integral part of sociopathy, but meshes well should the right triggering events happen to coincide. I can directly and specifically trace where that came from and it is a different thing; so don’t assume all sociopaths have that predisposition. The problem being that during my “good” phase, frankly I could not “rise to the occasion” as it were because the whole idea of boring missionary position puritan sex does nothing whatsoever for me. So, on the one hand I was fighting a losing battle with regard to trying to trick myself into empathy and on the other there was a lot of sexual frustration building up. Obviously this couldn’t last, and it didn’t.
I tried a transitional step, the whole “sociopath for good” notion whereby I would go with my natural self in inclinations, but consciously stay within social norms and try to help and the like. In this phase I got involved in a lot of political organizing (which later turned into a power thing for me), and so on and so forth (don’t ask what causes as I wouldn’t want to accidentally associate them with me today as they are still just causes and wouldn’t benefit from the association). However, after too many years working in a major investment firm and doing alright, the boredom just became too much.
As time went on I started tossing away the pretensions and looking at myself objectively as a creature. Just like a paleontologist looks at the individual components of a fossil and then combines all the discovered characteristics into a composite picture to determine what kind of creature it was, so I did to myself. I looked at what I was good at, where my talents and natural interests were, how I liked to think about myself and came up with, more or less, what I am today. So, yeah, now I gotta be me and really like being so.
Do you guys have any opinion about the state of the world or its direction?
ReplyDeleteDo you guys have any opinion about the state of the world or its direction?
ReplyDeleteI do, but I won't share any of that here as I wouldn't want to associate myself being honest with those causes and issues. In one character or another I'm usually quite happy to go into a lot of detail on the topic, but not here or within this context.
Bacchus said, "So, yeah, now I gotta be me and really like being so."
ReplyDeleteGood for you man. I went through a similar kind of exploration and my own I gotta be me moment has only just arrived, relatively speaking. It’s been very cool to hear you articulate this perspective so well.
"...not here or within this context."
That's too bad. If you're general enough, no one should be able to put anything together. Your opinions would be interesting to hear. ME has covered many angles on this subject as you've seen, but he/she/whatever hasn't done a lot of writing on politics or contemporary social topics. We did have a commentor here who identified as a bona fide liberal, but present days issues aren't touched, oddly enough.
Do you remember that old saying kids used to use in school... "It takes one to know one."
ReplyDeleteThere is some truth to that, but I have found another way of thinking that also seems to work for me better, and that is:
"We have a tendency to make assumptions about everything. The problem with making assumptions is that we BELIEVE they are the truth."
I feel that we can only make these assumptions based on our own scope of experiences. In other words... You believe I am commenting this way, because you assume I am doing as you, yourself have done.
On to the point...
Assumption number one:
That I am frustrated. Not true... I come here and to many blogs to cause some sort of stir so people will visit my own blog. Seems to be working so far. I get many more hits now. Though I should clarify that I'm not always so defiant on other blogs. I can be very understanding a sweet too. :)
Nothing personal... just business.
Assumption number two:
That I have had a bad experience with an S. Also not true as I have live my experiences. Not to my memory anyways.
The truth as I remember living it... even up to last week; has been that I am the one accused of being the predator.
My family, friends, and mates alike, have been accusing me since the age of ten.
"Cold and indifferent." Has been a common phrase, along with: evil, demon possessed, devil, and so on, and so forth. I am the one who gets bored, plays puppeteer, then leaves a mass of destruction in my wake with little care.
I am no stealthy wolf mind you! I tell them right from the start who and what I am, and still they come seeking love and a possible, different result.
So I blame them for being blind despite my efforts to warn them for their own good.
Clearly I am no sociopath though for I "feel" it is my responsibility to try and spare them this inevitable disaster... so what am I? The sheep say I am wolf, and the wolves say I am sheep. Why must I be one or the other?
