Tagged: aesthetic sensibilities Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • GeneticPsychosMom (Tina) 11:41 on May 20, 2015 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: aesthetic sensibilities, , , , , , , failure, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , success   

    What makes a successful psychopath? 

    James Renard manipulation quote

    This discussion came about because, in one of his comments on Meet the Parents of a Psychopath, James said,

    “…childhood is no doubt a critical phase in anyone’s life, so it stands to reason a properly-guided psychopath will be more successful and less destructive later in life.”

    Tina: I need this clarified, James. What do you consider to be a successful psychopath? All of the psychopaths I know, (over 20), are destructive, but in different ways. My definition of success does not allow for the scheming manipulation tactics being perpetrated on unsuspecting victims. The resulting devastation stays hidden. So, I am of the mind that psychopaths can’t really be termed successful by societal standards. What is your view of a successful psychopath?

     

    James: OK, well first of all I should note that I don’t agree that the tactics a person decides to use can have any bearing on how successful they are deemed. Let’s take CEOs of major corporations as a group. Some of them will have used manipulative or underhand tactics to get to where they are now. But these individuals are no less successful than their more honest peers, indeed they may be more successful. You can say that you don’t believe it is morally right for individuals to manipulate their way to the top but that is not the same thing as saying these people are not successful; any CEO of a major corporation is clearly very successful.

    James log assault quoteNow that’s been cleared up, I can answer your question. My conception of a successful psychopath is one who is able to adequately function in society. He or she has or is working toward a productive career with a decent salary, he is able to fulfil his physical, sexual and emotional needs, she does not behave in a way that will get her incarcerated. Unsuccessful psychopaths live on the margins of society, unable to control their behaviour or to fit in, or are currently behind bars for long periods of time. Successful psychopaths live within society, benefit from it and provide it with benefits. Some of them, as we know, get to shape and change their society due to the position they have attained within it. This is my definition of the most successful psychopaths.

    Just to clarify things further, you have said quite clearly what your definition of success does not include, and I have explained my opposition to that particular view, but would you mind giving a definition of what does constitute success in your mind?

    Tina: I am one of those hippies that does not admire people simply because they are titled in any regard, whether that be a CEO or some kind of royalty. A person is successful by achieving a goal by their own work, on their own merit, and they are not successful when they get something through inheritance, secret manipulations, or abuse. I look down on deceivers, even more so than I look down on people who do not try. At least people who do not try are not causing pain. There needs to be another word besides “success” that defines a person who steps on another to achieve their appearance of phony success. Maybe Phuccessful.

    Ok, returning to psychopaths…

    What you have described as a successful psychopath is just a regular member of society. Apparently the psychopathy makes success in that regard a constant struggle. For a psychopath, it takes a concerted effort to just be a member of society?

    I agree with you on that point, but the underlying aggravant to me is that the so-called successful psychopaths of today are merely successful at hiding their psychopathy. They are taking advantage of people’s ignorance by pretending to be of the same mindset. To be truly successful, in my opinion, would be to go forward into the world with your psychopathy well-known, and actually be a regular member of society, not a pretender. For example, Sam Vaknin and James Fallon have found ways to be successful. I am not talking about the fame, but rather the fact that they must forever more interact with other people without the secrecy.

    James: Sorry, not letting that first point go just yet! I agree completely people who inherit titles or privileges are not benefiting from their own success. But I have to disagree with you that manipulators are not deserving of their success. It is after all, in your own words, “by their own work and on their own merit”. If one of my skills happens to be that I am good at manipulation, that skill can contribute to my success regardless of how your morals sit with it. Success is not defined as being admired by Tina Taylor. Success is having (enough) happiness, fulfilment, wealth, power or status (to satisfy yourself). (I say ‘or’ because different things attract different people. I am not too concerned about either wealth or status but I sure do covet the other three).

    So, back to psychopaths…

    Yes, we are in agreement here. If a psychopath can lead an ordinary (or an extraordinary) life without being imprisoned, then he or she is successful, in my books at least. However, in order to do that we are unfortunately obligated by society to remain hidden. The way I naturally would like to behave and the things I would truthfully like to say do not reflect society’s expectation of me and would result at best in my exclusion and at worst in my incarceration.

