Friday, November 16, 2012

On killing

This was interesting:

"There are no atheists in foxholes," the saying goes, but according to this important book there are many conscientious objectors. In World War II and before, only 15 to 20 percent of soldiers fired their weapons at enemy soldiers in view, even if their own lives were endangered. Lt. Col. (Ret.) Grossman, a military historian, psychologist and teacher at West Point, builds upon the findings of Gen. S. L. A. Marshall in Men Against Fire (1978) and confirmatory evidence from Napoleonic, Civil and other wars. "Throughout history the majority of men on the battlefield would not attempt to kill the enemy, even to save their own lives." (p. 4)

* * *

The compunction against killing occurs in close combat situations, including aerial dogfights where pilots can see each other. It does not prevail with killing at a distance by artillery or bombing from airplanes. Machine gun teams also boost the firing rate because individuals cannot simply pretend to fire or intentionally mis-aim. In aerial combat one percent of pilots made over thirty percent of kills; the majority of fighter pilots never shot down a plane, perhaps never tried to.

* * *

In the U.S. Civil War, well-trained soldiers fired over the enemy's heads, or only pretended to fire. Of 27,000 muzzle-loading muskets recovered at Gettysburg, 90 percent were loaded, almost half with multiple loads! That could not be inadvertent. Further evidence was the low kill rate in face-to-face battles. Like Marshall's assertion about World War II, "Secretly, quietly...these soldiers found themselves to be conscientious objectors who were unable to kill their fellow man." (p. 25) The secrets were well kept, in "a tangled web of individual and cultural forgetfulness, deception and lies tightly woven over thousands of years....the male ego has always justified selective memory, self-deception, and lying [about] two institutions, sex and combat." (p. 31)

* * *

About two percent of soldiers lack the killing inhibition; they score high on measures of "aggressive psychopath." Another one percent in this diagnostic category cannot endure military discipline. Grossman says the adaptable two percent serve well, return to civilian life and function as good citizens.


  1. Those who can’t choose between their life and the life of others bother me. Why can’t they make up their minds in a timely manner?

    Like in WAR time, where choices like that should be made before the situation is actually at hand.

    It's always the majority of them that have trouble with the whole “me or them, life or death, victim or victimizer” moment of truth.

    If you can't don't know if your life is worth keeping then why even pretend to fire?

  2. Consensus these days is, that Grossman is a fool, and that guy S.L.A. Marshall whose research his thesis is based upon invented most of his data concerning the frequency of soldiers firing in battle. At least, there are no original documents. And I doubt that on the eastern front, German soldiers did not fire their weapons when faced with a drunken SMG-toting horde of pissed off Russians.

    It is kill or be killed, and most people have a pretty sharp self-preservation instinct.

    I have read a number of war memoirs, and while no people wrote they actually liked the war, a lot of them wrote that they had no problems shooting or bombing people. Are there any reports of aviators refusing to drop bombs, or refraining from strafing whatever moved, if given the orders?
    That is equally personal, though probably harder to resist. I bet flying a fighter plane makes someone feel like he is a god, especially if no air defense is around..


  3. "Those who can’t choose between their life and the life of others bother me. Why can’t they make up their minds in a timely manner? "

    In the vast majority of cases this is not a problem in modern times.

    Through training and because of human nature, most soldiers endure extremely well, battle and giving logistical support to battle.

    PTSD very rarely derives from kill or be killed events. It is more likely to be from instances of extreme imbalance of power and the abuses that can result. Group of soldiers, angry because a friend was recently killed, walk into a civilian area and murder a family or rape a girl. For most members of that troupe, there will be a long term price to pay in terms of PTSD..even if they partake at the time.

    Obviously the same is true for victims of abuses, but again, less frequently than you might think. Generally, if you were powerless when something happened, and clearly wasn't your fault, then you get over it. It's feeling responsible that kills a person inside. This is why victims of sociopaths can be so devasted.

    It's interesting few if any sociopaths here have managed to confront this reality without falling into line with disparagement and putdowns of the victim (on some level they wanted it, didn't they? sure.)

    1. "PTSD very rarely derives from kill or be killed events. It is more likely to be from instances of extreme imbalance of power and the abuses that can result. Group of soldiers, angry because a friend was recently killed, walk into a civilian area and murder a family or rape a girl. For most members of that troupe, there will be a long term price to pay in terms of PTSD..even if they partake at the time."