No matter. Perhaps I am blessed to have a tongue capable of tasting a bit of both worlds. And also blessed to not be able to fully experience either one.
I can see why you would come to this assumption... or maybe I can't! Either way it would be a waste of time to take anything said HERE, personal. It has nothing to do with me.
Daniel - I went through a similar kind of exploration and my own I gotta be me moment has only just arrived, relatively speaking.
ReplyDeleteGood deal, I hope you decide to have as much fun with your self-acceptance as I've decided to have.
Despite the fact that obviously I like ME's idea here and am enjoying sort of being myself a bit online, ultimately we're meant to stay hidden in the crowds. All of our skills and attributes attest to this and frankly no matter what we say or do, the prey will always hate and fear us because we are better than they are and they know it. Every feeler that has ever undergone some loss or emotional trauma envies our ability to not give a damn; every socially awkward or insecure person envies our social abilities; every loser trapped in a go-nowhere life envies our ability to throw it all off and live wild and free off our wits and skills if we so choose. There is an endless array of songs, movies and books expressing just these desires by people that can never share in our gifts. Not to mention whole social trends based on the desire to be like us from the vampire infatuation in popular culture to the glorification of unrepentant self-interest, like Ayn Rand and her Randbots. So they may cry foul at our tactics, but there is nothing that most of us do to people that non-sociopaths do not also do, the reason they hate us in particular is because so many of them wish they could be like us. Its envy pure and simple, but remember that the witch burnings and the Holocaust were partially inspired by envy as well.
While perhaps ME is aiming at social tolerance for us, I’ve adopted a different perspective, one of self-acceptance and pride despite the envious bleats of protest from prey that truly only exist to serve and amuse us. If we’re to be accused of being “monsters”, I say be the best monster you can be and have a wonderful time doing it. :)
[hmmm... sociopath empowerment? Sociopath motivational speakers? I wonder if I could make some money at this... lol, joking]
But Zoe... feeling or no... I am not a fool. You do NOT accept empaths; or come here for acceptance from them. You all keep coming here to prove your superiority. That is my beef hun... To me; you are nothing but a bunch of silly narcissists. But I AM enjoying the show... So PLEASE... DO keep performing. ;)
ReplyDeleteEden I find it funny that you assume I’m a sociopath just because I side with them. Maybe I’m just a smart empath? Or is that an oxymoron?
"Maybe I’m just a smart empath? Or is that an oxymoron?"
ReplyDeletelol, :)
"no matter what we say or do, the prey will always hate and fear us because we are better than they are and they know it. Every feeler that has ever undergone some loss or emotional trauma envies our ability to not give a damn; every socially awkward or insecure person envies our social abilities"
ReplyDeleteI think this thinking may exist as you say but I know for myself that any "hate or fear" I have I believe has little to do with a jealousy of S superiority, and you may be in fact "superior" in certain ways, but more to do with the danger and as a result of how I feel for others, especially any I know, who could be made to suffer. I really don't wish to be like the way you are. No offense or anything.
Pain sucks but that is part of the whole pleasure deal. I don't envy someone who does what they want without conscience because as soon as that steps on others rights I know I would feel bad. And the bad to me feels right and just. I don't want it removed. In the same way I don't want pain removed lest I not get warning signs when I cut myseld that I need to attend to it before it gets infected of worse. But it is just the way we are I suppose, though I guess I do believe i have some truth just like the S does and perhaps we are all deluded, but I don't think soo, as you don't I guess. I agree though that we should know strive to know ourselves and honor our natures and truths.
Aspie - I agree though that we should know strive to know ourselves and honor our natures and truths.
ReplyDeleteThat was a very well thought out reply and though obviously I don't think of things the same way, I understand I'm a small minority - even among like minded people - and can respect your opinions.
To be perfectly frank, the previous post was a bit exaggerated. Don't misunderstand, I do believe the basic sentiments expressed, but I am not really as enthusiastic about it as I implied. I don't care that much what anyone else does at all, including those of my ilk. I just thought of it as more funny than anything else, "sociopath empowerment" indeed. lol.