    Bob Dylan success quote

    Nah, scratch that. The worst case scenario is that I would be murdered at the hands of an angry mob of normals. The way to be a “regular member of society” is not in my case total honesty, it is to lie and pretend. If I was being completely myself right now, I would be writing more or less the same thing, but it would resemble the word soup of my ‘stream of thought’ post and there would be a lot more expletives; I would be typing every insult to you that is running through my head as they occur to me. But, you wouldn’t like that. It would spoil the working relationship we have. And it would not be in keeping with the spirit of a reasoned debate. In the same way, if I was entirely honest in my every action and sentence, I would be a long way out of what society deems acceptable. For society, lying is not the problem, it’s everything else. My dishonesty is as much for society’s benefit as it is my own. Do you understand?

    With regard to your specific examples, Sam Vaknin is not publicly a psychopath. The filmmaker of I, Psychopath  [Ian Walker] clearly thinks he is, and the way the film depicts him we’re left in little doubt that he is one, but Vaknin himself does not claim the title. In his own words, he is a ‘malignant narcissist’, which as we know means more or less the same thing as ‘psychopath’, but in the eyes of the public there is a difference. The film also shows that despite people knowing he’s a narcissist or psychopath or even both, he still controls his long-term partner’s every thought and still plays manipulative games with the filmmaker. Your idea that the games would stop if only psychopaths could admit what they are is a fantasy. Look at the film, Vaknin says “I am a narcissist” into the camera, gets diagnosed with ASPD on camera, and talks about his condition with the filmmaker, but still charms, bullies and manipulates him whenever he can.

    Then we’ve got James Fallon (Jim Fallon? Jimmy Fallon? That would be a turn up for the books…). He was already a well-known and well-respected neurobiologist (or whatever he is) before he ‘discovered’ he was a psychopath. And, like Vaknin, he subsequently made a career on the back of his discovery plus the fact that he has the expertise to (claim) to be making a difference to people’s lives and contributing to the total sum of knowledge of the condition.

    I do not have that luxury. Neither does almost every other psychopath. My academic specialisms are philosophy and the French language. Can I use my psychopathy to be better in these fields? Certainly. Would my public declaration that I am a psychopath help my career, or would it in fact destroy it before it has even properly begun? Vaknin can say “I am a narcissist, but don’t worry because I am actually using my personal insight into my condition to be one of the leading voices on… what topic again?? Ah yes, narcissism!” Fallon can say “I am a psychopath, but don’t worry because I am actually using my personal insight into the condition to improve my chosen field of work which oops! just happens to be the study of psychopathic brains!” Contrast with my situation, as an example for the situation of most psychopaths. I cannot say “I am a psychopath, but don’t worry because I am using my personal insight into the condition to translate this French legal document into English for you.” So my success does not just benefit from dishonesty, it depends on it.

    If that isn’t enough to be sinking your teeth into for now, let me raise a further point which could perhaps determine where this conversation goes next. I am not completely defeatist. I am not arguing that just because it is currently nigh on impossible for psychopaths to live openly, it will always be so. It’s a societal issue like any others. If attitudes change, if people are educated, it could happen.

    As a side note, have you ever considered the increasingly psychopathic nature of society that you have noted is part of that change in attitude?

    Arne Tiselius quote

    Tina: I have noted the lack of empathy in society, but I don’t think it is increasing. I think people in general are the same as always – oblivious and aloof, except for caring about their community circle of friends and family. I saw a poll that says 45% of people support the drone bombing of other countries to fight ISIS. Would those same people support the bombing of their neighbors because the Charles Manson cult was suspected of hiding in the neighborhood? People can be very shitty when it comes to “outsiders”.

    I do happen to think that the number of psychopathic leaders are increasing. I think that the number of psychopathic ideas being forced upon us by mass media is increasing – and that has a lot to do with the psychopaths who own the media.

    It is not morals, nor a sense of fairness, nor envy that have me anti-manipulation. Stomping on manipulators is survival instinct. People want to eliminate psychopaths, not because it is the moral thing to do, but because the manipulation is life-threatening. Since phuccess is dependent on threats, it is not just Tina Taylor who disagrees. You don’t even like manipulation, nor threats, yourself.

    James: So I’m concerned that we’re getting seriously off-topic here, that is to say no longer discussing how psychopaths can be successful in society. Perhaps that is my fault for posing the question I did at the end, but all the same none of what you just wrote is a response to (or even an acknowledgement of) what I said about psychopaths needing to lie to stay hidden. Instead we’ve gone all violent, talking about “eliminating psychopaths”, “stomping on manipulators” and using a made-up word with dubious connotations.