      I think this is why snipers are a special breed:

      Snipers choose to sneakily kill guys that aren't an immediate threat to them. It takes a special guy to be able to do that, again and again, and feel totally OK with it.

    2. I never blame my victims. I know what I am and take full responsibility for my entertainment :)

  4. "It's interesting few if any sociopaths here have managed to confront this reality without falling into line with disparagement and putdowns of the victim (on some level they wanted it, didn't they? sure.)"

    Making this point doesn't breach any of the realities of sociopathy. It's possible to ultimately not care, not feel bad about it, but still have the clarity to understand a core strategy is to make the victim lose confidence in their ability to judge, and from there to ultimately feel responsible for what happens. Yes, this is what all sociopaths do, regardless of their differing impulses (different impulses explains why some sociopaths are fairly ok to know and non-violent, for an example).
    But there is nothing in sociopathy that makes it hard for the sociopath to acknowledge he is responsible and the victim is a victim. This unwillingness to take responsibility is a secondary effect deriving from weakness. It is extremely common in sociopaths of course, because the vast majority of them are weak. So common, it is actually listed as a 'trait'. But it's not fundamental, that is the point here. It can and could be seen beyond, at least intellectually.

    Other points about sociopath nature that have broadly gone uncommented here, are the way they interact among themselves. Note, that most criminal sociopaths, absolutely hate sexual pervert sociopaths. A sexual pervert sociopath will be made the bitch of a criminal 'hardman' type sociopath.
    This is an extreme example of a more general point that is interesting. Sociopaths victimise eachother. A sociopath of one variety, can be a victim of a stronger sociopath, just as easily as a non-sociopath. This happens a lot in the workplace. In such scenarios sociopath 'underdogs' are actually MORE likely to suffer worse than empaths...becuase they feel the humiliation and rejection much more deeply...if it's gainst them personally.

  5. "Other points about sociopath nature that have broadly gone uncommented here, are the way they interact among themselves. Note, that most criminal sociopaths, absolutely hate sexual pervert sociopaths...sociopaths victimise eachother. A sociopath of one variety, can be a victim of a stronger sociopath, just as easily as a non-sociopath."

    Are you over looking the fact that many commenters known on this blog, or used to comment on here, have victimized each other for no real reason, was that something that you didn't take into thought before making that statement?

    Or was that statement really a message to ME, begging for him/her to write a post about it?

  6. YS:

    You say that Grossman is discredited. I’ve love to see a link which demonstrates that and why. And since I so often have to spell this out, I am not being argumentative or attacking your position or what not. I’d love to see where and how Grossman is completely inaccurate. Thanks.

  7. Damn, I hate Mondays. I’m really going to have to do something about that…

    I went back and read the article linked in the post. It was interesting. It seems uncontroversial to suggest that people with normal consciences and average empathic ability have a hard time killing other humans. Of course, it also seems uncontroversial to point out that some of these same people get around their consciences by “dehumanizing” the enemy, making it a lot easier for them to kill. In fact, I imagine modern militaries have turned training techniques designed to help soldiers bypass any moral qualms they might have about killing into an art form. Finally, it seems uncontroversial to suggest that people with little to no moral conscience to speak of also have little to no problem killing in cold blood. Some of them might even thoroughly enjoy it.

    I didn’t get the point of this comment:

    “It's interesting few if any sociopaths here have managed to confront this reality without falling into line with disparagement and putdowns of the victim (on some level they wanted it, didn't they? sure.)”

    Unless Sobriquet’s interpretation is correct, in which case, I agree with him. Unless Sobriquet’s interpretation is correct, in which case, I agree with him. I think it’s possible, maybe even probable, for people to know damn well that someone is hurting because of actions they took, and just not giving a damn. In that sense, the would be sociopath is taking complete responsibility for his actions. It would be nicer for the “victims”, however, to take responsibility for their own emotional state. You can only be a victim when you believe with all your heart that your internal state of affairs is entirely dependent on what other people do or say. That is the essence of victimhood as far as I'm concerned.