Ultimately, we are all we make of ourselves and I've found my path and it would seem that you've found yours, which is a good thing. despite the very different paths, just having one is enough to put us both in a better position than the overwhelming majority that have none.
Son of Zeus said,“Good deal, I hope you decide to have as much fun with your self-acceptance as I've decided to have.”
ReplyDeleteBelieve me, I intend to. Life’s too short to do anything less.
“Despite the fact that obviously I like ME's idea here and am enjoying sort of being myself a bit online, ultimately we're meant to stay hidden in the crowds. All of our skills and attributes attest to this…”
I used to think of my rather flexible outward personality as an aberration but now I have come to see that it is better thought of as chameleononic.
“frankly no matter what we say or do, the prey will always hate and fear us…”
Hence their rush to both condemn and pathologize.
“So they may cry foul at our tactics, but there is nothing that most of us do to people that non-sociopaths do not also do, the reason they hate us in particular is because so many of them wish they could be like us.”
True and it’s what kills me about normals. They lie, cheat, steal, manipulate, and murder just like any so called cold blooded sociopath. Where they diverge is what they do after they've done their "dirt". They beat themselves up afterwards, as if this sadomasochism somehow makes all the difference when in reality, it doesn’t. No amount of guilt is ever going to raise the dead or give sight to the blind or heal the broken hearted or replace stolen or destroyed property. So how can a conscience truly matter other than to keep them in line?
“Its envy pure and simple…”
I also came across an idea that I found intriguing. Normals are fascinated by people with little to no conscience because we represent the nihilistic truth of the universe. We are as indifferent to all of the things that supposedly comprise true humanity as the universe is. In some way that most of them only dimly understand, our actions and what lies underneath them, signify the utter bankruptcy of everything they hold to be true about life. The acausality, the sheer randomness, the blindness of fate… That’s what it’s like when we come and go as we please and do whatever we want without regard for their hopes, dreams, ideals, desires or concerns. Just like the universe.
Ah hubris, how I love thee! :-) It’s all fun and games in the end, even exaggerated confidence. Even so, someone should be coming along to say something to burst my bubble because the idea of unabashed arrogance is repulsive to most people, even people reading comments on a blog dedicated to “sociopaths”, where you’d expect to find arrogance all over the place. Wait for it…
“[hmmm... sociopath empowerment? Sociopath motivational speakers? I wonder if I could make some money at this... lol, joking]”
Isn’t that what the “Twilight” series is all about? I hear Stephanie Meyer is making a ‘killing!’
FUCK YOU DANIEL BIRDICK!
ReplyDeleteI was raised by a pathological parent in a very pathological environment, and believe me they do churn up some hate lol. Ive seen enough "masks" to last me a life time. The irony is, the only way to deal with that was to adapt constantly. I intially came across this blog looking for infomation to better understand the condition. Sort of get my head around it.
ReplyDeleteIm a young adult now and we came to an "understanding" as time went by. I have no love or attachment to that person whatsoever. People i know think how indifferent i am toward that parent is completely unnatural. I guess they are right. Whats the alternative though?
It's tantamount to putting a kitten in the lions den and seeing how long it survives.
I was a fucked up little kitten for a while lol
I developed defence mechanisms and unpleasant characteristic's id rather i didn't have because i don't want to be that particular person. Ever. I do fear the "monster" in myself. I hope it was conditioning rather than genetic. Id rather be absolutely anything than pathological.
I don't view my parent as gifted. I think that parent should have been sterilised actually lol.
I've questioned my own sanity and by odd views on things plenty of times. Checking myself repeatedly that im normal. Which since reading this blog i believe i am, just ever so slightly unhinged at times.
However I know one day solitute and old age is going to creep up on that parent eventually. Lets see who has the last laugh then ;)
Daniel - Believe me, I intend to. Life’s too short to do anything less.