    I am intrigued by what you mean when you say “(I) don’t even like manipulation, nor threats, yourself”, but other than that I have nothing further to add until we’re back on track.

    Tina: I already gave my opinion on psychopaths remaining hidden. It is what psychopaths are successful doing. It is what psychopaths will try to continue doing, because that is the crux of your success. If I was in your boat, I would not want to stop hiding, either.

    In your own words,

    ” I would be writing more or less the same thing, but it would resemble the word soup of my ‘stream of thought’ post and there would be a lot more expletives; I would be typing every insult to you that is running through my head as they occur to me. But, you wouldn’t like that.”

    Nobody likes that, whether they are psychopaths or not. You are trying to control yourself, however I feel free to express myself as I am. I believe that you have a skewed interpretation of the world – thinking that society is holding you back, when it is really coming from yourself. I, myself, am free to write things “talking about “eliminating psychopaths”, “stomping on manipulators” and using a made-up word with dubious connotations.” Should I stop? Why? Because you don’t like it? Because society doesn’t like it? Note how you are the one trying to be “proper”. Why is that?

    Let’s go to the childhood upbringing. Successful psychopaths learn to hide their lack of empathy and conscience from an early age. What develops after that? Holding yourself to an extreme form of controlled behavior and blaming it on society?

    James:  “I already gave my opinion on psychopaths remaining hidden.” Yes, in a private exchange. Not in this discussion, which is supposed to be made public at the end of all this.

    Alright, we’re back on track, though I note a change in your tone that means I’ve irritated you somewhat. It’s fine, you’ll probably deny it in your next reply, but I know it’s there. I digress.

    “Nobody likes that, whether they are psychopaths or not.” – Well that was my point, people wouldn’t like the completely honest version of me. But let me clarify something. I don’t think society is holding me back, I’m still going to be successful, with or without a ‘coming out party’. Yes there are certain limits on my behaviour, just as there are different limits on yours, but I can live with that. And I don’t blame society for the way it is; even so I can wish it to be different.

    “What develops after that?” Simple, we learn how to mimic other people’s behaviour and to appeal to their needs and desires. Yes, this is  necessary for ‘social survival’. No, I don’t especially like it. But I have benefited from it enormously. A turning point for me was when I worked out how to make people laugh. Intentionally and consistently I mean. Of course I’d done it before, but it was always hit-and-miss and often unintentional. And that didn’t come until surprisingly late, I was probably 15 or 16. So afterwards, once I could have people in stitches on a whim, the other things like charm and social grace and all that bullshit slotted into place. There is no better way to dehumanise someone than by realising you can control their thoughts and feelings through words alone.

    It would be natural for me to end on a question to pose you. Since I don’t have one, perhaps we are nearing the end of this discussion? I’ll let you have the last word on the matter, that is if you yourself have no further questions.

    Tina: I really don’t feel irritation. I am just blunt and succinct by nature. In fact, my father (a phuccessful psychopath) was the one who was irritated with me at age 13 when he said, “You are too truthful.” Many people don’t like the way that I talk because it “hurts feelings.” The truth hurts. That is not something that you, nor anyone else, has any influence on. It is all me, I am unique, and I like it.

    (It is odd that psychopaths don’t latch onto that fact, – if you want to hurt someone, just tell them the truth. I don’t like to hurt people. So, why don’t I curb myself and lie more? I like to be myself more than I like to please others’ sensibilities.)

    So, your view is that people wouldn’t like the completely honest version of you. The honest version of you enjoys dehumanising people. You would not be able to dehumanise people if they knew that was your intention. In private, you told me some things that reveals that you have caused grievous emotional harm to other humans. Unsuccessful psychopaths are not liked because everyone can see their antisocial side. My conclusion, therefore, is that your success at being secretly antisocial depends on your acting ability.

    Were you even tempted to go run amok and leave an undeniable path of violent destruction? Is there a point in time of your childhood when you made a conscious decision to care about your life direction? What is your ultimate motivation to be successful by your definition? (I was going to ask you why some psychopaths don’t concern themselves with being liked, but antisocial behavior is not a domain of psychopaths only.)

    Bruce Hood self-control quote

     James:

    “(It is odd that psychopaths don’t latch onto that fact, – if you want to hurt someone, just tell them the truth.)”