  8. Ignore that double sentence thing in the last paragraph. Like I said, it's Monday.

  9. DB

    Interesting thought on victimhood. However say you are walking on the street someone pushes you into a car and beats you up. Meaning you have no autonomy since youre pushed into a situation that seems very clear cut to you. You thus surrender to you fate at that specific moment. I think it would be right to than call yourself a vicitim. Emotionally this could happen too. That might be hard to imagine though, but if you have youre autonomy taken away when in all reasonableness you took precaution. Say I live with my boyfriend and I lock a closet/cupboard, in it is my diary and he breaks it and reads it. That would suck and hurt my trust towards that person. I am than actually a victim of his controlissues. If I stay one ( a victim) only depends on what I do afterwards. Get what I mean?

  10. but it is instructive, defining even, just how little interest any of you show in the general subject area of your victims. What people here do have to say seems to be divided between mocking and contempt.
    but it's has a way of giving people what they deserve, even if they don't know they are being punished. Hey, maybe that's another good rationalisation for victimising people? Could work, specially with the low threshold of self honesty you get round these parts.
    But what price is life making sociopaths here pay? Sad lonely people in the end. The minority of successful psychopaths who live full lives, is probably similar to the chances an actor will end up like Tom Cruise. The rest are waitors or worse, and the same is true for y'all.

  11. Disney:

    I used my words in my previous comment deliberately. I said you can only be a victim when you believe certain things. Who you believe you are has less to do with actions other people take, harmful or helpful, as you know. Or at the very least, other peoples actions are not the omnipotent identity "decider" as too many people assume. I am using the term victim here to describe powerless states of mind that people often adopt in response to other people’s actions. The point I was making has more to do with the story you tell yourself about other people and their actions toward you. The story is the thing. Love frauders rehash how they were hurt time and time again to keep their identity as a victim in place. If they believe that a victim is who they are, they will begin to carry themselves that way, talk that way, live that way. Eventually someone will come along to help them validate their sense of themselves as a victim. After all, who is the victim without their victimizer? I have zero pity for victims in the sense I am talking about.

    Last anon, voice of voiceless victim, when you're ready to have a grown up conversation, let me know. Save your moronic, moralizing missives for the unthinking majority. Ok, I admit it. I typed this last response to give myself the excuse to alliterate.

  12. DB

    Right I get what you mean. I personally am disgusted with people who ooze victimhood and wouldnt have the urge to be their victimizer so to speak. In that sense I just dont get victimizers. Why would you kick someone who is already down? Why would you hurt someone who you feel have control over anyhow.

  13. I agree with Disney. I don't understand people who will hurt and hurt over and over for no reason - there is no gain left, there is no power left to take, there is no favour to grab - so why continue?

  14. Disney and FD:

    People want different things. There’s always a reason, it’s just one a lot of people don’t get. Some people really do take satisfaction out of kicking victims when they’re down, beating up children, torturing women and so on. The pleasure is what they gain. I’m not as familiar with the psychology behind that though, so it’s hard for me to speculate. I do find bullying, especially the unthinking, physical kind, distasteful. But that’s just a personal preference and not a moral judgment.

  15. DB and FD

    Right. Yeah. I am interested in it. I dont know why. I find it fascinating the things people do, especially secretively. And the frameworks they come up with to conceal their urges. Most of the time I find it boring and a bit disappointing when the underlying motive is just trauma repetition. Thats just sad and pathetic and shows so little insight in themselves.

  16. One only has to take an honest look at the battle of Antietam, particularly, the action in Miller's Cornfield to see what absolute BS this post is. 17,000 men fell that day, 10,000 in the cornfield before 10:00 am. As for Gettysburg, the bloodiest battle in the western hemisphere, ever. Somebody was shooting at somebody.

    Also take a look at the wilderness campaign, and the "Angle" at Spotsylvania where the hand to hand combat was especially brutal.

    See Stephen Sears' Landscape Turned Red, and the Guns of Gettysburg by Fairfax Downey. This reading is not for weak stomachs.

  17. Disney said, “Most of the time I find it boring and a bit disappointing when the underlying motive is just trauma repetition. Thats just sad and pathetic and shows so little insight in themselves.”

    Well then you must find most everyone boring and sad and pathetic. You cold, wicked woman. ;)

  18. Disney & FD:

    You know, it just occurred to me to speculate that the real difference between me and people who get off on, say, beating their girlfriends/children or killing women and don’t feel guilty about it, is not morality, obviously, but imagination. I have it, they don’t. As PP said in another comment somewhere, power is power. It’s literally amoral. (And as I said, it doesn’t really exist without someone submitting…) You can “make” someone do what you want them to by literally bullying them, threatening them, hitting them and so on, or you can manipulate them. The latter takes much more thought, finesse and yes, imagination. The former is just brute strength used in a way that I would find stupid. Anybody can take a gun and go rob a liquor store. But not everyone is capable of making a person dance to your own tune without them even knowing it. I can’t speak for anyone else, but I think that’s a key for me. Imagination and thought.

