Of course, if you look at the real life woman, at some point people will probably feel sorry for the cute girl, tragically wheelchair bound due to neuropathy. But the ugly alcoholic male sociopath that callously runs over a few stray cats a week on his way to work - no sympathy.
Is this comparison outrageous? Another comment explains perhaps why not because in the same way that she doesn't have complete control over her body, most people (especially sociopaths?) don't have control over their minds:
Sociopaths are impulsive. I will impulsively grab a woman's ass. I will catch myself, after the fact. It is a bit like ADHD people interrupting, and only then noticing it (and perhaps apologising).
Your neck is probably tight right now. You didn't choose to tighten it. If you release it, and think a bit, or get otherwise distracted from keeping your neck quiescent, your neck will probably tighten up a bit. Again, you didn't choose to do this.
Finally, as you read this message, your brain turns the characters into words, concepts, etc and you have feelings about them. You don't choose to think what the concepts are, nor do you choose your feelings. If you get really upset at the thought that you aren't in control of your own mind (you can't even control the next thought you'll think) and get into a car upset and drive badly, that won't be you choosing to drive badly. You'll be a "victim" of your mind.
Similarly, when I grab a woman's ass at the wrong time, piss in the sink without realizing it (and disgust my housemates) or am impulsively rough with my girlfriend's cat, the same thing is afoot.
Or course, if we take this to the natural conclusion, no one is really responsible for anything they do, which we obviously can't have for practical reasons.
The difference between today's "theraputic world" and
ReplyDeletethe ancient world, is that no excuses were given for criminal
behavior, regardless of the criminal's prior abuse.
If someone committed a miscreaniant act they were held
responisible no matter what.
Take the case of Darrel Chessman. Not unlike M.E. he provides
us with extensive auto-biographical information. He made the
observation, "Nothing sustains you like hate." He fought a 12 year
battle to stave off execution, for a poultperrie of crimes, from
1948 to 1960.
That's quite a difference from Jack Henry Abbot, who wrote "In The
Belly Of The Beast, and was taken under Norman Mailer's wing,
and promptly killed a waiter.
Again I will reiterate my comment from days ago and the MS post.
ReplyDeleteI do feel more sympathy for a woman in a wheel chair due to Multiple sclerosis. I have MS and try to stay active. I don't want to end up in that wheelchair. But if I do, it is beyond my control. It is a disease of the body. I am not hurting anyone.
Now the alcoholic sociopath does not get the same sympathy for running over cats. Because he is acting outward. I walk, but if I didn't, I wouldn't run over people with my wheel chair.
I am sorry if ME is facing a backlash from the publishing of her book. But to compare, sociopathy with MS is just stupid.
Btw,
All these "bipolar- empath comments" are from me, aka deborah/maria/banana. I have several names because I get logged out and can't get back in to the forum. I don't try to post there anymore.
That is not the point of the comparison. It is talking about how something, which is considered non-normal - even detrimental - in possessing, provides unexpected advantages (and disadvantages). The outrage is unwarranted. The example woman could have had some other disease. It does not matter.
DeleteBob, You are the one missing the point. One is a disease you can not change and the other is a personality disorder that you can change or at least try to temper.
DeleteMy MS does not hurt anyone. Neither do other disease that we have no control over. A non-disordered person does not use a disease to their advantage. To get an "edge".
A sociopath is all about using anything to their advantage or "edge".
To me, that is the point. I do "spin" my disease for my benefit.
The sociopath is as helpless about his/her actions as the patient suffering from MS. The action is not the question we are addressing, but rather the reaction public has to those actions. Personality disorders don't have cures or treatments that can change the person. You can't will your body to produce blonde hair if you are brunette. We can't see sociopaths as being rude or for lack of a more endearing word, evil. They are victims of their own minds and the cruelty of the outside world is not helping their circumstances.
DeleteI am a beautiful flower.
ReplyDeletemmm recipe for road kill stew
ReplyDeleteIf sociopaths are unable to control themselves they should be institutionalized.
ReplyDeleteYou can't treat them by dehumanizing them. If you think it is justifiable to simply lock everyone up who can't behave outside the norm then perhaps you should exercise some introspection and see whether you should be in there with them too.
DeleteBeing impulsive and being unable to control oneself are two VERY different conditions..
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYeah, and upright behaviour makes and breaks acceptance.
DeleteI think some of you want to be more respected by society than accepted and loved on a microlevel. The problem is, that major problems on a microlevel impact the respect you get from society.
I understand that it would be nice to do whatever you want with the normos around you without fearing the mop and the loss of respect of society.
You name it repression, because some normo-assholes withouth the socio-stamp get away without loss of reputation?
Moral people will never accept this argument.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThe lack of impulse control is directly attributed to decreased functioning in the Orbitofrontal Cortex, not some psychosomatic excuse. Your anger is misdirected. The complaint isn't about incapability, it is about responsibility. It is a social requirement that actions, any actions, be held accountable to society at large.
DeleteWhat anon said was in reference to "what sociopaths want, but what neurotypicals don't want", which is respect for the condition. But, again, due to actions performed by some sociopaths, it does not happen.
I agree, this 'lack of control' over their 'impulses' is simply a bullshit excuse.
DeleteYou have to ask: Who are they trying to fool anyhow?
DeleteMaybe they just enjoy being fools.