    Yes, and the ugly truth hurts even more when it follows a series of beautiful lies. Just remember that, if you ever change your mind about hurting people.
    “The honest version of you enjoys dehumanising people”. Nah, I didn’t say that. The “dehumanising” line (“There is no better way to dehumanise someone than by realising you can control their thoughts and feelings through words alone.”) refers to how people can be dehumanised in your head, i.e. they become less than human in your eyes. It’s not something that actually happens to someone else. Sorry that wasn’t clear before, I was touch and go on the wording of that particular sentence and it looks like I got it wrong.

    “In private, you told me some things that reveals that you have caused grievous emotional harm to other humans.” Did I? What was that then? You can publish me word-for-word, if you can find the text.

    Your conclusion is on the mark, however. I am still tempted to this day, Tina, but I have committed to living life free and happy so I restrain myself. Actually the time I decided was just before I learned how to make people laugh, in fact it was the catalyst for that discovery. When I realised the negative consequences my poor behaviour was having on my well-being (namely, people were starting to hate me for being a ‘creep’, frightened of the physical pain I enjoyed causing, among other things), I turned things around.

    “What is your ultimate motivation to be successful by your definition?” What does that mean? Are you missing some punctuation or is it just poorly written altogether?”

    (I was going to ask you why some psychopaths don’t concern themselves with being liked, but antisocial behavior is not a domain of psychopaths only.)” Very true, it is not. As for what I’d have said, I couldn’t care less what other psychopaths concern themselves with; that’s not my business.

    Tina:  That was a poorly written question, but you got the gist of it. It was answered by your commitment to living free and happy.

    In some of our email exchanges, you had revealed the grievous harm of changing someone’s life path for the worse.

    (You had written, “Just a shame the ladies on LoveFraud can’t do the same as you; get over it and stop being bitter that you lost years after the fact.”)

    I replied: “It took me 10 years to get to this point and I will never “get over it”, so I can’t fault the people who are suffering endlessly. The consequences of loving a psychopath are forever. Every facet of my life was adversely affected. I had big plans. I had goals. I had dreams. I had hopes. I thought I was making progress in life, only to discover an all-encompassing scam. People like me (neurotypical) have an identity that is firm we don’t have the luxury that you do to change on a whim. My life decisions, very important directions I was taking in my life, were based on false information. It all could have been avoided. There was absolutely NO REASON for the trickery. It’s not just a few lies, it’s a whole illusion. My identity was flushed down the toilet and the man is lucky to be alive.”

     

    And your response: Big Bad Wolf and Little Red Riding Hood photoOK, point taken, it’s hard work to recover. That would explain why my last one dropped out of her degree in our excellent university.”

     

     

    Formerly titled ” Phuccessful Psychopaths (Who are they?)”

    Peter Pan and Captain Hook Photo courtesy gavinodd’s Bucket

    Little Red Riding Hood and Big Bad Wolf photo courtesy of PsychopathsandLove

     

     

    Psychopath TEST Politicians

    Advertisements
     
  • James 16:22 on April 23, 2015 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , aesthetic sensibilities, altruism, , , , , , snark, Yahoo woohoo yippee ki yay   

    Is it safe to date a psychopath? 

    Not loving these ugly blobs of grey all over the page. It’s all because I’ve quoted an external source, but here they fuse with the border around my French graffiti picture to create something hideous. Dear readers, please know I did everything I could to tone the effect down, but failed miserably. We’ll just have to accept the grey is a part of all our lives now. 

    So I recently came across this question on Yahoo! Answers:

    Is it safe to date a psychopath?

    Mille mots d’amour, version psychopathe. 

    I know that most of you will ask me, ‘Has this person been formally diagnosed?’
    And yes this person has been.
    Even if they hadn’t been, they show all the signs of being psychopathic.

    What (if there is any) way is the best way to date a psychopath without getting hurt too badly?
    [I get that there will be hurt somewhere along the line, but that happens all the time.]

    Frankly, I respected the cautiousness of the OP, but still I thought she (you can tell from the writing tone it’s a she) retained a certain misguided idealism that was ripe for popping. My answer:

    Oh yes, we make really considerate partners.

    We never manipulate or sweet-talk you into doing things for us. We don’t threaten or abuse our ‘loved ones’ and we don’t pressure you into doing illegal things with us. We definitely don’t choose the gullible and the easily dominated as partners and we would hate to hurt you physically or mentally. We promise to love you and be there for you forever, to remain faithful throughout the relationship and we swear there will never come a time when we get bored of you and chuck you away like last night’s takeaway.