ReplyDeleteJust be smart and keep your eyes open as you can’t expect much mercy if you get caught doing something illegal. My personal mantra is to try to stay as legal as possible. I slip up from time to time, but they are just minor things that wouldn’t result in too much trouble even if I did get caught. I want to hunt and I can't do that from jail.
I used to think of my rather flexible outward personality as an aberration but now I have come to see that it is better thought of as chameleononic.
That was basically my conclusion as well since it isn’t really social, i.e. I couldn’t really care less about anyone in the room, but it seems like it is. Now what possible use would that skill be to anyone other than to deceive?
They beat themselves up afterwards, as if this sadomasochism somehow makes all the difference when in reality, it doesn’t. No amount of guilt is ever going to raise the dead or give sight to the blind or heal the broken hearted or replace stolen or destroyed property.
LOL, I couldn’t agree more and it makes no sense to me either. It ties back into my theory that feelers are inherently masochistic and genuinely like to suffer as otherwise that, as with so much else, makes no sense at all.
We are as indifferent to all of the things that supposedly comprise true humanity as the universe is. In some way that most of them only dimly understand, our actions and what lies underneath them, signify the utter bankruptcy of everything they hold to be true about life.
I’ve run through that line of reasoning as well and there is certainly something to it, though I personally don’t derive much inspiration from the thought, at least not in the sense that I draw inspiration from the whole predator/prey reasoning or some of my other contextual constructs. However, I will say this much: at least in my experience it has been essential to contextualize myself, or give myself a role in society even if it is a completely artificial construct. After all, it is just designed for my own personal use and I have no inclination to go preaching it to others. If you find the inspiration for your own context in the idea you have expressed here, run with it. Nihilism is not overly compatible with a strong and healthy ego or sense of self-worth and power. Then again perhaps you view it differently and can find your own way to self-identify as a force of nature.
Ah hubris, how I love thee! :-) It’s all fun and games in the end, even exaggerated confidence.
Oh, why not? We’re accused of being that way whether its expressed or not and at least in my case I am in fact that way, so why hide it on a website where it is not only expected but encouraged?
Thank you Dionysus for your friendly consideration.
ReplyDelete"They beat themselves up afterwards, as if this sadomasochism somehow makes all the difference when in reality, it doesn’t. No amount of guilt is ever going to raise the dead or give sight to the blind or heal the broken hearted or replace stolen or destroyed property"
ReplyDeleteit can possibly make a difference for the ongoing future though
I think this view is shortsighted.
Survivor Anon – Two things. First, aspiring to normality is a waste of your dysfunctional childhood. The state of normality is worthless. You’re probably a very strong person (or could be) as a result of your painful experiences. Use them to make you stronger. This leads to my second suggestion. Embrace your inner “monster”. Doing that actually means embracing the fullness of your own power. Embracing your power does not make you pathological. Don’t let the normals fool you on that one.
ReplyDeleteAspie – What’s shortsighted is elevating conscience beyond its place. Obviously the emotions that comprise the conscience were evolutionarily useful to the species. How else could you make selfish but intelligent creatures cooperate on a mass scale over time? That I get. Normals are the notoriously shortsighted ones, which is made obvious when they pathologize consciencelessness instead of seeing it as essential to the human success story.
Dionysus, Liberator Extraordinaire – Thanks for the words of wisdom. But it should be obvious that I would NEVER, EVER, EVAR do anything illegal!!! I have way too much respect for law and order to even consider such a thing. Perish the thought old chap! Speaking of old chaps…
Peter Piper – LMAO! Perfect. I knew I could count on you.
I say this:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJTNUIuassY&feature=related
Aspie...
ReplyDeleteConfused prey?
L'Âme Immortelle - "Betrayal"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9wMi9SKIWI
Just a nice concept...