  19. DB

    I still feel bad for those people! Honestly the hurt in the world abstractly speaking does make me sad sometimes. I like to joke and fool around and manipulate people who are asking for it ( or at work when I dont respect someone and it has a purpose, that goes quite naturally), but close people I respect I can only be brutally honest with, as I actually want them to see me as I am. And I do believe I am a good person. Whatever that may be.

  20. Disney:

    Don't retreat into normal speak, especially if you're going to include comments about taking pleasure in manipulating people who are "asking for it". There aren't too many that aren't asking for it, are there?

    Tragically, I don't know many people that I respect enough to be only brutally honest with. I respect the former head of our division for instance, because he's made it obvious in subtle ways that he's smart and he knows how to play the game. But although we know each other, we aren't friends and I'd lie to him in a heartbeat if I had to. I'd have to be more careful with him though. Otherwise, there isn't anyone in my offline life that I respect so much that I'd never lie to them.

  21. And Disney, I just had another thought. I've come to the point where the only person who needs to see me as I am is me. That's probably part of the reason I don't have a "hunger" to be with another person in my offline world. In fact, I don't think I've ever really needed anyone to see me as I am, to keep using your words.

  22. DB

    hm. I wish I had that, but nope I like figuring other people out and have true interaction. even though i stand the chance of be disappointed by knowing them more...

    the only person outside family i truly showed me 100% and never held back was an exboyfriend I was with for a couple of yrs. i did respect him. he never bored me either. problem was he was in contact with the law too much ( he wasnt a sociopath though) and it gave me too much hassle (i dont come from a background that that would even remotely be viewed as normal, the lawbreaking I mean) so i broke up with him, i did tell him if he bettered his life we would be fine, but he didnt better so I had to cut him loose. he still isnt over me and i do still think of him with nice thoughts but once ive decided something i do just move on.

  23. DB wrote "You can “make” someone do what you want them to by literally bullying them, threatening them, hitting them and so on, or you can manipulate them. The latter takes much more thought, finesse and yes, imagination."

    Birdick, can we have a reality check please. You are a middleaged, failed insurance salesman.

    Worse, even though you are in a serious financial and personal crisis, you are spending your time talking (endlessly) on a sociopath list...because let's face it, it's only the sociopath angle that makes you even remotely interesting.

  24. Goody! Another anonymous comment attack. We can never get enough of those here. But a word from the wise. If you wanna make these comments really bite, you’ve got to gain more insight into the person you’re attacking. That way it’ll do actual damage. As it is, you’ve demonstrated that you haven’t been paying attention, or if you have, you’ve gleaned nothing real, so your attack is unfortunately for you, off point. Keep trying though. You’ll get there.

  25. Db

    goody, lol! its so hysterically lame. ' a failed insurance salesman' uh oh! right through the heart i bet. oh man.

  26. Do you see what they did there, Daniel. They tried to hurt your feelings. Come now, stop crying, I know it hurts too bad. Oh, don't listen to The Fray, it will only make you sadder! You need that cup of tea and hug I mentioned earlier.

  27. FD & Disney:

    Tis true. My heart weeps with the agony of it all. First I am ignored by all of the best commentary terrorists this blog has attracted, then when I am finally needled, it's by this sharpest of sharp anons, the most incisive of the endless throngs of anons! My wound may never heal. The pain is unendurable, gut wrenching, stomach boiling... Wait, never mind, I just have to take a dump. See ya in a bit.

  28. DB

    Talking poop. The solution to almost everything. And I know.

  29. I'm a reader of these blogs, one of my e-mail messages is posted in the blog author's blogs.

    I don't normally comment, but this blog interested me.

    Although I still find this a little odd to be true, the fact that most people are so indesisive is upsetting to me. People are so sensitive towards another it nearly depresses me beyond comprehension. This aspect of humanity makes me even more isolated, for all my life I always took necessary initiatives in order to achieve my goals. These initiatives I took were just that, nothing but initiatives...but whenever I would explain them to others, I found myself being morally scrutinized and rejected.