    What’s more, we always tell the truth.

    (https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20150217075103AAyFqIN)

    I’ve made a habit of answering psychology-related questions on that website. I am helpful at least twice as many times as not, though I’ll admit sometimes I abuse the format and lack of proper admins to mess with people. This answer is a little bit of both, as although the message is clear enough, I was obviously in a sarcastic mood at the time. Obviously.

    I get just as much satisfaction from helping as harming, as whether one or the other, I am influencing somebody else’s life. It’s a power thing. What’s interesting is that I have noticed other psychopaths doing the same, for example the sidebar of my question links to this little gem https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100414134339AAtEIwU

    So, contrary to popular belief, psychopaths can be wilfully helpful, despite apparently not possessing any altruistic tendencies.

    Are you surprised? Has your worldview just been radically altered? Do you have lots of opinions and a big mouth? Then leave a comment below!

     
    • A Psychopath and a Scholar 16:06 on April 24, 2015 Permalink | Reply

      Psychopaths can make great partners, the issue is just figuring out whether they actually care for you or not. I’m a psychopath and my two longest relationships were opposite. With one, I actually liked the person and I was honest, didn’t cheat, and did my best to be a good partner. With the other, I just needed a place to crash for awhile, and I never even liked her and lied constantly. However, they couldn’t tell the difference. If you’re paying the rent or the relationship is all about sex… you’re probably being used. Psychopaths can “care” for someone though, it’s just on a logical level rather than an emotional one.

      Like

      • James 18:13 on April 24, 2015 Permalink | Reply

        So you didn’t make the one you disliked subconsciously miserable. Would you mind explaining, for the benefit of our readers, what you mean by logically caring for someone?

        Like

        • A Psychopath and a Scholar 18:58 on April 24, 2015 Permalink | Reply

          Logically caring for someone is much like friendship. In this case, I liked who the girl was as a person. She had characteristics that I respected, and she was enjoyable to be around. Because I respected her, I treated her as well as I could. In the case of the other girl, I was obviously just using her. Both of them I broke up with, and both of them would take me back. I didn’t destroy their lives or make them miserable. I only made them sad when I left. Not all psychopaths are out of control. Just because I wouldn’t feel bad about hurting someone doesn’t mean that it makes me feel good or that I hurt everyone I can. I don’t feel bad or good outside of the physical sense. I just do what makes sense to me. I’ve never had a girl break up with me or even realize that I was a psychopath. In fact, people generally love me as long as I pretend to be normal. A psychopath dates people for one of two reasons: either 1) it benefits them, or 2) they enjoy being around the person. If a relationship isn’t benefiting me, than the only reason I’d be there is a genuine logical attraction, and that is stronger than the chemical attraction that goes away after 1-3 years. I still like that same girl from 7 years ago and I wouldn’t have left her if I didn’t have to move out of state.

          Liked by 1 person

          • @GeneticPsycho (Tina) 19:32 on April 24, 2015 Permalink | Reply

            Physically makes me queasy. I wouldn’t live in an emotionless void like this for a billion dollars.

            Like

            • James 19:45 on April 24, 2015 Permalink | Reply

              What is it about his answer that makes you feel queasy? There’s nothing unusual here. He didn’t mistreat the girls. He even liked one of them, without any additional benefits. What’s your problem?

              Like

              • @GeneticPsycho (Tina) 20:14 on April 24, 2015 Permalink | Reply

                Dating someone is an emotional investment. You depend on your chosen one to look out for your best interests. You depend on your partner to share truth. It is supposed to be mutual, not one-sided. It must be the off-balanced aspect that makes me queasy.

                Like

                • A Psychopath and a Scholar 22:08 on April 24, 2015 Permalink | Reply

                  Genetic psycho, you have to remember that being emotionless is not a choice that the psychopath made. It is simply our nature. You want us to attempt to fit into your emotion-driven society, but then we are the bad guy because we pretend to be nice? My nature, like most animals, is to kill anything that threatens me and to take what I need and want. The fact that some of us attempt to “fit in” is something you should be thankful for. Your emotion is based on what you were taught, not what is in your nature. Your nature is the same as mine, I just don’t feel guilty for not following unnatural norms.