VAST - "Pretty When You Cry"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOZ6ptqcbUc
Or on topic... (sux if you don't get trance or roll)
Xenomorph - "Sociopath"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gb7ibdEWa1I
Anonymous: Don't mean to be crude, but if you do what Daniel Birdick suggests it would be real similar to a RAPE victim becoming a RAPIST themselves. because figuratively, that is what socios are. victims who become victimizers, who apparently gloss over the former in favor of the intoxication of the latter.
ReplyDeleteIt's funny how socios talk about mind-fucking others who desperately thirst for their love - as if that's not the same DAMN thing their dad/mom did to them.
Given the latter is so fundamental for reproducing sociopathy, why is the former discussed so very much more often?
Such pride, that comes from such cruelty endured!
you are assuming that that is why they are like this
ReplyDeleteImo, no. Of course there are dynamics, however, they are born like this, you can't fix them, though they may be able to fix you, so watch out.
They are working this out of you.
being abused and then abusive and being socio are 2 completely different things imo
ReplyDeletethe abuser still has conscience and abuses because he has empathy and anger, for the socio it is all just a fun game, and oftentimes, boring
What are some examples of human successes that wouldn't have been possible with a conscience? This notion sounds suspect to me, because anything that benefits mankind as a whole is justifiable through the conscience, so long as a person is blessed with adequate foresight. One could even say that conscience might compel a person to sacrifice 1000 to save 1000000, while a person without a conscience might save the 1000 to maintain a popular public image.
ReplyDeleteI think the idea that being conscienceless is somehow integral to our species' development (perhaps intentionally) forgets that there is more often than not a disconnect between what is best for the individual and what is best for the group. Seeing that humanity is exists and survives as a group, it only makes sense to pathologize a disorder that places the group's most powerful trait, the cornerstone of every single one of its great achievements, (socialization) in jeopardy. It would seem to me that the pathological are simply seeking a way to rationalize their pathology and cast it in a positive light.
As for shortsightedness, this is a trait notoriously present in sociopathic individuals. It's part of the job description. Quite a few of the self-proclaimed sociopaths here have even ruminated about their own lack of foresight. It's ironic that you'd claim it was more prevalent in empaths, don't you think?
Also, the way you present the predator prey relationship is quite misleading. Sociopaths are nothing like wolves, cougars, bears, what-have-you. These are real predators, who haven't been subjugated by their "prey." They don't have to follow a deer's rules, and they certainly don't have to worry about the deer hunting them down and exterminating them in reprisal for their transgressions. Sociopaths, on the other hand, are completely bound by the empath's will. Their only freedom lies in choosing how much, and in what ways, they would like to rebel. They can be only slightly defiant and scrape by or prosper, or they can fancy themselves free to do as they like and wind up crucified or caged.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure it's comforting to compare yourself to predators who have relatively little to fear from their environment and their prey, but the truth is far less glorious. You're essentially a minority of marginal importance, and while some of you undoubtedly have significant influence, it's only by following and even propagating the empath's rules, choosing to rebel in more subtle ways. Those who are successful have chosen a symbiotic lifestyle, whereby they give some and take some, because it's the only rational way to achieve success. They are not predators. They are parasites who've chosen to give a little something back, in true empath fashion, to ensure their own prosperity and to prevent themselves from being crushed by forces immeasurably superior to themselves.
The sociopath stands alone, while empaths stand in groups with whom they share intentions, emotions, and even identities. If you anger one, you're likely to anger them all. Tread carefully, or you may be hung, drawn, and quartered, or hunted to extinction like so many predators before you. We are the top of the food chain due to a trait your pathology has robbed you of. Whatever helps us, individuals will die to protect. Whatever harms us, individuals will die to eradicate. The golden rule which binds us rewards unity and punishes dissent with absolute and remorseless destruction. A sociopath's place in this society is decided by how well he complies.
Well put, Dolos.