    ...Of course, this occured when I was younger and oblivious to social concepts, but I profoundly remember what I felt at that moment...and to say the least, the feeling wasn't enjoyable. That moment was one of the turning points in my life when I became conscious of the fact that I was different.

    Aside from that, reading the comments of some people somewhat disturbs me. Not much is known about our condition in relation to other conditions, so why do we bicker amongst ourselves with pointless reasons? Why don't we help each other by learning more about the other, and therefore in turn learn more about our condition?

    Now, were this in real would be much different. In real life I make an effort to sniff out all potential and certain "enemies", but this is not real life, this is the internet...Let's take advantage of the fact there are others like ourselves in the "viscinity" and learn from each other...and in doing so, we may perfect our given advantages.

    Trust me (Hahaha), I understand how fun it is to poke holes in ego's and making people feel less of themselves...but that's what chatrooms are for.

    May I suggest


  30. Birdick-
    I know you've done "extensive" research on your condition. Have you ever considered yourself to be more on the schizoid side of the spectrum? Some of your comments make me think as much...
    Just some food for thought...and a reference...

  31. Dear Anon:

    I am indeed schizoid. And I am a narcissist. And a psychopath. I am also quite normal. It all depends on who I'm talking to and which of my comments that person chooses to focus on and why.

    Thanks for the food for thought though. How'd you know it was dinner time? ;-)

  32. Dear Birdick:

    I am familiar with your take on the whole labeling idea. You're not into it and it goes something along the lines of "you are who you are and can be whoever you want depending on **fill in the blank**.
    I think thats the jist..

    On the more serious side though, maybe I shouldve worded it differently and asked if you think you may identify more with the characterstics of a schizoid than a psychopath based on the referenced article. Think about things you've most recently said
    about your personal relationships (outside of work).

    Dessert for thought...:)

    And p.s. Please try to use more sophisticated words next time, youre not holding up to the daily vocab lesson you promised...

  33. Actually “anon”, the truth is I “identify” with myself. I didn’t read the article you linked and I don’t plan to because I already know that there are superficial personality or lifestyle traits that I share in common with the so called schizoid personality “disorder”. Been there, done that, bought the t-shirt, took it back. But here’s the bottom line and my final word on the subject: I am not sick, twisted, pathological or psychologically “disordered” in any way, on any level. The reality is I transcend those labels. I am perfectly sane and entirely clear headed. In fact, I see far more clearly than most people. To repeat myself, I am what I am, no more, no less. As always, you and everyone else are free to think of me in whatever way you care to. Or not. Either way, I’m golden. That’s my real opinion of my personality.

    And now, "anon", you shared that article with me because...

  34. Daniel Birdick said...

    "I've come to the point where the only person who needs to see me as I am is me. That's probably part of the reason I don't have a "hunger" to be with another person in my offline world."

    I'm at that point myself. I see so many people offline that crave affection of others and it boggles me because I personally don't need others on that level. I realize that my comment is being written far later then Daniel’s, but whatever.

  35. Hi. My name is Peter Pan. You might recognize me from shows like, "I am super logical and sane," and "Nobody is as awesome as I am." I've also made guest appearances on, "Emotions do not affect me," and "Life is like a box of sheep." I am super logical and sane, and nobody is as awesome as I am. Furthermore, emotions do not affect me, and I firmly believe that life is like a box of sheep.

    You always know what you're going to get.
    Ha. Ha. Ha.

    I also have an amazing sense of humor.

    I extort money out of automobile pilots to earn a living, and in my spare time, I post about how super logical I am on a website dedicated to sociopaths. I also post about how nobody is as amazing as I am. Also, I post about how life is like a box of sheep.

    I bet you were thinking I forgot about how emotions do not affect me. Ha. Ha. Ha. The joke is on you. Ha. Ha. Ha. Emotions do not affect me. Ha. Ha. Ha. Thus, I do not care about what you thought. Ha. Ha. Ha. You probably didn't get that joke. Ha. Ha. Ha.

    Also, I like to stick my dick in bottles of peanut butter.

  36. Well Peter, you're dick needs to stop raping the sandwich mix, it sets up discomfort for the other foods, your preference has revealed that you are gay, because peanut butter is similar to the feeling of shit, thus your prefer assholes to vaginas, but don't fret, you are a boy, someday you'll be a real man...jiffy?