                  Liked by 2 people

                  • @GeneticPsycho (Tina) 22:40 on April 24, 2015 Permalink | Reply

                    I am not trying to make you fit. I accept you the way you are. In addition, I was not taught emotion, I was raised in a family of backstabbing psychopaths.

                    Like

                    • A Psychopath and a Scholar 22:52 on April 24, 2015 Permalink | Reply

                      It seems that you are under the impression that all psychopaths are bad people – no doubt due to the fact that your family hurt you emotionally. Nature is only part of the story though. All people live based on what they believe to be “right”, and that comes from their own observation of the world. Some psychopaths want to burn the world, some want to save it. But there is no shortage of emotional people who have guiltlessly killed in the name of god or country. Everyone justifies their actions, psychopath or not. Hurting others may not make us feel bad, but it also doesn’t make us feel good. Like everyone else, we do what is right in our own eyes.

                      Liked by 1 person

                      • @GeneticPsycho (Tina) 23:01 on April 24, 2015 Permalink

                        I would not use the word “bad.” I judge on behavior, not inherent neurology. The people who have done me wrong are on my shit list, but not all psychopaths in general. I love my family, from a distance. i don’t give them the opportunity to mess with me because I know what they do to each other. And as far as violence goes, that is not a psychopathic trait. I am probably more likely to be violent than you are, if I react badly. Society’s all about treating people right, so we can all have peace. Not about whatever thoughts are in your head. I don’t have pure thoughts, so what, I’m not going to go around hurting people. Psychopathy maybe puts the thoughts in your head, but you don’t have to act on them.

                        Like

                      • A Psychopath and a Scholar 23:18 on April 24, 2015 Permalink

                        But alas, what behavior is unacceptable? Your desire for peace speaks of your fear/insecurity. Not that this is bad – most people feel the same way. However, nature provides us with no reason to believe in right and wrong. We are all designed to kill. To survive. In Vietnam, the slaughter of puppies for food is normal and good, whereas in the U.S.A., it is wrong. In some places, cannibalism is acceptable, and in others, it is horrifying. What is “right” and “wrong” is based on what you believe. Nature only commands us to survive and procreate. In today’s society, the weak have merely banded together to fight the strong and give themselves a better chance of survival. Psychopaths are stronger willed, and thus at a disadvantage in today’s society. Your idea of society is built on submission, but mine is built on freedom. Freedom and safety are opposites though, and one cannot have both.

                        Like

                      • @GeneticPsycho (Tina) 23:22 on April 24, 2015 Permalink

                        Fear and insecurity? Huh? Peace means leave me the hell alone and I won’t shoot you. That’s peace to me.

                        Liked by 1 person

                      • A Psychopath and a Scholar 23:28 on April 24, 2015 Permalink

                        Peace isn’t realistic. Nature demands that we kill in order to survive. Everything that gives you calories was once alive. Even if humans don’t kill each other, they have to kill something. And realistically, we’re designed to fight each other over the best food and mates. I actually have a full article about this on my blog if you’re interested. You feel defensive because I said you were afraid, which seems to be an insult. It isn’t an insult though, just an observation. Almost everyone is afraid. This is why people worship gods they’ve never seen and are kind to people they don’t like. Everyone’s nature is violent, most just try to ignore it to feel safe. If there were no punishment, we’d all be killing each other.

                        Like

                      • @GeneticPsycho (Tina) 05:33 on April 25, 2015 Permalink

                        Peace is realistic. I am atheist.

                        Liked by 1 person

                      • A Psychopath and a Scholar 11:27 on April 25, 2015 Permalink

                        I’m not sure how being an Atheist has anything to do with the probability of world peace, but think what you like.

                        Like

                      • @GeneticPsycho (Tina) 11:48 on April 25, 2015 Permalink

                        According to your statements, everybody is restraining themselves from killing, and only holding back from fear of punishment. BS. Your views are projections of yourself on others. Nobody is like you. Nobody is like me. During this conversation you are putting adjectives on me such as fearful, and insecure for no reason whatsoever. You made those up in your head. You are the one who brought religion into the conversation like that was proof of mass fear. Fear is not as big of a deal as you try to make it.
                        I was not insulted, I am just none of the things you are trying to ascribe to me, therefore, your attempts to converse don’t sound logical at all. The world is not a black and white place where there is all peace or no peace.