ReplyDeleteEarlier, Dionysius made a straw-man argument that it would be incorrect either to label the wolf as evil or to discount its importance to the ecosystem. The implication is that, if you cannot say that the wolf is harmful, you cannot say that the sociopath is harmful. The logical shortcoming of this piece of rhetoric should be obvious.
As far as I know, there are no objective studies to show that those sociopathic behaviors that might be described as illegal, dishonest, predatory, parasitic, sadistic, or debasing strengthen the society in which they are displayed.
As far as either of them can be sincere, I accept the sincerity of Daniel Birdick and Dionysius asserting that they just are the way they are, and their way of being is natural to them.
It is not logical to assume that every natural outcome of their natural behavior is beneficial to human society.
They make a valid point that non-sociopaths have also been known to engage in illegal, dishonest, predatory, etc. behavior. Concluding that this ought to make such behavior acceptable to those who value a strong society is done with another little hand-waving bit of rhetoric. There must be a name for this sleight-of-words, but I don't know it.
In the new year, I resolve to study up on the old rhetoric.
We are the Borg. You will be assimilated. Your biological and technological distinctiveness will be added to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile.
ReplyDeleteNot if your a Species8472 lol
ReplyDeleteTink ;)
Dolos,
ReplyDeleteI'm not so sure that last was so well put.
I agree. I didn't post that.
ReplyDeleteDolos,
ReplyDeleteMaybe the gadfly makes a point, too.
We all get a long by going along. It is adherance to the societal norms that makes a society work -- makes it possible, even. But, in large, idverse societies, there is a lot of variation in how people act, and exactly what they understand each of the "pillars of society" to mean.
The need for cooperation would be much more obvious in small, subsistance communities.
i only hope some day we can do away with all the labels, because the reality is the world has a place for all of us and the uniqueness of the individuals will only serve to enrich all of our lives, whether we are sociopaths, empaths or narcissistic cunts...
ReplyDeleteA lot of this talk about " feelings" "no feelings" "whats good" "whats bad" are irrelovent. key to the text at hand in my interpretations of what love is believed to be, and isnt better described one way or another. To me love simply means " IMPORTANT ". I personally dont believe i have real connections like the others i see around me appear to have but the whole time they seem to do it without thinking about it and seem to visibly enjoy themselves is something i dont understand per sey. the point being i have to think about how to make it appear like that is what people need to see from me in order to feel a sense of comfort with me and my presence, even though im clueless to how it really feels personally. i believe people can love and with good intentions, but unfortunately not me. like i said "Love" is a word relayed to me as being improtant that is what my brains hears and thinks atleast. I wish no ill will for anyone personally but the recommendation is to just not cross me. I hate the idea of a social circle or click knowing me for me so i just put what i pressume they need for everyones' sake and comfort infront of their eyes. not hard but tireing. Just in like any instance in the human race eventually at some point of a concious minds life it decides whether its more pleasureable to be good or more so to be bad. sociopaths and non sociopaths alike, this is a decision at some point we all must conciously or subconiously make for ourselves in order to live our lives as we deem most suitable for us " we all" do this. so just because of what someone may or may not be is not an automatic entitlement to who they are or will become, that is for the person at hand, so no! no title needed, a so called label is not needed for a person to be good or successful or vice versa just conscientious thoughts and actions. a person of sound decision able making minds will determine on their own to whom they will become and should not feel alienated because they arent sad at an appropriate moment deemed by others. true there are bad people out there welcome to reality and at some point or another we will feel the scorn of such an individual in some way but its what follows the scorn that speaks volumes for ones character and perhaps unseen morals. a decision is made by all to either live a life that's scorned or to not, and try to do the best we can to just remember to breath. tomorrow is different and with it comes certain change how you face it is up to YOU. but in closeing we all use people to some extent for some purpose or another and its always a self full-filling reason too, no one is immune to that action. "like" and " non alike".
ReplyDelete