I understand it is inconvenient to have scientific evidence stand in the way of something as noble as self-congratulating hate, but if you took five minutes to Google why, you would find the real answer. Or just read my previous post instead of skipping over it. Whichever is more convenient.
DeleteThis isn't to say sociopaths are excused for acting on their impulses, but it also means it is not bullshit.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI've yet to see any 'scientific evidence' being presented here.
DeleteAll I've seen so far are your petty opinions and excuses, Bob old boy.
Lack is about deficiency, not complete absence. Both the words "lack" and "absence" are specifically used in defining criteria. It is more difficult, not because the impulses are stronger, but because what is stopping it is reduced. See the difference?
DeleteAnd actually whether something is voluntary, involuntary, or something in-between is important when gauging a response. The conditions that caused an event to occur must be weighed. If not, you are setting the conditions for exactly what you are professing you do not want. Everyone would be incarcerated instead of rehabilitated, because it does not matter why.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteTo anon at 9:30am: If you had read previous postings from me, you would have noted that when I make scientific claims, I carry peer-reviewed scholarly references on request. So here they are:
DeleteBlair, R. R. (2007). Dysfunctions of Medial and Lateral Orbitofrontal Cortex in Psychopathy. Annals of The New York Academy of Sciences 1121:461-479.
Yu, G et al (2009). The Neurobiology of Psychopathy: A Neurodevelopmental Perspective. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 54(12), 813-823.
Here is an interesting one,
Freedman, L.F., Verdun-Jones, S.N. (2010). Blaming the Parts Instead of the Person: Understanding and Applying Neurobiological Factors Associated with Psychopathy. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 52(1), 29-53.
Any other quips?
Erik: Which is why you do see sociopaths living in society without killing someone.
DeleteWell, don't just give me the random titles of the books you just found on Google...
DeleteQuote us a few relevant lines from your beloved texts to back up your claims, Bob.
Oh, 'Bob'.
DeleteLooks like you were nothing but a lying philistine after all.
What will your next alias be?
If you had any real interest in actual proof to the discussion, you would have read and attacked the reference material yourself, instead of asking someone to read it for you. If you are going to attack someone, don't expect them to hand-hold you through it. That is pathetic. You are supposed to read the reference material and "call" them on that, not test them on their ability to read an article. Do you really think someone would post an academic article as supporting evidence, and not even read it? If you did, you would have known that Google Scholar does not give full text of most articles. I could have disproven your argument by simply using an academic database with the full text and quoted from it, which anyone at a university - or even a decent-sized city library - would have access to. If you're trying to humiliate someone, at least do it right.
DeleteSeveral people have made better, more intelligent, retorts than the ones you have given. Those were more interesting. This one was disappointing. Considering this is a continuation of goading and ad hominem attacks, instead of on the topic of discussion, you are no longer relevant to the conversation.
If you've actually read the books, why are you having so much trouble quoting them to back up your claims?
DeleteIs it because of your 'lack of control' that you have to resort to using petty insults?
Don't kid yourself, you and I both know you lack the intelligence to come up with reliable sources.
I knew it. This 'lack of impulse control' is just a terrible excuse. We both know the reasons why you do what you do, and that's all that matters.
Because: 'Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.'
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteA basic question, what kind of impulses do socios have, you sound as if all socios have the same impulses. Aggression in all variants? which main goal?
Delete&
Yes I'm sure it's extremely difficult to cite a few simple quotes to back up a simple claim, you mongrels have been complaining about doing so this whole time.
DeleteErik: You did not misinterpret. There needs to be substance to the arguments, or else they are meaningless. Without it, it does not answer the question "Why/who not?"
DeleteAnon 11:56: The impulses are, typically, the same for sociopaths and neurotypicals. The difference is in the inhibition. For example, if you desired to go out and drink late on a Sunday, even knowing you had work the next morning, would you do it? A neurotypical may be more likely to reject the impulse, while a sociopath may be more likely to accept it.
The emphasis "may be more/less" is important. There is a greater chance that a sociopath may follow through with an impulse, while a neurotypical may stop themselves. This does not hold true with all impulses, and is not all or nothing. It is just that the likelihood of an impulse being carried out is higher with sociopaths.
As for aggression, that depends on the situation and the person. In the conversation above, I countered an argument of 'There is no scientific basis." with "Here is the scientific basis." When the response degenerated below an acceptable threshold, I destroyed and discarded him. It was straightforward. Did I feel angry at him for it? Irritated, yes. Angry? A little. That being said, the anger in itself is different than what you might experience. Typically in sociopaths the anger is more "cold" than "hot". In this instance, the "cold-heartedness" drove a desire to destroy his argument in the present, and destroy his reputation for the future. This response was calculated and performed, instead of reflexive and lashing.
By the way, regarding the quote from John 8:44, you conveniently forgot the context of what was being said, and what came two sentences later: "But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me. Which one of you convicts me of sin? If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me?"
This is why you read your references, instead of Googling them.
Looks like you conveniently forgot the next line:
Delete'He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.'
And the one after that.
And still, no sources to back up your claims, Bob.
Read the sources given, and you may participate in the conversation. You will need to do your own work for this to count.
DeleteAnd thank you for quoting the next line after mine. I thought you might. You just proved my biblical retort.
Once you have read the material, feel free to give feedback. Or continue digging your own hole. Either direction you take, both work in my favor.