                        Liked by 1 person

                      • A Psychopath and a Scholar 12:09 on April 25, 2015 Permalink

                        Analyzing people is what I do, so I tend to point out motivations like fear. And everybody IS restraining themselves from killing. Everything you eat was once alive. You’ve probably never killed, but only because you’ve never had to. Someone killed every plant and every animal that you eat. They were slaughtered, sometimes in “inhumane” ways, just so you could sustain your life a little longer. This is not a projection, but merely an observation. You are afraid and angry from being emotionally hurt, but you still have a lot to learn about the world. Death and hurt is the nature of this place. For one life form to survive, it must take the energy of another life form. It is a cycle. Ignorance to that only puts your emotions on a roller coaster.

                        Like

                      • @GeneticPsycho (Tina) 12:58 on April 25, 2015 Permalink

                        Again, you make statements about me that are off the wall. So what I eat meat, and so what I will kill. BIG DEAL. Your points are useless. Doesn’t make me hurt or angry or afraid. Why do you insist on assigning obscure “analysis” on me or anybody else? You don’t know how little sense you make?

                        Liked by 1 person

                      • James 12:59 on April 25, 2015 Permalink

                        You sound angry to me :/

                        Liked by 2 people

                      • @GeneticPsycho (Tina) 13:02 on April 25, 2015 Permalink

                        I am laughing because dude is entertaining me.

                        Liked by 1 person

                      • @GeneticPsycho (Tina) 13:03 on April 25, 2015 Permalink

                        Pardon me, I need to leave and go out on my fear-induced killing spree now.

                        Liked by 2 people

                      • A Psychopath and a Scholar 13:27 on April 25, 2015 Permalink

                        I analyze everything. I have an IQ that is higher than Einstein’s. As for why I called you hurt, angry and afraid: You felt the need to tell me that you were “raised in a family of back-stabbing psychopaths.” If you only wanted to say that you were not taught emotion, than you would have simply said “psychopaths” without adding the adjective. You called them back-stabbers because they emotionally hurt you and you’re angry about it. (Side note, you still learned emotion from school, tv, the internet… somewhere someone taught you emotion.) You also said “Society’s all about treating people right, so we can all have peace.” You then claimed peace was realistic because you are an Atheist… your logic is horrible. You even made obscure claims like “I am probably more likely to be violent than you are.” You feel defensive because you pretend to be strong to hide your pain, and my calling it out is interpreted as a threat. The fact that your replies are poorly put together and constantly mention anger over being labeled as something suggest that you are emotional as you write them. The problem with people like you is that you are so afraid that you cling to your beliefs as truth. You don’t seem to care to possibly learn anything. Debates are meant to enlighten, to show people something that they might have overlooked. There are holes in your logic, and I am illuminating that for you. If you were logical, you’d analyze my statements and possibly use something I said to better understand yourself. The true thinker is glad to be wrong occasionally, because this means that they’ve now learned something that they didn’t know before. I’ll quit filling up this guy’s comment section with unrelated comments, but you really should think about the things I said. Might help your logic.

                        Like

                      • @GeneticPsycho (Tina) 23:01 on April 25, 2015 Permalink

                        All you are doing is assigning traits to me that don’t apply. It’s like me sitting here and telling you that you have big fangs and beady eyes and that’s why you are angry and hurt and afraid. Nothing you say makes sense since you are making it all up. I called my family backstabbers, not because they hurt me, they did not, I watched them do it to each other. I witnessed the actual stabbing of backs. Is that plain and logical enough for you. However, I don’t think you will understand, and you will continue to tell me how afraid and hurt I am. You have no idea. But at least you provide insights into the psychopathy disorder and how it colors your thoughts.

                        Liked by 1 person

                      • A Psychopath and a Scholar 23:37 on April 25, 2015 Permalink

                        Tina Taylor… you seem to think you know so much about psychopaths due to being raised with them, and yet you say you were married to a psychopath. Didn’t see the signs? Yet you claim to be an expert on spotting psychopaths? Your sporadic job history and poor logic seem to hint that you have some issues of your own. Perhaps borderline personality disorder would fit? 5 months ago you were a luxury cruise consultant, and now you seem to fancy yourself to be a psychologist. You petition to use psychopath tests on politicians, and yet any research would reveal that psychopath tests are inaccurate, because we can fake emotion and our brains will light up like we feel it. It’s unfortunate that a woman of your age is still trying to figure out her life. But some advice – trying to make a living by attacking psychopaths is not a great career plan. Especially with your personal information so readily available online. I hear some of us are crazy 😉

                        Like

                      • James 23:48 on April 25, 2015 Permalink

                        Alright, Hannibal.