    Now where did I put my jello?

    --mike hawk

  37. Mike Hawk,

    Maybe he likes vaginas with lots of venereal warts and yeast. That could account for the peanut butter remark.

    Otherwise, I think the two of you are kicked out of the man club for fucking food.

    Self-examine, fools. You might be asexual foodies.

    Fucking wackos.

  38. Fishin' for love are ya, Harriet?
    I'm afraid you'll be dateless tonight, but don't let that discourage you.

    There's always hope.

    Mikey, shut your prude, bitter face, and loosen up a little. Fuck an asshole. Shove a beer bottle in your woman's pussy. Wear leather. Dress up like he-man. No matter what mommy and daddy might've told you, having a little fun doesn't make you gay, immoral, or disgusting.

    Next time you're workin that same hole with the same little rod for the millionth time, remember the old saying: All work and no play makes jack a dull fuck.

    Experiment. Explore your sexuality!

    Who knows, maybe one day you'll come back and shout, "Mikey likes it!"

  39. Peter Pan,

    Thanks for the laugh.


  40. You're welcome as always, my dear.

  41. Dirty, sweet Dirty...I was Mike Hawk. Oh, and I don't fuck food.

    Peter, I guess sorry is the next step, though I can't say it, seeing how you called me prude and bitter. If I said it, that'd be proving you wrong and you're never wrong are you?


    I get what your saying about sexuality, I'm not gay, just...gayish...that kind of thing, right? No, I’m joking about that too. I do get what you are saying though and I agree.

  42. Daft, I knew that was you.

    It was written in your typical "because xxx" "thus xxx" explain-everything-because-the-relationship-is-too-weak-to-understand-otherwise-thus-nobody-can-understand-it-which-means-you-list-out-entire-chains-of-unclever-drivel-that-really-stand-out-hence-I-knew-it-was-you style.



  43. Once again the sociopath blog owner makes the mistake of believing that killing inhibition is a trait of the empath. Killing inhibition is the trait of the extreme empath, the type of empath that has panic attacks and shell shock. The psychopath who enjoys killing is on the other end of the extreme. The focus on the extremes of the spectrum ignores the reality.

    In reality psychopath and empaths kill, but they kill for different reasons. The psychopath kills because he can, the empath kills because he has to. The killing inhibition is more related to Christianity in my opinion and is a symptom of a combination of thorough brainwashing often by the enemy force, and the fact that most people regret having to kill and very few people sociopaths included actually enjoy killing for the sake of killing.

    The question to ask which would determine a psychopath from an empath would be to ask whether the killer enjoyed killing. If the individual is having regrets about killing so many people then they aren't a psychopath. Psychopaths would brag about having killed many people the same way a sport hunter brags about their kills.

    But when it comes down to it, killing is as easy as breathing air or stepping on a bug. It only becomes difficult when you think about it too much, and if you are truly scared such as when someone is shooting at you and shooting to kill, you'll remove them from your reality and then deal with the consequences later. Thats a rational decision for any living mammal.

  44. " Those who can’t choose between their life and the life of others bother me. Why can’t they make up their minds in a timely manner?

    A lot of people don't care about their own lives. Then you have people who do care about their lives but due to a neurological disorder their reasoning abilities shuts down and they freeze up. We all know people like this and these are the people whom society must protect, or at least thats what an empath would say.

    Some people are psychologically unfit to protect themselves. Like children they must be protected by others who are psychologically able to handle the situation. I think sometimes this psychological condition is created by the flawed ethical system of Christianity which says "Don't kill" no matter what the reason. You also have deontologists who believe in absolute right and wrong which says no matter what the situation is you cannot kill. The software has bugs in it and so the hardware is not optimized. If you change the software or you program a child at a young age to be a "man" or a "survivor", they'll have the psychological tools to handle any situation when they reach maturity.

  45. Fascinating. They won't even kill to defend themselves or their buddies. How very sad.
    At least you can count on the 2% to get the job done.

  46. I killed someone. Killing does nothing for me.

  47. Thomas did not have the natural grace and charm of ME but the subtleties were just that--subtleties.

    To the uninformed eye, Thomas could pass just fine.

    There was something in his nuance which was a little coarser, a little more raucous, as if a melody was played slightly off key.

    However, he was a good actor and he needed money, badly.

    He had UKan breathing down his neck for a gambling debt.

    Once a week UKan visited him and it was not pleasant. UKan intruded himself into Thomas' rarefied life with a thud.

    UKan brought his equally rough wife, Kany. They told him that the next time they came, Thomas would be missing a tooth.

    Thomas was very vain about his appearance, which was as close to perfection as they come.

    You can imagine the chagrin Thomas felt about UKan's upcoming visit and no 10,000 dollars with which to greet UKan.

    ME knew the story and promised the 10,000 as a good faith payment for Thomas' upcoming project with Monica.

    Thomas had to get Monica to second base, at least, for the 10,000. Third would be better.

    Thomas had 3 weeks. His first appointment with Dr Monica Moo was today at 3 PM.

    Thomas would see Monica twice a week for his "problem" He still had not figured out the problem he would fabricate.

    Maybe, he would just tell the truth.

    To be continued.

    1. LMAO @ "Dr. Monica Moo" LOL! That had me cracking up!

      Nice friday edition of "Up from the sofa"!!!

      Off to save it right now ;)

    2. Theme Songs for "Up From The Sofa" Characters

  48. Rich
    You are so adorable :D

  49. M.E. Good article

    Many people have trouble with killing. I for one hate killing, anything; bugs, rats and mice included. There is shrubbery in the nearby homes that attracts rats. Had to kill some and my whole body shook from the experience of discarding them. I had to program myself with the realization that they are in my space and they are not wanted. That helped.

    1. In the above 5:59 I left out the fact that in taking care of my soul - it in turn takes care of me.

  50. I havent read through all the post here, but the figures of warriors unwilling to "pull the trigger" are what prompted Grossman's research and subsequent books "On Killing" and "On Combat". This research was instrumental in HOW the military trains to desensitize people into being able to commit "horrible" acts of violence on another human. The targets used to teach and practice shooting went from big "bulls-eye" stye to human silhouettes… there's more but this is getting long.

    In short the number of warriors unwilling to "pull the trigger" is nowhere near the number it used to be. For what it's worth, I have seen the same young man on Monday straight rocking and rolling, slaying bodies as need be… on Tuesday that same young man might be huddled in a ball of tears in the face of friction… Wednesday he will be right back "getting some".

    I have said that I think it is very advantageous for the military to find persons with low to no empathy for others to do our nation's dirty work… because in the end of the day, even if you condition someone to "pull the trigger", if he wasn't like that before and he goes out blows peoples heads off, then you bring him back home and tell him to go work at Lowes or your local electrical company… he's going to have some serious problems later on.

    1. "For what it's worth, I have seen the same young man on Monday straight rocking and rolling, slaying bodies as need be… on Tuesday that same young man might be huddled in a ball of tears in the face of friction… Wednesday he will be right back "getting some"."

      I've seen this too, outside of the military, but in similar, hyperviolent/dangerous scenarios.

  51. I met this ex-military guy who has killed in three different occasions since he's been back in the name of self-defense. In the first case he killed a dumb ass guy coming down his fence. In the second and third the same story... just some guy who was walking towards him that he chose to warn not to get close because he had a gun out of he blue. Both guys had guns and provoked him, like the two goats crossing the bridge. He shot them dead. All three cases went to grand jury, and he got out of them all.

    1. You never heal from PTSD.

    2. You should never use absolutes like "never".

    3. You never heal from PTSD.


  53. where is Rembrant kid?

    Curious about RemNovember 15, 2012 2:58 PM
    Rem, forgive my ignorance. What's xd?


    More curious about RemNovember 15, 2012 3:01 PM
    Rem, this was a very profound thing to say:
    "what do you do when you can do anything."

    If you can really do anything, can you prove yourself and the world that you can actually be very glad to have been born and can start the day with the cheer like Rich does, and feel it in your bones without and crutches Rich uses, such as drugs/alcohol/mum?


    1. Don't fuck with Rembrandt you're showing your PD loud and sadly unproductively. Try again.

  54. This chart, opinions ?

    1. Thank you for the link. This would definitely be in line with what ME has been saying here, at least the way I interpret it. It is also in line with both the legal system and the psychlogical profiling. And it leaves rom still for a further classification of high functioning psychopath vs low and high functioning sociopath vs low.

    2. I've been spending some time with a couple of friends who are very sociopathic, all signs are there from lying fo rno good reason to no conscience or empathy. These people are so light and so much fun at one level that I want to do things for them, and I do. There are times they try to manipulate me to get what they want, and when it is not something I want I just don't do it while sticking to the unaware sheep role. If the manipulative efforts become one too many I take time out, the best way for that is to tell them I am depressed. Somehow they are under the impression depression is an everyday ailment for empaths, plus they know depression because both are occasionally depressed from boredom. Both very promiscuous and impulsive in shopping as well.

      My overall feeling is that if one is aware one can practice a sense of calm whether the others are sociopath or npd, what not, and it all seems to boil down to time management and occasional irritation control.

    3. Just sped read comments. Little time here I have a mark to work. But glad someone here can spell "definitely" . That's it for now. You lovelies carry on. It's a busy Time in Lunar Life. Oh one thing, fascinating wreck tonight on the highway of Hell. Guy came screeching up behind this girl as we sat gridlocked. She got scared then rammed the shit out of a car in front of her. Moral of story she ass fucked when she should have let that guy ass fuck her.

      Yeah nothing to do with this dialogue. I said I'm tied up well tying someone up. Momentarily.

    4. There is no such thing as a clear-cut Sociopath, let alone psychopath. Until they expand their research past the prison population, all this shit is just speculation from a very limited pool of empirical data.

  55. why shoot your enemy
    when your ellies are so mutch easier to hit
    (we all know in war ther are no rules)

    1. and most of the time you know if they have anny money on them

    2. SW deduction servicesNovember 16, 2012 at 12:07 PM

      deduction... ellies are allies where you know if they care money most of the time...

    3. now i know why i don't wanne see my dad no more lol

  56. Narcissistic good guy... from narcworldNovember 16, 2012 at 12:12 PM

    Here’s a narcissistic “good guy”.

    He’s fit, principled, bold, maverick blah blah blah.

    As I read his story, I tried to think, “what do his coworkers think?”

    They probably think the guy is a kick-ass, obsessive, crazy guy, who will do whatever it takes to do what he thinks is the right thing to do. Respected, envied and perhaps feared, but disliked. Intensely disliked for acting like he’s better than everyone else.

    In another bio about the guy, I read that he was a Ranger – or some other crazy type that jumps out of airplanes to get the bad guys.

    That is, he’s kinda psycho. But he gets the job done. And he looks good without his shirt on. And he knows it.

    In some sense, the guy is better than everyone else. Just look at how he much ass he’s kicked; if only he could act awesome and remain humble, he’d be more likable. This is one problem that gifted narcissists have: they win and win and win. It is hard to act normal when others treat you like you are special.

    If this guy was more sociopathic, he’d be in touch with what his bosses and coworkers wanted. He’d be more focused on looking out for himself – by doing whatever was called for – than making personal sacrifices for his own “bullshit principles”.*

  57. Damn Sociopaths LOL!

    When the game was over -I remembered feeling this way before. When I was 9 years old, my cousin and I played a 24 hour game of monopoly and he won by $200.00. I was pissy all day until my younger sister told me that he had taken $2000.00 from the bank and hid it in his shoe when we opened the box. This was the feeling!! Not only did i lose the "game" but he won before it even started. If I told people he cheated or in this case he is a sociopath, they would merely think I was a broken hearted poor loser.

    Staying true to my philosophy of All is fair in Love and War, how could I hate him for out smarting me? This is not to say I aspire to be conniving, devious, or lack empathy.

    Just pissed off I lost!! :p

    1. It was Monopoly. Geez. You were 9. Seriously. :-P

    2. "Just pissed off I lost!!"

      Sounds like she's still 9

  58. So maybe we keep a few around and have the rest processed?

  59. Socios count on the fact that normals can't pull the trigger, that's why they mess with people. I can tell you this, my socio left me damn near destitute, if I don't come out of this he's going down with me the last face he see's will be mine I'll be pulling the trigger for sure. Then the game will be over it's a level playing field then. Coward! Bring it! Now that I know your a brain damaged freak you hide!


Comments on posts over 14 days are SPAM filtered and may not show up right away or at all.

Join Amazon Prime - Watch Over 40,000 Movies


Comments are unmoderated. Blog owner is not responsible for third party content. By leaving comments on the blog, commenters give license to the blog owner to reprint attributed comments in any form.