Until I have received the sauce, you don't mean shit. And until I have approved of the sauce, you don't mean shit.
DeleteLet's not forget our places.
If you've read the books, then you'll have no trouble quoting them.
DeleteClearly you haven't read them, and my guess is that they don't contain anything to back up your false claims.
Anon 12:30, if you think you can bully a sociopath, you're an idiot.
DeleteMelissaR
Is exposing a lie considered bullying?
DeleteMelissa: You are spoiling my fun. I was starting to thoroughly enjoy this. ME might get a thrill out of ruining people, which I don't, but I do enjoy seeing people ruin themselves. To coin a phrase, "He asked for it." It is far more satisfying to see someone destroy themselves than doing it yourself. You can not see me, but I am actually grinning.
DeleteAnon: As fair disclosure, you have been manipulated ever since your philistine comment onward. More specifically, I constructed a virtual gallows and placed your head in a conceptual noose. The difference in this case was that I put the lever in your hand. Every response you have given since then has been asking me for more rope. As you can imagine, I have no problem with that.
You probably want to stop now.
Everyone else: Welcome to Manipulation 201 - "Verbal Aikido".
Whatever you say, champ.
DeleteCan't say I wasn't expecting the 'I was only pretending to be retarded' line from you at the end.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteSay, where did Bob go all of a sudden?
DeleteIt's Sunday. I had to go grocery shopping. As thrilling as it was to watch, that thrill only lasted a few moments. Besides, there is nothing else to be said on that end - once you pulled the lever, the show was over.
DeleteErik: I can't give fair judgment as to their specific address without seeing the raw data with the collection methods, which being a typical article it does not include. I'm assuming based on your intelligence and knowledge that you are intimately aware of the vagaries and the designing of a study that actually works in real life. That being said, in terms of its original usage in the previous argument, I thought it was a sufficient example as to giving a scholarly quote of OFC involvement in psychopathy (instead of being purely psychosomatic/"excuse"). Yu et al addresses the question more directly: "Overall, brain imaging studies have suggested that: the orbitofrontal [etc.]... that deficits in these regions may contribute to features such as impulsivity and impaired moral judgment in psychopathic people...". I used Freedman as a source in regards to mitigation of circumstances when it comes to punishment (albeit based more on the Canadian criminal justice system, which tends to be more forgiving compared to America).
Erik, very beautifully said.
DeleteAnon, bar the bible quotes, you are hilarious. Nicely trolled :)
Bob, Bob, Bob.... *shaking head* are you fucking high? This is exactly why I say that you are not a sociopath.
An anon trolls you a little and you start talking about ruining and gallows? Then declaring yourself this great manipulator and victor?Haha! Fuck me, that was good. Where is Post's internet argument list when it's needed?
Enlighten me, oh great Aikidoka, in how you have succeeded, or even could succeed, in ruining, humiliating, or even greatly annoying an anonymous internet troll. You are nothing more than a few words on a screen. Yet you give yourself this great big pat on the back? Sad, really. Especially when you consider how he/she managed to rile you up without even much effort.
This is exactly why I questioned and very much continue to question your diagnosis.
You honestly seem to think that knowing a few traits, a good vocabulary and condescending manner will convince or deter those here with a good bullshit detector?
As for being diagnosed by a couple of shrinks, that is hardly impressive. Tell most shrinks that you are this highly manipulative, impulsive instrument of ruin (Ha!), throw in your teenage "diagnosis" of being antisocial and voila!
Shrinks are not perfect, not by far. They misdiagnose all the fucking time. And narcissists with some exaggeration and right catch phrases really can look so much like a sociopath.
It is entirely unnecessary to talk like a thug and make up tales of destruction in your wake, in order to be seen as a sociopath here. Infact, that is the quickest way to set off the bullshit radars.
Get over yourself, Bob.
"Overall, brain imaging studies have suggested that: the orbitofrontal [etc.]... that deficits in these regions may contribute to features such as impulsivity and impaired moral judgment in psychopathic people..."
DeleteSuggested? Suggested by whom?
Very hardly a reliable source.
Just thought I'd point out that there's some more damage control for you to attend to.
As for the disclosure, it was also one of the quickest ways to end what was not receding. Was it a little narcissistic? Sure. But that should not be a surprise. I don't have to worry about personal reproach, so I am transparent with my responses. Why should I not be? He attacked, and I counter-attacked.
DeleteIn this your argument is flawed - if I did not counter, you would have seen me as having submitted as an admission of guilt to "not" being a sociopath. Of being implicitly apologetic or accepting of it. If I did counter, you would have seen me as you just stated as an admission of guilt to "not" being a sociopath. You can't have it both ways. Besides, I am behaving how I want to behave. I have no need to fulfill your niche personal model of what is a "true sociopath". I'll show you what I am, and am not, because what is, is. You can't test someone using Trial by Ordeal - if the witch floats she's guilty, if the witch sinks she's dead.
We already had this discussion in a previous blog, so getting angry and repeating what you've said is pointless. Now I know first-hand a little what ME has experienced - this sounds a lot like other comments on the internet with the same criticism.
Anon at 5:15: If you had read the article, you would have gotten the answer. Those were the authors' words, not mine. Erik was not joking when he said you can't extract simple quotes from articles, and that was one of the simplest straightforward quotes I could extract.
DeleteBy the way, if you want to go another 10 rounds, you will have to - to quote Erik - undertake a "masturbatory farce" because, like with Bite me, there is nothing else left to be said. I'm done with this thread. If you consider that an admission of guilt or just straight admission, go ahead and masturbate.
Well, I have to hand it to you.
DeleteYou did have Erik there for a while.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI will add that my problem with the brain study, is that it is flawed, in that it's very two-dimensional.
DeleteIt doesn't take the spiritual realm into account, something which people will not be able to ignore for much longer.
Absolutely. Hence its use as mitigation, not relief. As for right/wrong, those are determined by society, and can not be determined by the sociopath. That would be impractical, since everyone must be held to the same standard to function properly in society. Remember, in this case we're separating what they "think" with what they "do/act". Because what they think is different than what a neurotypical would think in the same instance, it can provide reason for life imprisonment instead of the death penalty, like you had suggested earlier. Which is valid.
DeleteTo put it succinctly, take a look at ME's recent twitter quote (and/or mine) regarding bad behavior. It provides a possible explanation for the bad behavior, not a legitimization. If I killed someone that was fueled by a lack of impulse control and lack of remorse, there are explanations which - while not justifying - can provide explanation as to the influences (the circumstances). It doesn't provide a means of escape - to say that I am not responsible for murder - but it does give weight during sentencing. That, and treatment.
To be fair to both science and spirituality, the two of them in regards to this discussion are better off being examined separately. Or else, one will overshadow the other, and it will derail the debate towards science versus spirituality.
DeleteOh come now, Bob...
DeleteI do not base what I say about you upon one little interaction you have with an anonymous troll.
I base it upon the way you speak, the way you arrogantly claim that the discussion is over and expect to be obeyed, the way you try to portray yourself to be an absolute authority...and above all, your reactions when challenged.
You are a narcissist. Not a sociopath.
You are clearly used to being able to intimidate others by throwing that vocabulary and arrogance at them. It's amazing how many people actually do fall for that, I know.
And may I ask what in the world makes you think I ever was or am angry at you? I am not angry at all. At best you make me raise an eyebrow or roll my eyes.
What happened here was not you using a slightly narcissistic way to quickly end an argument with a troll. It was you becoming utterly convinced of your superiority and victory, and practically dancing around in an immitation of Rocky, trying to show everyone what a master manipulator you are. A classic narcissist move.
So very sad...
lol bite me, i think bob is playing you too. btw arent socios narcs too?
DeleteHi there, anon,
DeleteYeah... I don't think you should be paying all that much attention to Bob when he does his victory dances and proclaims himself to be a black belt Manipulation Aikidoka who "ruined" an anonymous internet troll by "constructing a gallows, putting the troll's head in the noose and giving him/her the lever"... That's called being an utter wanker. It's an anonymous internet troll for fucks sake. One that managed to rile Bob up without expending much effort.
Bob wasn't playing, he was serious. He wanted to show everyone here what a master manipulator and ruiner he can be. Show them what a great sociopath is capable of. Ha!
Sociopaths can be somewhat narcissistic, but there is a huge difference between narcissists and sociopaths. A friend of mine once said that if you think of a sociopath as a zebra, then the narcissist is a horse who paints himself with black and white stripes. Usually in order to feel special, more powerful. He will delude himself that he is a zebra and prance around trying to show he has the best stripes of all. And watch him buck and bray if you dare suggest he is a horse.
Narcissists have an unquenchable desire to be admired, worshiped. They need to be the center of attention at all times- look at the way Bob has been replying to pretty much every thread and trying his utmost to appear to be an absolute authority. The way he speaks, his arrogance, the way he clings onto the label for dear life...all of it.
There is no gain for those that worship them btw, they are merely props to boost the narcissist's ego ;)
One of the traits of a narcissist is that they have a very fragile ego and do not respond well to being called on their bullshit. They will do anything to lessen the narcissistic injury, including burying themselves under a safety blanket of delusion.
Look at the way Bob behaves when he's challenged. He can't handle it. Clearly deludes himself. Yes, like about being a great manipulator.
I can go on...
Spoil sport.
DeleteAnd yes, there are certain narcissistic traits which do appear in sociopaths, such as grandiose perceptions and/or significant confidence in self and abilities. That being said, there are differences that arise from possessing sociopathic-centric traits and a weaker sense of self.
Bite me, when you are wielding a hammer, everything will look like a nail. That is what trial by ordeal - or a "witch hunt" - stems from. It is about seeing what you want to see, as a part of mission fulfillment, regardless of what is actually there. Wedging a square peg in a round hole until it fit, doesn't make the peg round. In this case, you perceived literal statements as emotionally profound ones, which was why the peg fit, because you pre-conditioned to make everything square as round.
DeleteAnd sure, I am a sociopath who also has a few narcissistic traits. ME is a sociopath who also has a few sadistic traits. If you looked at a Venn diagram of the Axis II disorders, you will find overlaps with their traits. Sociopathy is, as is very evident from discussions on the site, not cookie-cutter. This explains the misconceptions, and why you changed your mind from before when it was asked of me to adopt a name (as Bob instead of anonymous), so as to not get caught into this very situation you wanted us to avoid.
As for the narcissistic slant from the manipulation, that was more sadistic in quality in reality. You can thank Melissa for telling you, I just rubbed it in.
Bob, Bob, Bob...whatever will we do with you? :)
DeleteYou seem to be making a few assumptions there.
First of all, I was not the anonymous troll. That was not my style of trolling at all. In fact, I haven't posted as anything but Bite me and Green Eyes for months.
So Melissa didn't tell me anything. Your "manipulation" was amateur and predictable. And essentially consisted of doing exactly what the troll wanted you to, then dancing around in "victory". That whole little speech about gallows and ruining...mwah! Beautiful! I laughed for 2 minutes straight.
Second, you are saying that I want to see you as a narcissist so automatically attribute (and twist) anything you say to make you sound like one? Wrong again. I actually rather enjoy talking to sociopaths and seriously wish there were some on this blog right now (except for that one guy a few days ago talking about being nice to his wife, he sounded interesting)
Have been on this blog for 2 years now and let me tell you, you are a copy of a copy of many a narcissist that has come before (yes, I adore Trent Reznor. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVB_DI4ajKA But I digress)
I agree, sociopathy is anything but cookie cutter. But it is disconcerting just how similarly narcissists talk and react. From the way you speak, the way you react, the examples you give, I see plenty of narcissism, yet not much in the way of sociopathy.
You know what I think one of the main problems with this site is?
M.E. used to be this darkly seductive, mysterious, insightful figure with a fascinating way of seeing the world. And this place attracted some brilliant minds such as TNP, Ellicit and Birdick, sociopaths like Loki, UKan, Post, Piles and Slimey to name a few, who were actually both insightful and fun (they would have torn you apart btw). There were also the sweet empaths who tried to bring love and healing, like Monica. As well as plenty of "slayers" who could be downright hilarious.
But then came the book.
And all the religious crap.
And Dr Phil...
The great mystery of M.E. was unveiled. And found sorely lacking.
And I actually like M.E.
And it turned most of those types of people right off.
As far as I can see, Melissa, with her way of seeing straight through bullshit and telling it like it is, Erik and Mach are pretty much keeping this place from becoming the new Narcissist (and Lunatic) World.
If you can not be convinced with what is right in front of you, after full disclosure, at this point it is because you don't want it.
DeleteBy the way, do you intend on participating in the conversations, or just lurk until you find something that violates your desires? When you became satisfied previously you were content, until you changed your mind. You already knew ME was still the same person before her transparency. But once it happened, you shifted abruptly. And when I gave the transparency, you became dissatisfied with me as well. You always knew it wasn't magic or illusionary, but you behaved as if it was. So it wasn't a delusion on your part. You already knew I was an actual sociopath from previous implicit confirmation. You chose to change the conversation to feel good about inflicting humiliation, since I violated the desire. And nothing I say, or don't say, will change that. Because it never has before you met me.
The wax eloquence and now nostalgic response in your last reply confirmed this. You are not neurotypical, but that doesn't matter in this case. What you need are new sociopaths.
You are an interesting person.
I should correct myself. You don't want new sociopaths. What you want is the perfect sociopath. Once I came across as imperfect, I then became flawed.
DeleteYou are setting extremely high standards for yourself. The likelihood of finding a sociopath that fits your criteria is very low, despite staying here for so long. Realistically, if you want to fulfill the desire, you will have to gradually lower the bar to a high - yet realistic - level. Why live with disappointment when you can become satisfied with the imperfection? Most people have loved for less.
I read M.E.s tweet then this. Youre a demon.
DeleteThat's just it, Bob. I don't need you to convince me.
DeleteYour responses, especially to being ego stroked and challenged have done a good job of that so far.
I do not and have not needed any sociopaths to convince me. It was self evident in the way they carried themselves and the stories of their lives they chose to share. And most of them did not give a damn about the label. They were just themselves.
I think you misunderstood me before. I never confirmed you were a sociopath, I merely told you what I thought you'd want to hear so I could get some more information out of you.
The reason I did not reply to you was not because I was satisfied with the responses, not at all. I actually was extraordinarily busy the past couple of months and simply did not have the desire to get into it then.
I must admit though, that I do love puzzles. Am extremely curious by nature, so wanted to see what some extra pieces of your puzzle would reveal.
Once I see those classic tell tale signs of narcissistic personality, it tends to...disappoint me. That's why I became "dissatisfied" with you.
With regards to M.E., well, it was not really the same person.
More of a catfishing experience. Imagine you are talking to a person online for a while and they paint this picture of a fascinating, intelligent, sexy being. Then you meet them in the flesh. And while attractive, they do not look anything like what they have been describing. They are not nearly as charming. In fact, they are arrogant and self centered. All of a sudden, they start talking about religion. A lot. You start seeing all those contradictions, etc, etc, etc.
You could argue that they are the same person you had the relationship with before, but...they are not. Their puzzle has been solved. And it's disappointing, is it not?
That is why I think that most of the types of people that made this place fun have been turned off.
I do not lurk in this place until something violates my desires. Although I do love the way you put it :)
More like I am inclined to comment only if something interests me, someone has not already said what I would have wanted to and I have the time.
Yes, I always need more sociopaths. More fun. Who doesn't? :)
Well in truth, speaking at this level, I am a sociopath with narcissistic traits. I have never hid that here. So in a way, that does make me an imperfect sociopath. Of course, at that same level, it has also kept me from being so significantly lacking in target areas that I avoid crime. My lack of impulse control is not that exceedingly low. I can't complain about that feature. And to anon, I am no more a demon than you are, if you believe such things.
DeleteI did find the religious talk a little odd, but I can see how advantageous it would be to practice a religion when most people also practice it. Embracing it on the otherhand is the unusual part, because it means discarding certain fundamental rational processes for others (ie. faith) which is asociopathic. Going on Dr. Phil was a narcissistic act (though personally if I was in her position, I would have not done it since the risks exceed acceptable levels). Of course, being an imperfect sociopath, I find her also an imperfect sociopath. Which means you'll have to stay dissatisfied that both of us, as individual and unrelated entities, sit on the granular scale too far away from the extreme to sate your desire for entertainment. Because we possess other traits which pollute the purity and sanctity of the sociopathic ideal.
But again, I can not complain about staying out of prison. Corruption has its advantages.
By the way Green Eyes, what would you do if you had the opportunity to be with your ideal sociopath, assuming chance was in your favor? I'm not the ideal and even I don't feel love or admiration. Would it be sufficient without it, because if I don't, they certainly would not.
DeleteGenuine question.
I just read your previous message. You made me smile :)
DeleteMy standards are high (in many regards) but I in no way expect perfection. I don't believe in perfection.
And I have already told you that I have had the pleasure of meeting and talking to numerous sociopaths on this site, so clearly my criteria has been satisfied many times. None of them were perfect. All of them were rather different. All of them utterly fascinating. All of them fun.
Piles was the one who drew my avatar. Spectacular talent, is it not?
I should add, since believe it or not I do like you, that I did not "choose to change the conversation to feel good about inflicting humiliation, since [you] violated the desire". I simply challenged you in a way that would have inflicted narcissistic injury. To see how you would react, basically.
I do that. Can be a real bitch sometimes.
I am not looking for a romantic relationship, Bob. I am married. To an empath :)
DeleteI seek out sociopaths simply to talk to. I like the way they think, the games, the fun, the way they challenge me and provide insights that I could never get elsewhere.
I have been in a relationship with a sociopath. We almost killed one another. Literally :)
I cannot say whether he loved me or not. After all, how do we really know how someone else feels? All I can tell you is that while it was stormy, he *showed* me love in many ways. No, not with gifts. I am not materialistic.
More that he was (mostly) considerate, put me above all others, treated me with respect, tried to help and encourage me... and it was fun. But yes, there were lies, games and cheating. In the end, I it was a matter of "what's in it for me" and I chose the man who became my husband instead.
I know you intended narcissistic injury, which was obvious in its extremism, but you did not offend. I'm not that narcissistic. If that is permission then consider it given, though that would obviously not stop you anyways. My issue with the anon was in seeing something incorrect - so I corrected it. I type in literal prose with analogies for easier interpretation (due to previous complaints of being too dense in diction to make it obscure, hence the gallows analogy), so that probably significantly contributed to observations of emphatic response. It didn't help that, yes, I gained a level of sadistic satisfaction after being irritated to spin up the anon in an engaging pursuit after irrationally refusing basic reading skills to discredit. That would set off my radar as well. That was genuinely entertaining, including the manipulation disclosure. I did not know you found it more pleasing to see it kept undisclosed, so that is unfortunate for you.
DeleteTake a second look at my previous texts without the standard emphatic radar and you'll find statistically significant regularity in how unemphatic it is to be coincidence. As previously disclosed months ago, I decided to be completely open and transparent of my thoughts and experiences (sans identity), to validate participation to the discussion without the "bullshit". To coin the phrase, read what is on the tin, as in a literal analysis.
Since it is not a lie, it requires no additional effort to maintain a lie. Imperfection and all. This has not changed. And since it is not possible for me to alter my previous responses "post discovery of fraud" it was already proof of proverbial innocence instead of guilt. Hence the irritation. As a conceptually imperfect sociopath, I was irritated at seeing 99% of comments discarded because 1% did not make me 100% sociopathic. It was irrationally absurd. If I really was perpetrating a fraud, I would not have disclosed instances of crying, or anger, or anything else that would suggest non-sociopathic behavior. When people fake something to match something else, they engineer it to match the ideal - to support it entirely, and not give doubt. Frauds introduce flaws to make it realistic so as to cast away doubt, but what they don't do is make it so it actually gives doubt. Since I am real person as a real sociopath, there is actual doubt.
It doesn't make me less of a sociopath. It just does not make me more of an ideal sociopath. Does this make more sense now that it is explained properly?
By the way, I was not referring to romance. I was referring to stimulating connections inside the site.
DeleteI'd say that's rather interesting you see what happened this way.
DeleteI did not discard 99% of your comments for the 1% that did not fit. There were many other considerations.
I think you are highly intelligent, rational and very interesting. I think you know the traits well and have much to contribute, as you do with pretty much every question :) Would not have talked to you otherwise.
I am not looking for any ideal sociopath. There is no such thing.
As I said, the ones I have met on this site have all been rather different. But there was no doubt in my mind that they were all sociopathic.
I guess you and I will have to agree to disagree.
As for the relationship question, I must have misinterpreted it, my bad. When you mentioned love and what if I was to be with this person, I assumed you meant in a romantic capacity.
I guess in seeking out sociopaths I wish a return to the discussions, games, insights, attacks, brutal honesty (I stress the brutal part) and hilarity that this place brought before the big unveiling.
What do you really hope to get from this site?
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteIn this case it is not defense, it is clarification. I am correcting a perceptual error. Remember, sociopathy is not an all or nothing affair, and when you have developed over decades you adapt. It is how you become higher-functioning, which I did not start out as. Remember the two psychiatrists I mentioned? I received cognitive therapy to avoid the same issues that place low-functioners in prison. And, after years, it worked sufficiently.
DeleteAs for impulse control, that has been a lot more fragile than it looks from text alone. I have already self-destructed an education once, and a career twice. Since I recognize the repeated behavior, and can not financially afford another opportunity to walk away, I have forced myself to override the tendency. It is unproductive, and dysfunctional, in this case. Whether it works or not is unknown, since it is a work in progress.
This is why I questioned Green eyes' argument in the debate. This is a debate, which is why I am suppose to defend my argument as the opponent. So why introduce ad hominem attacks on the discussion of sociopathy - in this case, the topic was now about me? This is developed as an adversarial process. It is not personal.
This actually explains it now, because I am wondering why it is coming across as off. To answer your question, and this one, what I get out of being on this site is stimulating discussion in a challenging process - an adversarial process. Since I am the topic of discussion, I am playing a dual role as fact-giver and opponent. Because of this, I have not sufficiently delineated the roles in discussion, which I treat as separate. That all makes sense now, and why the reactions have been this way. It did not make sense before.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteConsidering the conversation has shifted to a less balanced format due to projectioning and personalization, and is not shifting back, then I have concluded my participation in this thread of discussion. When you analyze it again post-mortem, make sure to try the dispassionate third-party analytical method, and you will see what I meant in each response in literal prose. That should clarify the ambiguity.
DeleteAre you denying that you're a narcissist? That's disappointing. Ah well, every quest for self discovery has to start somewhere, I'm sure your journey will be a long and interesting one! See you in other threads under other posts I suppose!
DeleteI don't get the necessity of the questions. No, I am not denying it, nor did I before. As stated more than once, I am a sociopath with narcissistic traits. If you are looking for delineation, it is not the primary disorder.
DeleteThis is a strange quandary. There must be some miscommunication from my end, though I don't know how more literal and unambiguous I can get.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteSo the counter-perception will not change, because they established it. Ok.
DeleteOn Friday it was beneficial for people with other disorders to have a sociopathic mindset because it is empowering. Last Saturday children should be taught there is nothing insurmountable about mental illness. Today most people (especially sociopaths?) don’t have control over their minds. I wonder which way the pendulum will swing tomorrow or next week.
ReplyDeleteMelissaR
I guess you are entitled to think that about her blog posts. we all react differently.
DeleteFor me..Its called life. different direction of roads for everyday. nothing wrong with that. you choose with path works for you daily. which card of hands to play, and how to deal for each situation you encounter. I enjoy her posts. its full of diversity and she is non-judging for the most part. :)
The blog is structured with daily doses of reflection. Mostly something new, everyday. The key is about the daily reflections - to examine and discuss it in the moment. It is not about why the posts exist. They exist. It is about what is discussed and why (or why not) that exists.
DeleteThat was my daily reflection "I wonder..."
DeleteMelissaR
M.E. I understand the impulses. for me its sexual impulse. Im hyper-sexual because of Cyclothymic disorder (less intense bipolar) /bpd traits, (again less intense docs say). Many are with this disorder or even any personality disorder. How do i control my animalistic side that comes over me in a snap - and I wanna fuck the world. Im open with my SO. I do occasionally look at porn, and I do expect having sexual fantasies fulfilled with my SO. There is a line we wont cross. As long as its not harming my SO or his feelings too much. Its A ok.
ReplyDeleteI could be a girl who can have a lifestyle of Polyandry within my home. (I admit) Everything open and honest under all one roof. I know thats not the norm, but 50% of couples cheat.....so Im open with my attractions. I've never physically cheated, but I admit, its crossed my mind. But too many diseases out there and hurt feelings. I guess all that moral stuff too lol. Don't want to be the cause of chaos. ;)
"How do i control my animalistic side that comes over me in a snap - and I wanna fuck the world".
ReplyDeleteIt sounds like you're already doing a good job of this.
MelissaR
Lol, mock me, scorn me..
Deletedo what you do best! good day! :)
Superchick, I meant you are already doing a good job of "controlling your animalistic side..."
DeleteMelissaR
LOL, O, okay, my mistake. my apologies also. internet communication can get a little frazzled at times. :)
DeleteSam Harris makes this argument in his book "Free Will". If you "get" this line of thinking, you stop blaming people and you stop experiencing pride and shame, because all those are based on the idea that there is a "you" that "freely chooses" to do things that are either bad (blame), good (pride) or bad (shame).
ReplyDeleteThe best parts of his book relate to psychopaths like Uday Hussein and how we ought to kill them (of course) while loving them (because they aren't blameworthy). It is a very Epicurean/Stoic/zen approach to things, free of the faulty assumptions that almost all humans share - which is quite sociopathic.
Have you read "The End of Faith"? I'm thinking about getting it. I'm a fan of Richard Dawkins and the work he does for advocating secularism.
DeleteMelissaR
I haven't read it. You might want to study Lucretius while you are at it - science and secularism have their roots in Epicureanism.
Delete"My Genes Did It" by Elijah Wolfson , March 5th, Newsweek
ReplyDeleteThis is an interesting article about the law, genetics, neuroscience, free will, and aggressive behavior. I believe it is also related to Fallon's research, but I'm not sure.
"An extremely high-profile example of how genetics enter the fray can be found in the case Jared Lee Loughner, who was charged with 19 counts of murder and attempted murder, including the shooting of then U.S. representative Gabrielle Giffords. At the time of his arrest, Loughner was visibly unhinged; for months, one of the primary questions of the case was whether or not he was competent to stand trial. Loughner's defense team, led by stalwart capital punishment opponent Judy Clarke, filed subpoenas for the public health records of his relatives, going as far back as 1893. When, during the plea bargain, Loughner's team revealed that a number of his maternal relatives suffered from "extreme bouts of mental illness," their strategy became clear."
"Even if a person is considered insane, proving that person acted without consciousness at any given time - in Loughner's case, at the time of the shooting - is essentially impossible, and can be tough to sell in the courtroom. On the other hand, if there is something in the person's genetic history that might indicate a tendency toward violent or otherwise crazy behavior, it makes a strong case that the person should not be held fully responsible for his actions. Loughner ultimately avoided the death penalty; he was sentenced to life without parole as part of a guilty plea bargain. Clarke will also be defending Dzokhar Tsarnaev, the man accused of carrying out the Boston Marathon bombing."
http://mag.newsweek.com/2014/03/14/genes.html
MelissaR
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteIncarceration is general is limited as a behavioral modifier to those with sociopathy. Executing them would eliminate the conflict source. Incarceration would not really fix it. What would be needed in this case is therapy on top of incarceration, so that when eventually released they are not in the same (or worse) condition they were before being imprisoned.
DeleteErik, I think it could impact many kinds of mental illness in the criminal justice realm. I really don't have an opinion of it. But it does sound intriguing.
ReplyDeleteMelissaR
Is there a link beetween the lack of sympathy and the
Delete"lack" of impulse control?
I assume when you mean sympathy, you meant empathy? If that is the case, then it is hard to say. There are various regions of the brain which contribute to each other when it comes to the deficiencies, but conceptually they are different. I am unaware of any studies that test the link between the two. That is a good question.
DeleteDon´t think "lacking self-control like raving maniac" is on the "how to recognize mr Psycho" list? Then surely the case kind of closed? It was established that hollow folks are impulsive (this can mean they wanna do it right now but don´t) but they did not stray into the land of the psychotics but knew exactly how to control their urges. Most master the art of "strained patience", understanding that juicy stuff can become even juicier with time, a calculated strategy for sure..
ReplyDeleteThanks for your help anon 2:58. "strained patience" is a good description. I also think that pedantry is an unspecific feature of sociopathy. And they seem to identify with Aikido, martial arts, Zen type archery, religious systems.....Are they are searching for a "higher" system as a guide or for virtual gratifications? Maybe a coincidence.
Delete"Foaming mouth fury" when carefully laid papers on the desktop gets in disarray due to "bumbling interference" by cheerful clown may be a "yes indeed" on the "psycho or not"-list? Sounds very likely. Maybe "thought maps" rule hollow folks days, where they´ve (in tiny detail) planned their route, what store to visit and exactly what they´re going to say, perhaps practiced in advance in the bathroom mirror while shaving? Would be interesting if some "pro" could confirm/demolish these groundbreaking new theories..
DeleteOr that person has OCD, or Autism. The trait alone is not enough.
DeleteAlso be mindful when using the term "Psycho". "Psycho" is short for "Psychotic", not "Psychopathic". The two are distinctly different, even though they share spelling.
I wrote all the comments M.E. quoted. In my youth when I was busy working or chasing after things, I wouldn't have been reflective enough to notice and write about that stuff, although it would have resonated with me (due to the content and tone).
ReplyDeleteThis is one upside to having blown up my career - a bit like M.E. - when you aren't continually chasing after things, feeling frustrated, etc, you've actually got time to reflect on what it is like to be alive.
Thich Nhat Hanh mentions in a book that people in 3rd world countries are more relaxed.My take: their economies are hobbled by corruption and low IQs, so people have more time to relax, because they aren't telling themselves, if I start my startup or get that new job, I'll be rich and famous, and then I'll get the women, cars, clothes and then ...
In the first world, it is a radical act for an educated smart person to purposefully blow his or her career up to the point thathe or she has years to contemplate things. Sociopaths are a lot more likely to wind up in that position, for various reasons.
Empaths too. That's one thing we have in common with psychopaths.
DeleteMany people mis-use the term empath, taking it to mean 'neurotypicals'. Being capable of empathy doesn't make one an empath. Empaths are people with surplus empathy who can feel another person's pain and have to make an effort to tone it down or they end up consistently putting loved one's needs before their own.
The good news is most careers are over-rated. If ME was brave enough to admit it, she probably feels relief at no longer having to traipse in to law lectures week in, week out. So long deja vu. On some level, she probably wanted this outcome.
If it was done on her terms, it would be. Wouldn't you?
DeleteThe loveliest aspect on earth are upright persons. Upright behaviour should become our goal. Mind candy is for light weights.
Delete