                        Liked by 1 person

                      • A Psychopath and a Scholar 23:52 on April 25, 2015 Permalink

                        Lol. I have to admit, I have been compared to Dr. Lecter before. It’s really just logic though, I enjoy enlightening those who care to learn, and mocking those who are ignorant. I’ll attempt to quit filling up your comment section, it’s just… laughable and disgusting at the same time. It’s interesting to taunt people who are ignorant of their ignorance.

                        Like

                      • @GeneticPsycho (Tina) 00:53 on April 26, 2015 Permalink

                        Boo hoo my feelings are hurt. You win. I am a crazy person who doesn’t have a clue. You are such a great teacher and I have a spotty work history and live in a box on the street. I am a bum, begging for scraps, and you are the mighty knower of all things. Oh, the pain in my heart. Oh, the pain, Now I see.

                        Liked by 1 person

          • James 19:40 on April 24, 2015 Permalink | Reply

            I fail to see the difference between “logically caring for someone” (as you see it) and any other type of “emotional” friendship. If you like someone, you like them; that is emotion not logic. When you apply logic to a relationship, you treat your partner in a manner that pertains to achieving your goals. There is no caring involved.

            Like

            • A Psychopath and a Scholar 22:00 on April 24, 2015 Permalink | Reply

              I think the difference is that I have to work to treat someone well. My nature is to do what is best for me. I have to make an effort not to lie or manipulate. Emotional people will feel bad if they hurt someone, but I do not. If my best friend suddenly hated me, I’d simply move on. There is no connection that makes me need them. So for me to be honest and treat someone well, it has to be because I really want to. Not because I feel attached or feel guilty, but because I logically want to treat them well.

              Like

              • James 22:11 on April 24, 2015 Permalink | Reply

                Of course I understand the logic of “I like you so I want you to stick around, therefore I need to treat you well”, I apply the same logic with people I like, no need to explain. But the fact that I / you like someone at all is emotion, not logic. It’s okay to admit it. Psychopaths are not robots.

                Liked by 1 person

                • A Psychopath and a Scholar 22:15 on April 24, 2015 Permalink | Reply

                  I guess it depends on what you consider to be emotion. I often am “angry” which is an emotion, but I never raise my voice or get excited. It’s a different type of emotion. I don’t feel anything, I think it. If I’m angry, it’s because I analyzed a situation and felt that someone was disrespectful. It’s very emotion-like, but some people would argue that it isn’t real emotion. But I agree, psychopaths are not robots. We just aren’t emotionally weak.

                  Like

                  • James 22:28 on April 24, 2015 Permalink | Reply

                    Yes, that’s more like the way I think about it. There are many ’emotions’ which I consider to be more states of mind or thoughts, that perhaps to others are real feelings. ‘Surprise’ is a good example. For me, being surprised* is just recognising something unexpected has happened, and deciding how to react, there’s no feeling that I associate with “being surprised”.

                    *startled / shocked / whatever else

                    Liked by 1 person

    • @GeneticPsycho (Tina) 19:36 on April 24, 2015 Permalink | Reply

      I would never again date a psychopath. Way too much work.

      Liked by 1 person

    • littlebitcold 08:42 on April 25, 2015 Permalink | Reply

      Thanks for such a great article. People can use the label ‘psychopath’ who are just users and you are a number to them something they can mock for their entertainment and they have no good intentions at all. If you can’t respect someone then you should be by yourself rather than even consider dating.

      Liked by 1 person

    • nowve666 12:35 on December 25, 2015 Permalink | Reply

      A Psychopath and a Scholar: Do you really believe emotions are taught? Did I get that right? I think emotions are inherent. Even babies show emotion. Perhaps empathy is taught. People don’t show that until they are old enough to have been “educated” a bit.

      I agree that most people kill to live. But not fruitarians. You can eat fruit without killing the plant. Of course very few can live that way.

      James: I would reply to the question if it’s safe to date a psychopath by saying dating isn’t supposed to be safe. Every time one connects to people, even just to go out with them, one is taking a chance. One is also opening hir life to new possibilities. I think a completely safe date would be boring.

      One of the great things about dating psychopaths is the danger. Even Robert Hare said an encounter with a psychopath could be thrilling. Coming from him, that’s a big admission.

      Like

c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel
%d bloggers like this: