Thursday, August 21, 2014


I enjoyed reading recent comments comparing/contrasting how sociopaths think/feel about what they do vs. empaths. Often people cite the sociopath's lack of guilt as a reason for thinking that they are inherently more dangerous than people who are capable of feeling guilt and empathy. The problem with that is that empaths seem perfectly capable of turning off their guilt and empathy when it doesn't suit them, e.g. slavery, Holocaust, any of the thousands of genocides, any of the millions of wars. And as one commenter put it:

I wonder though, now that you have learned that the perfectly normal person can in the proper circumstances not just do worse evil than the sociopath but ENJOY it and rationalize it as a MORAL victory, do you find that MORE horrifying? When I do something evil at least I know it is evil. I don't get emotional satisfaction out of it. It might give me a momentary intellectual thrill. The "normal" person though who has been given societal absolution for the evil? The get enjoyment out of it. They get excited. btw Anon. They=you. Yes you personally. You want to remove me personally from society because I MIGHT cause harm. I have in my lifetime saved well over 50+ lives. I do charity work. I am making the world a better place DESPITE the fact that I get Nothing out of it emotionally. I do it because I follow my moral code. If we were both put in a position where we were released from societal consequences for causing harm to others and told to kill a stranger (like in war) I would be LESS likely than you to do it. Think on that. 

So the sociopath never receives the same sort of emotionally driven self-justification for doing bad things, just an intellectual thrill. But people seem to find that thrill more scary than the the ability to blindly follow someone to rape, kill, and maim in the name of some higher good.

The other thing that people find disturbing about the sociopath is that he does good things but not for the "right" reasons:

I do good things, I do them because they are right. I don't do it because it makes me feel good or because it makes me feel morally superior. I do it because I know what I am and I want to be something better.
I believe good and evil to be actions. Seriously, fuck all the moralizing crap, you are what you DO. You have time after time defended empaths who do evil or do nothing (in Tii's example) and reviled anyone who believes socio's are redeemable with an astounding lack of logic. I have no bones with holocaust deniers, to each their own own conspiracy theory. I subscribe to a few myself. I find them a good intellectual exercise. However, I have noticed a particularity about you that I need to address. 

Another commenter makes a similar point:

I have witness a kid fall of a train platform, thank God for him it wasn't too fast. Every one around made a commotion and took out there phones and cameras. No one tried to help, even the mother just watched while screaming and crying desperately. Only one to act was yours truly, Mr Sociopath. I jumped down and pushed him back up, not because I was happy to do it, not because I cared what happened to the kid, and not for the glory or gratitude (I care about that less than the kid). I only did so because it would be a shame to die so young, and because I couldn't stand those idiot empaths hypocrisy. The mother barelty noticed me I didnt even get a word of thanks, the other fools just clapped, it got me so upset (the clapping) I had to leave the platform. Next, my neighbor's dobberman onced got out of his yard and terrorized a young couple. The boyfriends ran away leaving his girl, while she stood there paralyzed and crying (a few morz seconds she might have pissed herself). One witness, actually a pretty cool guy and a good neighbor laughed, another ran into her house. Who put himself between the beast and the lovely dame? Yours truly, Mr Sociopath. I calmed it down and dragged it back to its house (fine the girl was hot, and I wanted to show off and earn point but still). Anyways my point is, just because I don't care, or because I am not genuine, or again because I hide my true feelings and intentions (I guess that would count as not being genuine too but the backspace key is to far) doesn't make me evil. If I have chosen to live my life doing good, and helping other for their sake and not mine, since I don't give two flying shit what happens to people, I shouldn't be seen for what I think. If actions speak louder than words, they surely speak louder than a thought that doesn't make a fucking sound. Whoever said it's the thought that count was just a lazy bitch, or incompetent hoe that couldn't or wasn't willing to act as he thought he should.
Many people call me a hypocrite when I tell them how I truly think or feel, because it doesn't align with my words or my action, or because I don't do good for the sake of others but, because I want to buy my way into heaven. But the way I see it Christianity is about sacrifice, so if I put my own thoughts and wants aside to follow a path that leads me to God (even if I only take it so that I don't end up in Hell), my actions should count more than my thoughts. A pedophile might be regarded as sick, and disturbed in our society but, if he resists all his urges and lies about his preferences because that is the "right" thing, shouldn't he be seen for what he does and not what he thinks? 

The unifying theme seems to be that sociopaths focus on the actions and the results of those actions, whereas normal people have been socialized to care more about whether someone had a "good" or "bad" intention, presumably because they believe that bad intentions make bad people and you can't really trust bad people no matter what:

[P[eople who feel remorse (e.g. who are not psychopaths) are more likely to refrain from committing further crimes than people who do not. This has been explicitly linked to reduced fear of consequences, the absence of shame and remorse and the resultant relative inability to learn from mistakes.

But is that a question as to the morality or the cost benefit analysis of keeping certain people in prison for longer than other people who may have committed a similar crime?

"In a wider sense, I'm not convinced (lack of) feelings of remorse make a 'morally bad' action any better or worse. To take an extreme example, a murder is a murder is a murder. Whether or not the murderer feels guilty about his or her actions, there's still a dead person and a bunch of people negatively affected by that person's absence and the manner of their 'departure'."

The main problem for the sociopath in accepting the empath's point of view here is that to a sociopath, actions can be controlled to a degree (as long as they are not completely ruled by impulse). Thoughts and feelings cannot, particularly to the extent that someone is asking them to feel a certain way about something that is impossible for the sociopath (guilt, remorse, empathy, etc.) So what do you do if you are a sociopath who cares to be better than how they were made? You make choices to do things that you believe to be right -- without any of the usual positive emotional reinforcement that empaths experience and sometimes against your very nature. And is that any less good than acting based on emotional prompts?

I would like you to notice that some of the sociopaths on this site are trying to live by society's rules, though they do not have the emotional "muscle" to help them do that. They have to use their intellect to do it. Can we also use our intellect to understand them? 

And to wrap it up:

I stand by my assertion that you are what you do and what you think or why you do it has no relevance. What I think is smoke and mirrors. Why I save a child or adult is of no relevance. No more than why I hold the door open for the person behind me. It is the right thing to do and I am betting that sociopath that I am I have done more right in this world than you have TJMO.

Does that thought piss you off? For all your hand wringing and moralizing that it is possible that Tii and I have saved more people than you have? That our continued existence benefits society more than your's does? Here is the kicker sweet flower. Most norms do good so they can feel good about themselves, we do because it is the right thing to do. We must fight our very nature to accomplish this task and we do it. Every damn day. For no reward whatsoever. I want you to take that and really think about or feel about it even for a second. Maybe take an hour or two out of your day and meditate on that. Good people do evil things every day. Evil people do good things every day. This is one of things that makes ALL people so damn fascinating to me. Even you my special flower. 


  1. Holy shit fucks, if we were judged by our thoughts rather than our behaviors, I’d get ten life sentences. I’d get the death penalty. What matters is behavior; how you conduct yourself, not your thoughts. This is what I tell borderlines. Your homicidal thoughts don’t matter, it’s your actions. If I were born in history they would still know my name. It would be Ginger the Terrible, and her lesser known evil counterpart Vlad something… :P

    1. Hello Dr. Ginger, I agree. Mephistopheles' dreams of retribution have ofttimes swirled inside my head. I would think mental aggression in hominids has been around from the beginning. Intentions should not weigh in more than dispassionate action. I wonder what would happen if a socio discovered a cure for cancer and was later outed to the public. Would the public now hate the healer of so many lives?

    2. I don't believe that the statement "thought do not matter, actions do" (or anything similar like "What matters is behavior; how you conduct yourself, not your thoughts") is logical,

      because this statement is a thought itself. If thoughts do not matter, this belief or thought (that thoughts do not matter) also does not matter. So it is logically inconsistent.

      However, I can see how such a thought, however logically inconsistent, can help some people manage their lives better. If you can change your thoughts, you can change your behavior. So thoughts matter.

      Am I missing something? I would like to know.

    3. Hi Newbie, Busy with work so it's been difficult to get back to another interesting comment you made yesterday on a different thread. Anyway, thoughts count only as far as we do or don't indulge them and/or follow through with action; all human created realities began with thoughts.

    4. Newbie,
      Now we're going into philosophy XD.
      Yes, when you put it that way I get what you mean. It's like saying "bicycles are useless" and then riding one to go to work. What I meant, and what I believe Dr. G, and June also meant, is that the intentions in that case (which would count as thoughts) do not matter. Someone's intentions are good but, they do not act upon them, they shouldn't be seen as better than someone who's intentions aren't necessarily good but still does good things.

    5. Hi Tii,
      Back to philosophy XD..

      Someone who's "intentions aren't necessarily good but still does good things"
      must also have, mixed in with thoughts that are not necessarily good, thoughts to do good things -- so those would be thoughts with good intentions. Or am I missing something? We all have some crazy mix of thoughts in our head as we walk around and as I've said before consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.

      Without thoughts to do good things, a person cannot do good things, because as June said "all human created realities begin with thoughts" {i would add feelings, impulses.. for those who have them}.

    6. I suppose that's true. But what if I don't necessarily think of it as good myself, but do it because I know that that is what people think is good and right in that situation. Remember that sociopaths don't really have a sense of right or wrong, everything is morally grey. It's been said that sociopaths don't have a conscience. In that case that would mean that I'm doing the right thing because that is what people think is good, not because I want to do good. In this case, my intentions aren't necessarily bad, but neither are they good, I'm not thinking of doing good but thinking about doing what is right according to an external party.
      I could easily watch a kid drown and not blink an eye. Just observing the process without feeling anything but new information coming to me. Does that make me evil, not really, why should I save him? Why is it any of my business? I am not his guardian nor do I know him. But, if I do see a kid drowning I will help, not because I want to do good (since I have no real sense of what's right and wrong besides what I learned) but because that is what I was taught is right in this situation. If you can save someone, why not do it?
      I guess what I mean is it depends on what the acting party believes is good. If it doesn't believe it's good but a simple action like any other one through the day, it doesn't really have any good intentions.

    7. Hi Tii,
      Your frank remark about watching a kid drown and not blink an eye opens up my perspective. I want to understand that better.

      Could you watch your sister drown and not blink and eye? I'm sure you would try to save her, just like the random kid, but would there be more behind it -- adrenaline pumping, fear, or other feelings in the moment that are not there for a random person?

      Where is superchick? I miss you.

    8. I don't think so, of course I would never hope for her to drown, and it would be a shame for her to die that way, but I don't think that it would raise any other emotions. If I see a person drown my reflex is to jump in and attempt to save them, I was taught to help people in need. Even when I see someone cry in a corner, I approach them. Usually the thought going through my head is "Fuuuhhhck... How annoying, now I have to jump in." But, since I've decided to live a life being as helpful as I can, I do it anyways.
      Now I'm sure that my sister is one of the people I am most attached to, but my nature isn't to miss someone who's gone. If she dies drowning when I couldn't help, well so be it. Her life would have come to an end one way or another, no matter what. Plus I believe in heaven, so if anything there's nothing to be sad about, for an empath or a sociopath. If I'm able to save her then good.

    9. But, I guess I can't say for certain since I've never been in that situation.

    10. Newbie I think I see your problem in comprehending how this works for a socio. When I see a child drowning or an adult for that matter (I am a trained lifeguard and rescue diver) this is my thought process: I recognize that a person is in distress, I access the safest and most expedient way to rescue them WHILE running towards them and scanning the area for the best rescue equipment if I need any and divesting myself of extra clothing that may impede my rescue efforts, I very loudly in the "voice of command" Instruct as many people as I can to dial 911 and give them instructions on what to say, I preform the rescue, I preform any needed first aid while double checking that 911 is on the way, I calm down any panicking bystanders. Nowhere in that scenario do I even THINK about WHY I am doing this. When an emergency situation happens I kick into hyperawareness. I act without extraneous thoughts. While I do analyze the safest way I can do something I will do it anyway if no safe option presents. Motives??/ It is to laugh. I do, I don't think. So no I have no good motives because my mind does not work like that. I don't think like that. When I do charity work I do it because it is my duty. For me there is no difference in how I would feel drowning someone or saving them from drowning. I don't make the choice based on feelings or intentions. I have just trained myself to act like this because it makes sense to me on a spiritual level. Perhaps you could say that the original decision to follow this spiritual path and moral construct was the "good intentions" I will concede that. You definitely might have a big point there in fact. The only difference is HOW people like me and Tii come to this original mindset. We are doing actually doing good for the sake of doing good. We just did not reach that decision to act in a good manner because we FELT it would be a good decision but because we THOUGHT it would be.

      Perhaps we are not so different form normatives in this matter as we think we are. Everyone, socio or normative has moments when they have murderous thoughts. The difference is socio's almost NEVER have altruistic ones. Our brains just don't go there. All my altruistic actions are based in my spiritual practices. I had to be taught, had it explained to me in a logical manner, and had it repeated and then practice these things on a daily basis to get to the point where I will do altruistic things and not do "bad" things. I think the disconnect, for me anyway, comes form the fact that the "good intentions" are so far removed from the resulting action. They are an ingrained part of my life, I don't HAVE TO think about them. I am not however invested in them. Not emotionally anyway. In answer to your earlier question to Tii I have the experience of having saved both strangers and friends from drowning and I can tell you honestly that no, there was no difference in how I processed it emotionally or intellectually. There is no WHY to that. It just is the way I am.

    11. Puppy Basket,

      I try to highlight a few points, and my response. It's an attempt at an english to english translation.

      1. 'Nowhere in that scenario do I even THINK about WHY I am doing this.'

      Neither do I. That is not a property that only socios have when responding to emergency situations. A trained person would do the same if they were confident in their actions. That person could also be an empath. So there is common ground.

      2. " While I do analyze the safest way I can do something I will do it anyway if no safe option presents." no comprendo seniora. What does that mean?

      3. "Motives??/ It is to laugh. I do, I don't think. So no I have no good motives because my mind does not work like that. I don't think like that. When I do charity work I do it because it is my duty. " Then I would say you are MOTIVATED TO DO YOUR DUTY. Lot's of empaths can feel that way too. What's this thing about laughing? Do you feel happy, or amused, or excited. This is a serious question.

      4. ". I don't make the choice based on feelings or intentions. I have just trained myself to act like this because it makes sense to me on a spiritual level. Perhaps you could say that the original decision to follow this spiritual path and moral construct was the "good intentions" I will concede that. You definitely might have a big point there in fact." I would say there are empaths who have made a decision to live their lives in a spiritual way, rather than based on their feelings. Unfortunately, I am not able to empathize with spirituality because I don't feel it in myself. What is spirituality like?

      5. "FELT it would be a good decision but because we THOUGHT it would be. ". Ok, I think this is the nut in the nutshell here. There are lots of people who have feelings who make decisions based on what they think rather than what they feel. Also, I must also say, that unless one is trained in separating thoughts from feelings, then one can be rather confused (as I have been myself) between what are thoughts and what are feelings. I don't think you are saying that you have no feelings, but even if you are, I think there is more to this question here.

  2. The Sociopath is the LEADER, the empath is the follower.
    That's why Sociopath/Leader Adolph Hitler instituted the Holocast, and
    the millions of Empath/ followers carried out the Holocast.
    J.F.K. Bill Clinton & now Hillary are examples of Sociopathic leaders.
    The millions of stupid empath wussies-the "nowhere people-" who are
    slaves to commitment and consistency will follow these empty suits to
    the grave.

  3. There's a (probably false) parable about Abraham Lincoln travelling in his carriage with a friend discussing morality. Lincoln asserts that people aren't truly capable of moral behavior, but rather only act selfishly. He then sees some piglets drowning in the mud, so he hops out and saves them. His friend points out the selflessness of this act and Lincoln replies that it was purely selfish because, had he not saved them, his conscience would have bothered him all day.

    While I wouldn't go so far as to say that those with a conscience are incapable of selfless behavior, I will say that only a sociopath can act in ways that are unambiguously selfless. To echo the article, when I help people I don't get a warm fuzzy feeling about it. When an organization I help sends me a picture of some child with cancer or some war refugee assisted by my actions, I always get a little chuckle at the attempted emotional manipulation, but that's it. I keep helping because what I lose in money, time, or effort is outweighed by benefit received by those I help. Overall utility increases, so it's the right thing to do.

    As for the Kantian empaths versus the Benthamite sociopaths, I never understood the vast appeal of deontological thinking in society until I started learning about sociopathy. There have been a few studies suggesting that socios are much more likely to use utilitarian ethical reasoning than empaths. Apparently there's just something about the way we're wired that makes us care more about actions and consequences than about good will.

    1. Ythene,

      Some of what you wrote is over my head, but one thing seems clear (please correct me if I am wrong). You have a pro-social sociopathic personality,
      with a world view of overall utility, which includes other people, not only yourself.

      Is it the narrow self-interest (a focus exclusively on the self) that @Mach refers to that distinguishes the character of sociopaths?

      How did you arrive at the point of making decision based on a sense of overall utility?

    2. Dots,

      "You have a pro-social sociopathic personality"

      Well, I try :)

      "Is it the narrow self-interest (a focus exclusively on the self) that @Mach refers to that distinguishes the character of sociopaths?"

      I'm not really qualified to say what the key characteristics of sociopaths are and are not. Having said that, I personally feel like a lack of guilt and conscience creates a situation where it's very easy to act in a totally self-interested way. However, that doesn't necessarily have to be the outcome.

      "How did you arrive at the point of making decision based on a sense of overall utility?"

      That's a very difficult question. I have trouble dealing with the philosophy of metaethics and philosophers I've read who deal with it seem to wind up resorting to strange, almost spiritual conclusions.

      Basically, I have difficulty seeing how someone having "good" or "bad" thoughts makes any difference to the morality of how they treat others.

      As a practical matter, it seems that socios somehow seem wired for Utilitarianism. So, that approach may just be an accident of my psychology, to some extent.

    3. Ythene,

      Thanks for sharing. I also end up lost in esoterics of philosophy, although sometimes it can help to expand one's horizons.

      I'm having a language problem formulating my questions so please reframe them in a way you find meaningful.

      My main question is about how you arrived in your current world view. How did it evolve, what key events happened in your life, what feelings or sensibilities did you have?

      Second, do you see a difference between between being self-centered and self-interested?

      Can you elaborate on your point about the relationships between thoughts and the morality of how people treat others?

      I read on some previous posts (not your comments) remarks like: If you're the latter {stupid} all I want is to exterminate you. Have you ever had thoughts like that? In any case, where do you think such thoughts come from?

    4. @Ythene,
      Psychopaths make up only 1% or so of the general population but commit a disproportionate amount of serious and violent crime.
      Approximately 93% of adult male psychopaths in the United States are in prison, jail, parole, or probation. (source:Kiehl, Kent A.and Morris B. Hoffman. The Criminal Psychopath: History, Neuroscience, Treatment, and Economics. Jurimetrics. 2011 Summer; 51: 355–397).

      How do you justify this overrepresentation?

      Don't you think that the elimination of psychopaths would maximize the wellbeing of the system, so it would be morally justified from a utilitarian point of view?

    5. @curious

      There are so many papers out there which give a different result but there is no need to read any of those papers. You can just google a few numbers and do arithmetic.

      It is nonsensical that 93% of adult psychopaths are in prison. The adult population of the US is about 200 million. If psychopaths are 1% of
      the population that gives about 2 million adult psychopaths in the US.

      It turns out amazingly enough that there are about 2 million people in prison in the US. This would mean that just about every prisoner is a psychopath. The firm data is about 25% (or less) of prisoners are psychopaths -- which gives about half a million psychopaths in prison -- not 2 million.

      So that's all rubbish. Just google those numbers yourself.

      Fortunately we do not live in a utilitarian society as you suggest. Otherwise we would ask all the old folks to jump to their death when they no longer contribute to society.

      And the upshot is that it is much more likely for a psychopath to live in society as a free person than be in prison. You can find other classes of people, if you really want to, that are more likely to end up in prison than psychopaths.

    6. oops, I see its 93% of adult male are in prison...
      same difference because the estimate is that 2% of adult males are psychopaths, adult males number about 100 million, and most prisoners are male. So by that prediction one gets about 2 million psychopaths who are all in jail, and since there are 2 million prisoners -- all prisoners are psychopaths.

      Anyhow, what is your fascination with that statistic?

    7. @curious empath there are some studies suggesting that it could be as many as 4% of the population not 1%. One of the reasons socios get over-represented in the prison population is the way we process and learn. We will respond to a carrot but not to a stick. We have shit for impulse control and we don't understand why society's rules should apply to us. We respond better to immediate gratification than to long range reward. In poor populations the rewards for criminal behavior are higher and more immediate than for "proper behavior". So socios raised in this environment are at a worse disadvantage than those socios raised with privilege. The privileged ones also have access to lawyers when we do our "youthful indiscretions" . Privileged socio's become politicians, doctors, and lawyers, underprivileged ones end up in jail. Just the way the world works. We are also by nature very vengeful creatures. While a privileged socio is more likely to ruin an enemy financially or socially, thereby fulfilling their need for vengeance an underprivileged one will just shoot their enemy dead. There are more of us running free in society than you might think. I could be a high as 1 in 25 people. My point is that as we are adaptive creatures. By our very nature we adapt to the environment we are raised in. Economically advantaged socios are, usually, better qualified to stay out of jail than our less advantaged brethren. The rewards, both immediate and long term, for us are greater.That is how we make decisions. "What I am getting out of this?". The other side is that I have noticed disadvantaged socios often don't hide what they are. If you have ever lived in "the projects" you would see it is a war zone. Being the biggest baddest predator and letting everyone know it in this situation is actually an advantage. It is a social adaptation that benefits the socio. Why would they not embrace it? However it does draw attention of the authorities and since it gains you no real friends you are more likely to end up in jail because of it. Once you are in the system you are kinda screwed. Therefore it is not surprising that socios are over-represented in the prison system. It is ludicrous however, to believe that we all get locked up. I am only person I know who has never been to jail. Empath or socio most people have done something that could get them arrested at some point in their lives. I was just better at not getting caught and, when I did get caught, weaseling my way out of it. Highly adaptive socios are very good at this. Non apdaptives end up in jail.

      A little more on statistics. There are those that believe that more males than females are sociopaths. I think we are simply better at blending in then males are. The problem with the statistics on sociopaths is that most of us are unidentified. There is no real way to know how many of us are in the general population since we are, for the most part, not gonna let anyone know we are here.

    8. @Puppy Basket,

      Wonderful comments that I am reading through. I want to clarify some of what you said, in case I have misunderstood, or at least to make it easier for people who are less familiar of the subtleties here (and there are many) to understand.

      There's a few themes to your posts, which I am trying to identify. We certainly share some common ground.

      I guess the biggest practical point (a HOW point) is that every single person on the planet (no matter what their personality is) responds and adapts to the environment around them.

      So all those empaths who want to make the world a better place, because of the 'bad' sociopaths out there, get the message that one of the biggest ways to achieve change is to learn developmental strategies to develop sociopaths and empaths (but the methods are truly and significantly different) into human beings that act in a pro-social way.

    9. oh, this is another HOW point about developmental strategies.

      I read a post by Harry Lime (I think it was in 2009 but I cant seem to find it now) who wrote something to the effect that as a child, when you realize you are really different and don't feel the emotion that others do, you know you will be reviled or face alienation, so you learn to fake emotions, lie and deceive, simply in order to survive and fit in. This is axiomatic.

      This becomes 2nd nature in order to fit in. Then it is easier and more comfortable to lie about anything and can develop into a pervasive pattern of lying in a human who has become highly adept at it.

    10. My overall view of the comment section here is a class discussion in sociology 101. It is not always polite and needn't be so.

      But it is not about who is better or worse than someone else. Those discussions have been had throughout human history, and often lead to conflict beyond imagination, if you haven't lived through them that is.

      I try not to say too much about myself, because I don't want to intimidate, come across as superior, or seem pretencious, even if I do sometimes feel that way. There is also no reason to believe the personal histories that anyone writes. Look at their thoughts and sentiments. Imagine a person who could write such things... There are in fact many more types of persons who might that what you think at first.

      I discovered a whole new world of personal existence through prolonged exposure with my ex. So what you see are the after-effects of that and from that an intelligent and skilled person could develop a picture of my ex without my telling what actually happened too much. Because it is implicit.

      I got this view of a (Socratic if you will amongs teachers and students) dialog -- based on an attitude of openness to new ideas and tolerance, based on my personal history and way of going about things, or my psychological and intellectual inclinations, motivations, or 'traits' if you will.

      Just a few facts so you get a better idea of "why" [which sometimes helps develop 'how' questions:

      my entire family lived through the holocaust in Poland. I have faced injustices of many kinds in my career. I was a successful university professor physics. My mother had a Ph.D in clinical psychology.

      But I am truly a Newbie here, graduating to a higher degree.

    11. "So all those empaths who want to make the world a better place, because of the 'bad' sociopaths out there, get the message that one of the biggest ways to achieve change is to learn developmental strategies to develop sociopaths and empaths (but the methods are truly and significantly different) into human beings that act in a pro-social way."

      This is in fact what I was hoping for. It is actually already being accomplished in a way. Many sociopaths are alcoholics and learn a moral code in Alcoholics Anonymous. Some may argue with the success rate but I find that learning from other people who have been through what you have and think like you do and seeing that they can successfully adapt themselves to be functioning members of society by following some simple rules to highly effective.

    12. Newbie I think one the problems some people have with accepting philosophic arguments as a valid part of dialogue is that they have met too many people who substitute them for thinking things through themselves. Not that you are doing this it is just a pitfall of using philosophic thinking instead of your own life experience and what you learned from it to consider a problem or idea.

      Philosophy can be very seductive to debate or to bring into a debate but from my personal point of view it is ideas put forth by people who wanted their peers to consider them to be brilliant thinkers. I don't find much of it to be any "deep truth". Pour enough words out of your mouth during your lifetime and put them on paper and you are sure to have a few winners in there. Those are the ones that get passed from generation to generation whether or not they are valid any more or ever were.

      It is just a personal dislike of mine as I have argued philosophy with people for years and some really really hate that I tend to use real world examples as proof to refute their idols ideas. I do like the way you use the idea as a stepping off point instead of substituting it for an argument.

    13. @Puppy basket.
      Right oh on philosophy, it's a jumping off point.

      Another principle I guess is that children who are born with a certain type of neurological condition can be thought, adults can learn too. Once one accepts this as a true fact, that everyone can learn regardless of their personality type to behave in a pro-social manner, the only question is what are the best methods to do that.

      I whole-heartedly agree that "learning from other people who have been through what you have and think like you do and seeing that they can successfully adapt themselves to be functioning members of society by following some simple rules to highly effective."

      This is true for any type of neurological condition. Period.

    14. @DoctorNo
      "oops, I see its 93% of adult male are in prison" prison or jail or parole, or probation.

    15. Ok since you insist on this. The correct number for the number of people in prison or jail is about 2.2 million. The number of people on probation is about 0.8 million, so my dearest curious empath who suggests exterminating all sociopaths because of some number he or she found in one paper, and who isn't able to make a google search of anything it seems or do arithmetic.

      You get to 3 million people in prison, jail or parole, which is ghastly all by itself. Using Hare's measurements that about 20% of people in prison (and therefore since jail and parole also involve the same populations -- also 20% there) you get a whopping estimate of 0.6 million psychopaths in prison, jail or parole.

      But the lowest estimate for the number of adult psychopaths in the US is at least 2 million.

      I hope you are able to divide 0.6 by 2. Now that 2 number could be much higher. It is only a lower limit. In any case since 0.6 is less than 1, most psychopaths live a free life.

      I hope I have put your mind at ease now. You can stop worrying about exterminating psychopaths. Again, the likelihood that a psychopath is in the criminal justice system is significantly less than other groups of people. I don't want to go into examples in case you start thinking they should be exterminated too.


    17. Whew, I feel much better now. Did I feel enraged? You bet. Did I feel appalled? Yes indeed. Do I feel protective of a community I am engaged with. UhUh. Did I want to set the record straight. Of course. Did I think it was worth my time? Well not at first, but then I got enraged enough to spend 2 minutes on google and searching using option F through one document.

      Is my pulse still running a bit high? Yes. Do I feel a sense of personal satisfaction? yeah, I guess that would be the real motive.

      Did I mean harm? No. Did I want to send a message that was loud enough to get through? Well I tried.

    18. Hey I like this doctorwhonofuckofffeelings character

    19. Yah I could see myself getting along with him in the real world. I'd get a few laughs that's for sure.

    20. @Dr. Ginger, I don't find your sense of humour dark, but if I do some day I'll let you know. I feel like I can be accepted here. I guess you and Tii both do to. So that's something we three have in common.
      @Tii, well we make each other laugh now do we not. There are papers, maybe you know about them, that show that it is not simply that happiness makes one laugh, but also it is strongly the case that laughing makes us happy. If someone is sad, knowing there's going to die, sometimes the best thing to do is to get them to laugh. They want to laugh,they really do, they miss it.

      I see we are actuall 'getting along in the real world'. For me this place is a part of my real world, and the relationships are real too. Along those lines, I'd be curious to see different perspectives on the characters of Ukan. He was here before and has resurrected himself. If you know him, how do you seem him? What does his presence mean to you -- or what do you see changing as a result of the fact that he has chosen to reappear.

      It's out of curiousity about social relationships, sociology, how we see each other and, well, it would be fun -- maybe a bit diabolical -- to know.

    21. @DoctorNo!,
      Less than 1% of all noninstitutionalized males age 18 and over are psychopaths (source: Coid Jeremy, et al. Int’l JL & Psychiatry. 2009;32:67;Hare Robert D. Crim Just & Behav.1996;23:25.). This translates to approximately 1,150,000 adult males who would meet the criteria for psychopathy in the United States - the latest census data show that as of 2010 there were approximately 115.2 million noninstitutionalized males in the U.S. ages of 18 and over (n=308,745,538 total U.S. population, less 24.3% of those under age 17; and less 50.7% all females = ~n=115,224,144 adult males in the United States.(source: Quickfacts. U.S. Census Bureau). And of the approximately 6,720,000 adult males that are in prison, jail, parole, or probation, 16%, or 1,075,000, are psychopaths.Thus, approximately 93% of adult male psychopaths in the United States are in prison, jail, parole, or probation.

      The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position, which is exactly what you did in your previous post.

  4. Black and white thinking here. Thoughts do matter, because thoughts lead to actions and actions have consequences. People who have impulses or thoughts to murder, and who do not, are held back by other thoughts, or their moral code, even if they have no feelings per se. Unless you claim to be a mindless robot.

    There's also the fact, for instance, that a murder is not a murder. Sure a person ends up dead. There's premeditated murder. murder in the heat of the moment out of passion... all the way down to manslaughter. Does anyone here really think that these should all be treated the same just because in all cases a person ended up dead?

    1. Why should it be different. If I rape someone's mother after planning it for weeks, or I rape someone's mom in the heat of passion because I couldn't hold back my desires, why should it be different. Ask the son what he would do to me if he could for both of those situations. I'm sure his answer will be the same.

    2. If you kill someone without proper justification it doesn't matter whether or not it was planned.

    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

    4. "Thoughts do matter, because thoughts lead to actions and actions have consequences."

      This is still a consequentialist approach. If thoughts matter because of their consequences, then the fundamental approach to ethics you're taking is that consequences are what matters, not thoughts. Thoughts only matter to the extent that they have consequences.

    5. Hi Ythene,

      I see what you are saying. I didn't mean to imply that thoughts ONLY matter because they lead to actions which have consequences.

      Thoughts can also lead to other thoughts, which lead to other thoughts -- in ourselves and others. I can say for sure that most of the thoughts that I've had in my life have not lead to consequences. But they are important sometimes to me so they matter. Other's thoughts that they communicate to me also can matter, which is why I am here for example. Life of the mind so they say.

      I was trying to boil things down to make contact with the rest of the discussion in a way that would make sense without making things too complicated.

      But that's a good point!

      Not an expert in philosophy here, beyond 101.

      Any thoughts?

      Do your thoughts matter to you?

  5. So one person plans a murder in detail to get an inheritance or insurance, say. Another finds his wife in bed with another man, violently attacks the man, who dies of a brain hematoma from hitting his head on the bedframe.... His adulterous wife later retaliates and hits him in the head with a baseball bat. The husband dies from a brain hematoma too.

    Are you saying that all these are the same, or that some or all are justified?

  6. I see where you trying to go, but from my point of view all you have to do is break a few thing with a bat and chase them out of your house before handing the wife her divorce papers. If the husband was still alive after killing the man, yes it doesn't matter whether or not he planned kill the man. But I guess we're judging the wife now, killing her husband after such an event would be from self defense in my opinion, if he killed her boyfriend, he could easily kill her too. Now if he had backed away and was on his knees, feeling guilty and wondering what the hell he did before the wife hit him, yes she should go to jail without caring about planning or not.
    If people's impulses are so strong that when they get extremely mad they can't control their anger, they are as dangerous, if not more than, as the person who plotted to kill.
    Now, in the case of an accidental killing it's different. If you didn't have any killing intentions at all, but purely an accident, yes I would agree that the rules change.

    1. But I guess that one could always find a psychologist of some sort, to examine and vouch for the person"s mental condition in such a situation that would allow for leniency. There are loop holes in every case.

    2. What about less tenuous examples?

      1) Someone attacks me and I pull a gun and shoot him dead.
      2) Someone is walking down the street and I shoot him dead.

      In both examples, someone is dead. Are these killings equivalent?

      I agree with the sentiment that actions matter more than thoughts, but actions also take place in context, and the context matters.

    3. One is justifiable self defense. At that point it's him or you, killing him is for survival. Killing someone walking down the street just for the hell of it is just plain murder.

  7. Wouldn't want the Social Justice Team℠ shitting up the blog (more than the usual).

  8. I remember being shoved in the back of a police car, screaming "Namaste, Namaste!"

    1. I thought they were hired Israeli gunmen going to take me out somewhere to kill me then throw me in the trash. I felt like Namaste was one word everyone around the world knew pretty well. I can tell you they were thoroughly confused.

    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

  9. A socio sits alone in a bar looking at a happy family outside, thinking "-I can never have what these folks have", the happy family outside comes into the bar & says to him "-We are willing to be your new family, interested?" The socio then says: "-What would I do with you, what purpose would you serve in my life?" Is this a greek tragedy or something completely different?

  10. I wouldn't say so. To the socio statement "I can never have what these folks have" isn't one of grief or sadness but, a mere remark or observation. The sociopath thinks, I can never have that, and that's where it ends. I can admit that I am sometimes curious as to why people love to be in love. My observation is, I can never fall in love like that. It doesn't mean that I wish I could or that I am sad or grieving because I can't. It simply means I can't, and that's where it ends.

  11. "I believe good and evil to be actions. Seriously, fuck all the moralizing crap, you are what you DO. You have time after time defended empaths who do evil or do nothing (in Tii's example) and reviled anyone who believes socio's are redeemable with an astounding lack of logic. "

    I completely agree with this. Love, morality, goodness- none of those sentiments mean a damn thing without the actions to back them up.

    That said, I feel that this post is dangerously close to painting sociopathy as something closer to autism than it really is. With antisocial behavior, it's not the absence of emotions that is the problem. It's the supreme self interest and the lack of willingness (or even capacity) to delay one's own gratification for a higher purpose.

    1. @Mach,
      I agree with you about sentiments like love and goodness mean nothing without actions and also about how this post is veering to a picture of autism.

      But I don't think that you are only "what you do". That only is important. I am not sure if you are saying that you are only what you do -- just trying to clarify.

      Let's say a person is backing out of their driveway and they see a neighbour, a little old lady who not only is very short bothers all her neighbours incessantly by calling the police every time they have party.

      The driver thinks, oh I can pretend I didn't see her, and then runs her over.

      On the other hand let's say the driver really didn't see her and was just being careless. It was dark and the lady was dressed in black.

      In both cases the driver ran over a lady. In the first it was intentional and in the second it was not. In my mind there's a huge difference.

      BTW I knew a lady when I was growing up who ran over her dog backing out of her driveway. She had seven kids, some shorter than the dog. She said she didn't see it. What else would she say?

    2. That would be an accident, whathr the person's action was was to back out of the driveway, not noticing the woman was a variable that lead to an unexpexted outcome. That like a scientific experiment where someone is suppose to test dangerous chemicals on animals to see how it would kill them, and another experiment where one is suppose to test a new type of chemical on animals to check how it cleans there fur but, by without the experimenter noticing a dangerous chemical fall is there and kills the dog when they test it. One is purposeful the other is unexpected and accidental. In the second scenario we can't really say that what the scientist was doing was killing the dog, but his neglecting to do his job properly killed the dog.

      Sorta weird to explain, not sure if I'm expressing my thoughts clearmy enough for you to understand

    3. so Tii it looks like you are saying that intentions matter, not just acts. In this case it matters what is inside the person's head when they run over the little old lady.

      BTW is there anything that you would see or hear, besides a threat to you personally, that would get your adrenaline going?

    4. What I mean is that when you run over someone by accident because of an out of place unexpected variables, the situation is different. Accidents are not intentions.

      As for what would get my adrenaline pumping. I'd say an all you can eat candy store, a beautiful women whom i wish to pursue, sex, and an orgasm. And maybe getting chased by the police.

    5. Let me further clarify- because I see that I was unclear because of the old lady story. The RESULTS of actions are not always proportional to the underlying intention. There's a lot of chance in this world where all of our actions are interconnected. Taking the thought "this old lady is annoying" to the level of intentionally backing over because the motivation is shrouded in plausible deniability falls into the category of a negative action even if the alibi is stated by a person who pretends they killed her accidentally. It's unlikely that the psychopath will be brought to justice because they have added deception to manslaughter/murder, but the action is no less harmful just because the person doesn't get caught.

      It's not normal to act on an impulse to "accidentally on purpose" kill someone. When harmful acts like this accumulate a pattern develops that gives the general public a better sense of motivation that is disguised more easily in a one time event.

      What I was actually referring to when I said actions matter more than intentions is the idea that no matter how much "love" someone says they are experiencing, if they actively hurt another person, they are not acting in a loving fashion.

    6. Well stated @Mach. Thanks for you clarification.

    7. You have a point there. I was generalizing a little to much. I agree that it is the self interest that is the driving force behind most sociopaths behavior more so than a lack of emotions. There are exceptions to your actions being what you are and people have given some really good examples of that. however I think that the examples are not all fair in conveying what I am trying to express. They are actually illustrating different instead of similar situations whereby actions are more important than the emotional or self-interested drive behind them.

      Self defense is not the same as murder. Accidentally causing a death is not the same as murder. But in a completely identical set of circumstances our justice system will punish people differently for what they are feeling at the time of the incident. To illustrate let us take the example of coming home and finding you spouse in bed with your best friend.

      1) A highly emotive person come in and makes the discovery. Unable to contain their rage they grab a gun from the beside table and shoot the spouse and friend. Result: Temporary insanity they get off or manslaughter at the most.

      2) A person who stuffs their emotions comes in on the scene runs off and thinks about it for a few hours getting angrier and angrier until they return and shoot them both. Result: Premeditated murder. Long sentence.

      3) The next person is not only highly emotional but racist or homophobic. They discover their spouse with someone of the hated group. They scream slurs while killing them both and are overheard. Result: Life in prison or the death penalty because the addition of a hate crime charge tacked on.

      4) A sociopath comes in on it. Dispassionately kills them both.
      Result if they can fake the right level of emotional distress they get the result in example one. If they are known to be a sociopath they get the result in example three. (Though in my case I would be more likely to not kill them at all. Since I am not really that invested emotionally I would be more likely to take out a camera and get some good pics for the divorce proceedings. They then post the pics online to ruin the participants socially.

      My point here is that the same crime was committed. Two people are still dead. But the person in the first example is going to be rewarded for not being in control of their emotions. The second person is feeling the same thing as the first but because it took them longer to get into that emotional state they get a harsher punishment for not being able to control their emotions. The third person did the exact same thing as the first but got a much harsher punishment because society does not like the REASON they got into that emotional state. The fourth person will get a different punishment based solely on whether or not the way their genes express themselves is discovered. This in my opinion is kinda fucked up. cont

    8. cont

      Even in the original example say the discoverer grabs the gun intending to just threaten and scare them and it "accidentally" goes off. Well..... The discoverer was not attacking him with the intention of tickling him. He wanted the them to suffer. If they died as a result I don't see why the attacker should not be punished as harshly as any of the other examples. I truly don't see why any of the examples should not have the exact same punishment. Here is why

      One, we can't know without being inside the shooters head if they actually meant to kill or why. Two, why are we rewarding people who lose their shit emotionally? The answer to that is, that in that particular situation, people will tend to empathize with the person being cheated on UNLESS the person shooting is personally abhorrent to them like the sociopath or the racist. The jury or judge would be able to put themselves in the place of the shooter and if they feel emotional kinship to them will give them a lighter sentence EVEN THOUGH it is the exact same crime.

      Society says it is allowable for certain people to kill certain people in certain situations. Like the self defense example or war. We accept that because we are indoctrinated to do so. Take another society for example though, like one where Honor Killings, (Killing a woman who was raped and letting the rapist go) are an accepted norm. Most people from an outsider society think that is horrible. Most people within that society think it is a good and Godly thing. At times in the past and even today many people think/thought that genocide is acceptable. Should people who live in a society where killing certain people is acceptable be judged the same as people who live within a society where killing the same person is murder?

      This is where judging based on anything but results gets all messed up in my mind. You can't know why someone really does something. Even if you could it may seem perfectly rational to them. By our very nature we judge people's actions based on our own beliefs, biases, and emotions. That is why I don't trust anything but actions. It really does not matter to me why you did something or why I did something. I don't see why it should matter.

    9. Puppy Basket,

      This is a highly complex and interesting subject you offer here. Continuing on with an attempt at an english to english translation.

      "But in a completely identical set of circumstances our justice system will punish people differently for what they are feeling at the time of the incident. "
      Socios have strong reasons to hide who they are and their motivations. Got that.

      "You can't know why someone really does something". Well one can infer.
      Sometime it is more clear than others.

      You also raise the point that motivations do not matter. I disagree. A planned premeditated murder, executed with a detailed plan in advance is certainly different than the other situations you described for killing. Even the situation where the killer waits a few hours after confronting an enraging situation.
      Do we agree or disagree on this?

    10. ps I do believe socios are also capable of acting in rage and murdering. That is impulse control, the same as empaths.

    11. Puppy basket is making a very good argument here. But there is one thing that is missing. Emotional hurt and personal betrayal us not taken into account. Or at least it is not given it enough weight. Personal betrayal can hurt somebody to the point of suicide. Any emotional hurt can change your body chemistry. Not necessarily temporarily. It can last for months or years. If you look at it this way, a person that has been betrayed as in your example 1 and 2 is acting in self defense, even perhaps removing a bad apple from humanity. Our society recognizes this and believes we should punish accordingly and be more lenient towards somebody who has been betrayed.
      The reason sociopaths are so reviled is because they commit personal betrayal without any emotional consequences. They can break the fabric of society, one person at a time, with impunity, by making neuro typicals doubt their emotional instincts.
      Emotions and emotional memory is in us to help us form an entity that is bigger than us and is supposed to help our survival. Lets face it. The human race has done pretty well on earth, as a whole. Do you think that would have been possible without those feelings that keeps us knit together?

    12. Some days ago an anon posted an expression of trauma resulting from an intimate relationship with a sociopath. I have edited the remarks, in a way that makes sense to me -- taken out the word 'evil' and replaced it with betrayal. It is real -- this trauma. Some trauma reactions can be long lasting -- complex PTSD for instance. Women who have experienced intimate partner rape also feel this kind of personal betrayal and can also suffer from complex PTSD, which can go on for years, if not decades.

      Edited: "But there is another kind of betrayal which only a minority of people are familiar with. It is something so cruel, so alien to their own nature and
      to what they had thought could even exist, that with their first encounter, they are astonished--------'it can not be so, this can not possibly be'. And they are 'diminished' -- it is a loss of 'innocence' so profound that it seems almost irrepairable. And this is a problem, for, in order to recover and heal one must be able to recognize what happened and your part in it, to recognize it you must be able to understand what happened and cope in order simply to survive, and to know a part of you must change in a fundamental way.

    13. Dots. I am so happy you commented. I took the words"personal betrayal" from one of your earlier comments, I believe. I don't know if you read enough of my own comments to realize that I too had to lose this innocence. Took me the greater part of 3 years. Many sleepless nights. Amazingly I only cried twice, during the whole ordeal. You have to understand to survive, it is true. A part of you must change is also true. The most difficult part that I believe most people cannot achieve is isolate this part of you that has changed and not let it rot the rest of you. You can retain your trust in people. You do not have to doubt your emotional instincts, though the experience makes you feel that they are screwed up and unreliable.
      In my mind, if the person is unable to recover their trust in other people, and if they think their only recourse is to start acting in sociopathic ways, they remain a victim. They take the risk of ostracizing themselves from society.
      I have a very special place in my heart for the person I keep calling my sociopath "friend". There is still a chance that he will betray me in worse ways than he already has. He has it in him for sure and I have made my peace with the fact that this will always be the case. I am very conscious of it and try to give him no emotional trust whatsoever. It is alien to me and I know I am taking a risk, daily it feels. But I do not want the rest of my heart to be damaged. The experience has stretched my heart and my intellect, but not broken either of them.
      I am hoping I am making sense to some of the readers.

    14. Thank you dots and Old and Wise. I am trying to intellectually wrap my mind around what you are saying and am having trouble with it. Thank you for using the term betrayal because I can process that. I really never considered this, being as I am univested with peoples motivations for what they do. I am reading M. E,'s book right now and just hit the bit where she is discussing this very thing and that in the sociopath we never develop this "skill" or "ability" or mindset..whatever to process shades of intent.

      While I don't/can't get it myself I am definitely going to start exploring this. To understand better I have some questions though. Was it the loss of innocence that was most damaging or the fact that there there was no investment on the part of the socio? Just to reassure you I am asking so I DON'T damage people in the future, not to gather ammo to do so. I know I need to watch my actions so I don't hurt people like this. I do still have a really bad habit of discarding people who don't have further utility for me. I am working on that.

      Would it have helped at all if the scoio had self revealed before hand so that you knew what you were dealing with? I am still experimenting with this. I am hoping that if I let people know before hand if I mess up they will not feel as betrayed by my actions. I find it also gives me an incentive not to mess up. Since I don't have to mask who I am I don't feel the need to manipulate how they feel about me. They either like me for the mess I am or can walk away.

      Okay if I look at this way it makes sense: All "crime" is a betrayal of both the "social contract" as well as the people being harmed personally, yes? The crime itself should have a "baseline judgement". Then we layer on the damage done to "persons harmed by the crime". We mitigate the end punishment based on the "intent" of the person who committed the crime, based on if the person they damaged had harmed them or presented a threat to them. Is that correct?

      ARGGGH! I can get the first part, it is the last part I can't wrap my head around. It looks, from my decidedly warped viewpoint, that you get a walk if you feel bad at the victim or, if in the eyes of society, the victim was a "bad person". Is this not the case in many rape trials? If the victim can be painted as somehow provoking the rapist (drunk, dressed like a slut, etc.) then they get off? I am actually agreeing with you on the betrayal aspect here I think rape is worse crime than murder since the victim has to live with the betrayal. At the same time the reasoning that should give the rapist more time can be turned around on the victim if the jury perceives her/him as less than deserving of justice viewed through the lens of social mores.
      This is hurting my brain.

    15. Dot and Old & Wise you seem to be the victims of what I am going to call a "social crime". Not something that can be prosecuted in court but no less heinous for that. I think many of us socios who want to stay out of jail indulge in the social crimes for just that reason. I do want you to know though that you were probably targeted because you are GOOD PEOPLE. Good and innocence are something most socios look for in their targets. I am a little differnt and I think maybe Tii is to in that if we do target a person it will be another socio or a maladapt of another sort who is harming others for our "fun". They are more challenging and if they are harming others I feel I am providing a service to society by shutting them down. It is also more dangerous and I will admit I have come out on the losing side of a few battles. But I do want you guys to realize that you are exceptional human beings. It is what drew your socio to you in the first place.

      I don't like that you were hurt. I'm not trying to excuse their behavior. The experience changed how you interact with people and made you less trusting. While this may feel to you like a bad thing now it may actually prepare you for something in the future. Looking back, for myself, on things I thought were horrible at the time, I realize that without these bad experiences I would never have survived things that came later without the skills I learned and the lessons I took away from them.

      Thank you for being here and helping teach me more. If this site was just a collection of socios we would be diminished. In the short time I have been here I have really grown in wisdom from you people. All you people.

      Maybe that was why you went though what you did. A bit of martyrdom in the cause of human uplift for our joined cause of understanding. If so do know that I at least appreciate your sacrifice and applaud your spirits.

    16. OldAndWise, I see that both you and Dots have been victims of a social/intimate crime as Puppy Basket writes. There are many paradoxes involved in recovery, and, having the opportunity to live life with more fullness, less pain, and more awareness of beauty, experiences of joy...

      I get started on some paradoxes about that topic -- recovery from intimate partner trauma. It is difficult for many people to simply accept that they were a victim. They never saw themselves, perhaps, that way before, certainly never to that degree. So the paradox here is to accept being a victim and then accept not being a victim.

      "You can retain your trust in people." Yes one can learn to be a better judge of character, and still be open. But the other side of that coin is to "retain your trust in yourself." People who have complex PTSD have not learned to trust themselves again. They feel, and this is the really weird part, too responsible, they blame themselves for not getting away earler... They kick themselves around, and can actually feel guilt for not taking personal responsibility for their own life. One has to come to terms with that paradox.


    17. Hi Puppy Basket,
      I'm also trying to grasp at what you say about betrayal and many other things too. "just hit the bit where she is discussing this very thing and that in the sociopath we never develop this "skill" or "ability" or mindset..whatever to process shades of intent." I guess you are referring to the mind-set of someone who feels betrayed. Can I ask, have you ever run into an insurmountable obstacle that prevented you from realizing your dreams. Does that strike you as a kind of deep betrayal too?

      I'm trying to connect 'shades of intent' with betrayal. I thought socios could excel in reading other people, being able to help or ruin them. Do you get a mental picture of someone elses intent, as you get to know them. Are you aware as you act, that you act with intent. Or is the whole notion of intent a blur, obscure, or some kind of paradox?

    18. Puppy Basket,

      I try to answer your questions and ask some in return.

      "Was it the loss of innocence that was most damaging or the fact that there there was no investment on the part of the socio". It is the lie that they presented themselves as intimate, and got you to trust them, and then you find out that they have no emotional investment in you. That is what the betrayal is in my view. It is the lie, and then the profound loss of confidence in yourself, and in the world. Because our relationships are so important to most all of this (empaths and socios and anyone else needs relationships, we go crazy by ourselves), and trust is what intimate relationships are based on -- well that's a psychological catastrophe. I am not exagerating.

      Can I ask, have you ever been betrayed by someone you trusted? Do you trust anyone? This is a serious question.

    19. About the shade of intent, usually I can tell a lie by just the eyes or the lips. If a person is good at controlling those, some other part of the face gives it away. If they have some awesome ass pomer face, just take a roller coaster ride in their minds, ask questions going around in circles and choosing different words with different connotations but same overall meaning. Ask questions and then ask it again later on in a totally different way, or just make a comment that leads them to answering the question again. If there's a lie the ride is bound to be bumpy and full of holes. If even after that the lie is still made unclear, go with it and judge the character. I myself do not trust anyone, I may rely on people for some things, but trusting is a no.

      I can easily tell that someone is feeling betrayed. The question lies in how does it feels? Does it feel so bad? Why? And why does it matter?

    20. After the lights turned on and the darkness in my soul began to lift, I found that rage was a useful,healing feeling to get me out of my despair. How that happened? After lying on my sofa for a few weeks, I took advice of a cbt therapist and started to exercise again, back into nature, scrambling in the ravine behind my house. At first it was almost impossible to do, to force myself to pay attention to the outside world, to see beauty, sunlight sparkling in the snow, the shades of blue and grey of the shadows in that revine, that became my refuge. At first, whenever I saw a kind face, and I had to force myself to look at people's faces, whenever I saw kindness, tears would well, and sometimes I would simply breakdown crying. That's really the only times that I cried.

      But it was the rage that helped me start to get out of that. I wrote and wrote, and imagined a torturous ending for this monster in my life. And in that rage I realized that this man had actually raped me twice. Ok, it happened. Non force rape. But it was the rage that helped me to see and then I undertook journeys and rituals in that ravine where I burned symbols of his penis, and many others too, and in the end I saw what appeared to me as absolute pure evil.

      Later I started to understand more, and got past all that evil business.

    21. @Tii "I can easily tell that someone is feeling betrayed. The question lies in how does it feels? Does it feel so bad? Why? And why does it matter?"

      I've partially addressed your first three questions already, but I guess not well enough for you to understand. The reason it feels bad is that we were raised to identify intimacy with trust -- that we trust people who are close to us, then we find out that the trust was missplaced entirely by a game of "FooledYou".
      It's crushing. Most people are simply not as resilient as you are.

      Now as to the question of "why does it matter": First, relationships matter and losing important relationships matter even more. Second, we find out that we were fooled, and this brings enormous discomfort and confusion and hurt. there are many more reasons -- or 'why' issues.

      Can I ask you, if you were having sex with a woman, and without you suspecting it at all, she got up and hit you on the head with a baseball bat, right away with no warning -- how would you feel?

    22. Basket of puppies, you are certainly making me think.

      You ask: "Was it the loss of innocence that was most damaging or the fact that there was no investment on the part of the socio?" I believe it was the #process# of losing the innocence that was the most hurtful for me, not the actual loss. The loss was more like a relief to me. But it was the fact that the socio had no emotional investment in the relationship though he claimed the opposite that made me lose my innocence.
      Damaging? I am not sure it was damaging for me in the long run. Actually, I see it as having been strengthening, though I did not see it that way at the time. It could have gone either way. I could have collapsed. I know for a fact it was difficult on the people who love me. But this kind of experience is damaging to most others as you know. Perhaps I was lucky or smart, or a bit of both. I also had no choice but to survive (or make it work, sounds a little less dramatic) because I had a whole family depending on me. There was no escape, and i am not a quitter to start with...

      Yes, absolutely, it would have been easier if he had been upfront with me. I am actually not sure he has completely come to terms with it himself. He talked about it sometimes but retracted what he said later on.
      I think you are doing the right thing by explaining how it works on your head. Hats off to you! Btw, how do you present this to people? What do you tell them?

      I will try and answer your other questions from perspective later, but keep in mind that even for empaths, ethics is so often a brain twister ands source of endless discussions. Lots of shades of grey...

    23. From *my* perspective

    24. OldAndWise,

      To answer my your question, I'm not sure that how I feel would be a good way to say it. My thought process would have been along the lines of "Okay... whoah... wtf just happened?" Next I would replay and analyze what was said and done to try to figure out where I made a mistake and where things went wrong. If nothing appeared then I would suspect that either she's moody and taking out her anger on me (in which case I'm not the comfort masyer I thought I was, which would.make me try again with her), or I would put it aside thinking I had an off moment and engaged with a nut job. If I felt that my lifenwas in danger I would restrain her, or do anything it took to make sure she can't hurt me. Of course my head hurts so I'm a little pissed but, after all this is done I would just think "Well then okay...that was pretty fucking weird and unexpected. "

  12. I´d say tragedy for sure; the guy in that bar could be in orbit, in space. Even open invitations is met with indifference. "-Who are you, why have you come here?" A spectre tied to some haunted mansion could not be more utterly alone, lost..

    1. I guess from the perspective of someone who would mind that it could be a tragedy. But, if you're someone who prefers being alone, or not keeping any relationship that's not something bad. Maybe not this family, but the sociopath could always find a beautiful woman he doesn't mind living with, charm her pants of, marry her, and get a family of his own. Maybe he wouldn't be the same emotions as the empathic family but hey that all a matter of perspective.

  13. the minute the shoe is on the other foot it struck a nerve. Socio's come on here and blast about using other people but if an empath finds little tolerance for it.. well, that's just not right now is it? Pot meet kettle.

    Most socio try to do right to be able to function in society and avoid jail/prison. That's all that is about.. Most have learned to discipline themselves but it never takes out of the equation of true intention. That is the issue. Most socio do not have good intentions. I'm not going to applaud those that come on here to boast and brag about intentions of using & harming someone. Although I identify with an empath I'm not much of an emotional person. I rarely cry if ever. I'm more of a realist.

    In reading the book.. intent of a socio is quite evident. It is the focal point of your life is how to get over on someone. Whereas, I want to legitimately earn it and do not have the need to use someone to attain it..There are all kind of personality disorders. If evil is done.. they were evil all along. That's comparing apples to oranges.

    everyone is entitled to their opinion.. and my opinion is just that. mine. I gravitate towards genuine, good natured people. When I see the kind of person that likes using others.. I will throw a wrench in it quick. I don't like being around arrogant people.. I just see a much bigger picture and we are all just a speck of nothing in this huge wide world & universe. Don't get too carried away with yourself there..

    1. Hi Anonymous2:49,

      I can understand the preoccupation some who identify on the socio side of things have with endlessly arguing that they are better than empaths, or at least no worse -- and it does get tedious and boring at times.

      There are always people (and always will be) who are vilified because they belong to some class, not because of their individual behavior. This isolation does not tend to make individual behavior more pro-social -- how could it?

      I can also understand how empaths could arrive at this site in various states of rage at the deception, betrayal and suffering they have gone through at the hands of a manipulative sociopathic bastard.

      So the only way to have an open and beneficial (rather than pointless and counter-productive) discussion between empaths and socios is with an attitude of tolerance and I would hope more humour.

      I am trying to move beyond that myself with an attitude of tolerance to everyone. I think you will find tolerance for your views and opinions if you are able to express your ideas without invoking large scale stereotypes like "That's all that is about..." {sociopaths not going to jail}.

      Call anyone out as you see fit. That's what I like about this place after getting past the elementary school fights of "We are better that you are".

      Anyhow, if you are new, welcome to the site and get a name so I can pay attention to read and can follow a train of thoughts.

  14. The fascinating thing about this book & enlightening is the thought processes of a socio. I've watched people like this that go out of their way to use people to a breaking point. End result is a lot of drama and quite a mess. If I can prevent it. I'll do whatever I can to stop it. Socio seem like they gravitate more of the weaker one's. Easily fooled and sadly a lot people lack life experience and need more wisdom. Education is key.

  15. I feel socios are more matter of fact, and less opinionated.

  16. The thread from which M.E. posted excerpts today really got my attention as well. If you read that series of posts from the beginning of the month, you will see that one one of my comments that started the mayhem. (Does this make me look full of myself? Whatever, I have been called worse). A couple of empaths re-acted very strongly to what I had to say. They called me dishonest, a co-dependent, a co-perpetrator, a narcissist, a masochist, a manipulator, suffering from battered women syndrome - I may be missing a few - idiot might have been in the list, or was it for Jamie's comment? And, oh, they also called me a sociopath and correlated that my stance to that of hookers, of which I am neither :-) To be honest, they made me feel like a traitor... But as the thread progressed, and they heard thoughts from Dev, Tii and Puppy Basket, I believe they started to re-think their original views of sociopaths: perhaps sociopaths are not sub-humans after all. They also asked me this question:


    It took me a while to think this through actually, and here is my answer:

    ... contd

    1. cont'd.
      I do not see myself as anybody’s advocate, more perhaps as some sort of a facilitator between “sociopaths” and “empaths”. In my mind, it is impossible for a neuro-typical to emotionally empathize with a sociopath. I believe the only thing neuro-typicals can do to understand sociopaths better is empathize cognitively with them, the way sociopaths have learned to empathize with neuro-typicals. Even that, in my experience, is difficult to achieve.

      Also, I strongly believe that if there was more awareness of ASPD, sociopaths could better integrate in society and cause less harm. I see the awareness being of value to both sociopaths and neuro-typicals. Sociopaths would better understand how they differ from the norm and choose to address their differences in a way that is suited to them, depending on whether they want to integrate into society and to what degree. They could also mentor other sociopaths and bring them to a higher functioning level (Kudos to Puppy Basket on that front). Neuro-typicals would be able to better recognize when they are being targeted by a sociopath and not get as damaged by the experience as they do now. They would also have other people to speak with. Had I recognized whom I was dealing with earlier on when I met the person who was going to become a few years later my sociopath “friend”, I believe it would have been a heck of a lot easier.

      To the interesting part: what might sociopaths bring to society? As much as any other human being, but perhaps more than what they do now because they are usually shunned and rejected once people realize how they think, or sometimes even before because they wreck lives or just plainly are difficult to deal with. They could use their differences in a more constructive way. They usually can see through people pretty easily. Think about how much awareness they could bring to a person’s psychological health, particularly cluster B people, if they were their psychologist. (OK, I am not sure this one is going to go down well with some neuro-typicals, here). They are also cool under pressure because they do not have the same fear response neuro-typicals do to extreme situations. Fear can paralyze neuro-typicals pretty easily. Think about Emergency Response workers or ER surgeons, special police forces (scary, I know) or soldiers. They also tend to think outside the box: guilt, fear and society’s norms do not encumber their thought process. Not necessarily always good. I don’t have an example for how useful this might be, but maybe somebody can come up with one. They could also be good leaders in business - they already are - because they can be great motivators and energize people. With more awareness though, they could potentially lead without detrimentally affecting the people they lead, if those people knew and understood their leader’s sociopathic traits (also scary, and yet to be proven, but better than the current alternative) and it would be easier for anybody to recognize any ethical slip-up on the part of the leader. Also, some – the minority I am assuming, but we do not know - have an enormous capacity for learning, the way some autists do. I am sure our society could use this brain power.

      Right now, we are just closing our eyes and hoping for the best, or putting sociopaths in jail after they commit a crime. Some think we should eradicate them – talk about ethical. Exploring new ways may be difficult, but can potentially be rewarding for all involved and our society as a whole.

      OK, having thought through this a little more, perhaps TheDevilsAdvocate is a better name than OldAndWise :-|

    2. Oops, the question asked disappeared! Here it is:

      What might sociopaths/psychopaths "bring to society" and why are you their advocate?

    3. How about TheDevilsEmbassador? I feel like it's a better fit than advocate.

    4. Actually no not really... That you're also sociopath.

    5. Hi OldAndWise,
      I can add to the laundry list of what has been written about you, which I hope is a kindling source of eternal everlasting delight. It's really the best thing I can say.

      If you look at the end of the last article "feeling for you" {how appropriate!} I suggested the wonderful possibility that you were a pure psychopathic who created a false history of an uber empath woman.

      To tell you the truth, this would be an awesome outcome if it happens to be true or even remotely so. You are doing good. Period. That's why I read what you write.

      My feelings about you do not change in a negative direction if that guess is the case and you are a pro-social psychopath.

      I think it is simply that people are projecting their own selves and their personal history onto you. So you are a mirror.

      I've also been amazed at the calm and composer that you and others like Dev have been able to keep when stepping up to vitriolic hate.

    6. Old and wise. I think your awesome. And you have many flavours to you. Which is a great character asset to have. Never loose that. Your sociopath friend sees something special in you and I think people like you are one in a million. Sociopathic, empath, etc or whatever spectrum we fall on...... it just doesn't really matter, your You! :)

    7. As you pointed out Old & Wise there are many things we could bring to society. I do now use my ability to analyze both my socio and my emathic friend's lives and help them through things. They come to me because I can look at things non emotionally and give really good advice. I don't have "a horse in the race" so to speak. I am not invested in the outcome for any reason except to see them get along better or achieve whatever goal they have. I don't play favorites. I don't support one side over the other. I do a thing for my friends we call "English to English translation" when they are having trouble communicating with each other. We establish the terms of the dialogue and I sit between them and explain what each person is trying to say to the other stripped of the emotional component and call bullshit when I see one of them lying or rationalizing their behavior. I have found this to be an excellent outlet for my manipulative nature. I am using my skills at people reading to help instead of harm. I have found it gives me the same visceral satisfaction to manipulate people's lives for the better as it does to manipulate for the worse. I highly recommend it to my fellow sociopaths. You get all the satisfaction you could get out of destroying someone and you get a reward of improved social currency to boot.

      Anon I in no way mean to imply that sociopaths are better than empaths as people just the opposite in fact. My entire premise is that it does not matter if a person is socio or empath. There are empaths that do evil and socios that do good. Why we do is of little matter to me. I am living proof that sociopaths can be productive members of society. We just need to be taught how to overcome our deficits. I could liken a sociopath to a deaf person. Without being trained how to survive in a world where we were born with a severe handicap both the deaf person and the sociopath are at a disadvantage. Without training in how to interact with the world in general and "normal" people we may adapt but, probably, won't excel. With proper training and incentives we can learn to be productive members of society. I would be pleased to train more sociopaths. It pleases me that in my social group we have four sociopaths two of whom are "out" among the empaths. The other two just think the rest of the group does not know. No one had to tell them, once my roommate and I revealed the other two were not that hard to spot.

      I have a question for the other sociopaths on the forum though. I have noticed that those of us who follow a moral code all seem to have a spiritual foundation for it. Is this an accurate observation?

    8. I do a thing for my friends we call "English to English translation" when they are having trouble communicating with each other.

      The worlds of socios and empaths are so differently constructed, so that 'english to english translation' is often needed. Sometimes to call someone out for their bullshit, but often, also, to see the common ground, which is what I think you are saying.

      A lot of good can come from this conversation across the chasm.

    9. Puppy Basket asked a question on the previous article about how different personality types -- their strengths and weakness -- are more functional than others in different situations.

      Think of Star Trek and its sequals. Remember that each space ship had to be a self sufficient, self organizing system -- often dealing with hostile worlds, but going on voyages of exploration.

      Now the fact of the matter is that in all cases, there were clear detached "alien" characters devoid of emotion, Spock and Data, for instance. There were also highly empathic characters (I forget their name). There were all combinations in between. It's the diversity of abilities, traits and predilections that allowed the group to "go where no man has gone before".

    10. Her name was Deanna >:{ >:{

    11. Pup Bask,
      Yes, at least for me the moral code comes from something along the lines of spirituality. My religious beliefs ask of me to follow these codes as a duty.

      Yes, good point. SCIFI BITCHES!

    12. Good example Doc. Perhaps the world needs all these different kinds of people for healthy functioning. One of the best examples might be Doctors. Many are sociopaths. They often make the best doctors. They have the observational skills to diagnose, the social adaptations give them the best bedside manners, they make split decisions that save lives in surgery and they can lead their teams with ruthless efficiency. Their "socio needs" are met by their position so they have no need to act out in harmful manners, though I have heard being married to one is an exercise in masochism. I have to wonder how many breakthroughs in medicine are directly attributable to sociopaths? How many companies that have brought technological breakthroughs to society would have failed without a sociopath or two at the helm? Something to think about the next time someone suggest putting us all up against the wall and eliminating us.

    13. I totally agree with the sentiments and points that you made. The point is really simple. Sociopaths or others with different neurological constructions are part of nature -- such people exists as a result of Darwinian evolution and the evolution of human society, and will always exist. Period. End of story on that.

      Now, given that Darwinian selection also operates at a group level, and societal level, the existence of sociopathic personality types in society is an advantage for society, otherwise it would have been selected out of existence a long time ago. But it is important to not have to many sociopaths, which is why they are relatively rare. Society depends on cooperation and trust, and in any cooperative game there will always be what are called 'cheaters'. One can do computer simulations of simple models of cooperators and defectors and find that defectors always can invade a cooperative society. That is also a fact of nature.

      I am not saying that all socios are cheaters, but they are more inclined to take rather than to give, and the whole notion of fairness and what most others think the rewards are, is different.

      Now it is also a fact of the matter, that if one changes the rules of the 'cooperator/defector' game, one can get more stable populations of defectors or less.

      So the point is really about defectors, those can be socios or empaths too.

      I agree there are many professions where socios do naturally excel, including the ones you mentioned. Those are on the cooperative side of human society. There are also socios who can excel on the defector side of society.

      The question is simply to decide if one wants more or less defectors in society and then change the rules, open communication, and mold people regardless of their personality types into pro-social beings. There will always be anti-social characters though. That's a fact of nature from my POV.

  17. Replies
    1. Stay away from the devil! All psychopaths are evil -- naw avoid him for sure, OldAndWise. Linking2Worlds?

    2. I'm a sociopath ^_^.

    3. No, you are not.
      You're an aspie, kid. I raised 2 aspie boys who are so like you, you could be kin.
      Be honest now.

    4. Tii,
      Sometimes I get insight reading you, and sometimes I think you write like someone who cannot at the moment listen. I have been told I have this problem sometimes myself. We all do to various degrees.

    5. Anon 2:45,
      Lol what the fuck XD. Weirdest test I ever took. Am I asexual? Lol what the fuck type of question is that?
      I think I now understand why some people get creep out an out Aspies, they are a bit weird, stalkerish, and horrible with people if they are expected to answer yes to most of these questions. Half of the behaviors they asked about didn't make sense to have them.
      My Aspie score was 30/200 I guess that would mean I'm not. I suppose you don't know your kids as much as you implied. Though I guess that also unfair to say sense all you have to go on are my posts.
      My neurotypic score was 140/200, not exacty perfect but, still closer to neurotypicals than Aspies.
      Might want to be careful calling emotionally sensitive people Aspies, that's equivalent to calling them social idiots. Anyways I answered as honestly as I could, if it is even possible in that test.

      I can"t say I really understand what you're trying to say.

    6. Anon 2:45,
      I think that you've mistaken my hippie rasta way of life (or more life preferences) with horrible social skills. I'm not bad in social situations, I'm actually pretty good, people think I'm charismatic and I make friends easily. The only think is that I'm not a big fan of the loud party extravagant lifestyle people around me lead or want to lead. I prefer a more peaceful and quiet one. Which is why I would like to live in a small rural town surrounded by nature. Sure I don't mind interacting with people but sometimes I just like to be alone just observing nature (not necessarily have to be alone, if other people enjoy that too I wouldn't mind them along. Just don't know many people like that myself.

    7. Tii,
      I don't want to pick on you or any one thing that I've read -- that would not be fair and would be a misrepresentation.

      On the other hand, looking back through some posts I have seen a number of suggestions that you have aspie tendencies. That's also mixed in with other tendencies. Those tendencies are neither good or bad, they are just tendencies.

      Who cares what a generic test says. I get the impression you are more complex that your run of the mill sociopath. Why deny it?

      Maybe some of those suggestions are actually reasonable. If you say that in whole "I do not ever care what other people think", that's also fine, but then one does not ever really listen. I'm not saying this is what you say, btw. So don't take that personally.

    8. I might be, I'm not saying otherwise. Just never thought of it or seen it that way myself. I've identified more with sociopath that's all, but then again who knows. Sociopath, Aspie, BPD, or Narcissist might be seen in the future as just personalities instead of personamity disorders for all I know. I just saying that I've always thought I was more down to Earth and less irritable than the Aspies I know. Plus, it doesn't seem like they are chameleons who are able to camouflage in their environmant. But I can't claim to know much about them to say that. Maybe I'm a machiavellian aspie. lf as Anon says s/he raised two aspies, maybe s/he knows more than I do. I just see myself more as a sociopath that all.

      And about the listening, I wasn't taking anything personally, I truly didn't get what you meant. Wasn't sure if you were calling hard-headed and stubborn, or uncomprehensive, our as someone who ignores people when they talk, or someone who hears what people say but doesn't really listen. If I'm understanding your latest post correctly you mean that when I console people I hear what they say but I don't really listen and retain. I think I'm a pretty good listener and a good councelor. I'm not just an emotional punching bag to people, I actually respond and participate in the conversation. And I retain the info gain from the exchange and will sometimes act upon them months later.

    9. I think Anonymous at 2:45 is correct, Tii.

      Considering the way you reacted to his/her opinion, the way you put down aspies, it is obvious why you want to identify as a sociopath instead.

      You refer to autistics as "wierd", "stalkerish", "creepy", "horrible with people".
      Your knowledge of autism seems extremely limited.

      Self tests are useless, especially since your prejudices would make it particularly difficult for you to answer truthfully any question which might lead to you being seen in that light.
      It is a spectrum disorder. One I would recommend you look into.

    10. Like I said maybe, s/he claimed to have raised two aspies, if that's true s/he knows more about them then I do. I admit that I know pretty much nothing about autism, except what I observed from a younger autistic neighbor that I had as a in my early teens. He was pretty high functioning, and did pretty well on a social level. He had his of moments and his temper tantrums once in a while, but for the most part he was pretty much like every other kids (except for the way he expressed himself, and the metaphors he used). If I may correct you, I never said I thought of them as creepy, weird, stalkerish, or horrible with people. My exact words were: "I think I now understand why some people get creep out an out Aspies, they are a bit weird, stalkerish, and horrible with people IF THEY ARE EXPECTED TO ANSWER YES TO MOST OF THESE QUESTIONS."
      If you took a look at the test, I think you would understand what I mean. Some of the questions asked were:
      Do you have a fascination for slowly flowing water?
      As a teenager, were you usually unaware of social rules & boundaries unless they were clearly spelled out?
      Do you tend to look a lot at people you like and little or not at all at people you dislike?
      Do you forget you are in a social situation when something gets your attention?
      Do you have an urge to learn the routines of people you know?
      Have others commented or have you observed yourself that you make unusual facial expressions?
      Do you mistake noises for voices?
      Have you experienced stronger than normal attachments to certain people?
      Have you been accused of staring?
      Do you examine the hair of people you like a lot?
      Do you like to follow (walk behind) people you are attached to?
      There were many more like these. Now tell me if doctors, psychologists, and the parents of a person told you that that person was definitely not autistic but you still saw him/her behave that way, what would you think? I guess I should have said instead that if an aspie is expected to answer yes to all these questions, I understand why people who are unaware might believe they are creepy, stalkerish, and horrible when dealing with people.

      I myself don't have a preference for Aspie or Socio. Socio came to mind because I had a few friends mention that I was like a robot, or that I was cold hearted and blunt, and in some occasions call me a sociopath. At the time I thought sociopaths were crazy rapist killers that ran after people with machetes, and killed as many people as they could when they snapped in their school. Then I researched the topic because of the comparison which became more frequent, and realized that I do have many (if not most) sociopathic traits. So to me it seems like sociopath is more likely, you might think asperger and it may be true. You say tomayto, I say tomahto.

    11. Newbie and Anom you both seem unaware that there is definite overlap in some areas of Apse and Sociopathy as there is between us and Narcissists. I took your test for lulz and Tii is right. That is some weird shit. I have friends who have Apse though and trust me there is a huge difference in how we present in real life as opposed to online. The easy way to check Tii is "are you afraid of anything?" Aspe's have fear, socio's don't. Aspe is going to choke in a stress situation not so the socio.

    12. Puppy Basket,

      Great point! How can one distinguish if one is more on the aspie side or more on the socio side: "The easy way to check Tii is "are you afraid of anything?" Aspe's have fear, socio's don't. Aspe is going to choke in a stress situation not so the socio."

      Is that the only difference?

    13. Not a few more differences, but some seem so alike on a physical level that you'd have to go in our heads to actually see the difference. Like while some Aspies find it hard to express their feeling, which is sometimes mistaken for apathy, the sociopath may be genuinely disinterested.

    14. Hi Tii,

      Puppy Basket pointed out a great question that anyone can ask themselves. Are there other questions a person could ask themselves to know more about their own personality type?

      It's not about someone else going into another person's head (or giving a test), but a person going into their own head with a small set of questions that are rather unambiguous and straightforward enough to answer for themselves. It's about self-identification and self-understanding.

    15. Doc,
      I really don't know. I'm not really a "who am I" type of guy. I'm more of a that's what I am like, and that's what I like type of guy. I don't do much self searching, I find no point in it. Maybe because, like people say, sociopaths don't have a self (though I'm mot sure what is meant by that). Most of those tests I take for shits and giggles, or to see if the results are consistent, not really because I'm truly interested in my personality type. My advise would just be live like as you please, as long as you refrain from being a nuisance to others.

    16. When you think about it Doc the root cause of ALL mental disorders is some form of Narcissism. I am not saying there is no genetic or physical factor but the manifestation of them is rooted in Narcissism. Let me explain. As children (all children) we see the world only as it relates to us. If you can think back far enough you know this to be true. As we mature we begin to differentiate ourselves from others or others from ourselves. Unfortunately in the case of the Pure Narcissist this NEVER HAPPENS. They see everything in the world as a reflection of themselves or themselves as a reflection of what they perceive. They create lies to support this and they BELIEVE THEIR OWN LIES.

      One step up that ladder is the sociopath. We have the same mindset but at some point realize that we are different from rest of the human race. We still see everything as somehow belonging to us but know that we ourselves do not belong. We lie but don't believe our own lies as that would leave us open to discovery. Both of us are mostly concerned with our survival. From what I have learned of sociopaths at least one parent in EVERY case I have read is a Narcissist. Usually the other is a submissive. There are cases where both are narcs. Not all children of Narcs become socios but you better (genetic predisposition?) believe they all need some kind of therapy. Aspe seems to have a much more genetic and/or environmental (by that I mean nutritional or chemical exposure) element to it. As someone with extreme chemical allergies I have been in support groups for that where parents have gotten Aspe and Autistic children onto purely organic and non grain diets and within a month had perfectly normal children from ones who could not even speak.

      You can find ego at the root most mental illnesses. My brother is schizophrenic (though he has traits of many other things added on top). After 50 years of observing him I can tell you this. His "delusions" are all crafted to be self serving. They serve only one purpose. To make sure it is never his fault. He acts quite rational UNLESS he feels he will be blames for something. Then his mind spins vast conspiracies that leave him a victim. He lies and believes his own lies in this. He creates scenarios after scenario and I do give credit where credit is due, he remembers every added detail no matter how much time has past. To do this however requires that he replay the fictional event/s over and over in his head.

    17. cont
      Lets test depression under my theory (again there is a huge chemical component to this), but the base of depression is the lack of hope which stems from comparison of the depressed persons life to the life of others. They are focused on themselves completely. They cannot live in the moment paralyzed as they are by fear of the future and regret for the past. Circular thinking patterns emerge and are reinforced. Vitamin deficiencies set in as they neglect their health and don't go outside to get vitamin d form the sun. Lack of exercise compounds this.

      This is why socios are very resistant to depression. We tend to live in the moment. We don't regret the past (much), we don't fear the future. Socios who are practicing Alcoholics are an exception to this as Alcohol is depressant and they can get caught up in the cycle like anyone else. I have lots of personal experience with that one.

      You can run pretty much any mental disorder through the Narc filter and see this. There is always a physical component that accompanies it which might be the deciding factor on HOW the Narcissism manifests but at the base of all of it is a combo of ego and lies.

      This is why one of the best therapies for whatever is "wrong" with a person is charity work or just helping another person do, well, anything. During the time you spend helping someone else you are not focused on yourself. You feel like doing something positive and hope and compassion spring forth. Do it enough and you won't have time to wallow in your own shit. It is transformative. This works for anyone but the True Narcissist.

      The kicker here is that mental disorders that were thought to be untreatable, if approached from this viewpoint, could be, not cured, but treated. It seems to me that many of us along the spectrum simply never developed past a certain age emotionally. We retain our child ego. Probably as a survival technique but it really does not matter the reason.

      The only real reason to identify what you are Doc, would be to find where you stopped "maturing" and work to move on from there or develop a tool kit, so to speak, to replace the missing parts. Just my two cents.

    18. Puppy Basket, you raise so many interesting points -- I'll just start at the beginning here of what you wrote.

      I agree that narcissism plays and important role in many mental illness, but I am not an expert enough to say all or indeed if it is the main feature one or more mental illnesses.

      Schizophrenia is a special case with psychosis and all that. It looks like afundamental brain abnormality. It's true that mosts psychoses are focussed on the self, hearing voices telling you what to do, megalomania etc. though.

      So we understand each other, I tend not to believe things like ALL people of a certain type do ALWAYS certain things. My world is more grey -- there are tendencies but not absolute rules when it comes to human behavior. Just my 2 cents.

      "Not all children of Narcs become socios but you better (genetic predisposition?) believe they all need some kind of therapy. " Good point. Such children are not getting the parenting and mentoring they need to function best in the real world, because the world they grew up in is so fucked up.

      Well what can be done about that? Yes, therapy is a good step and training therapist to learn to help socios or children from that kind of environment is necessary. At present psychology is dismally inadequate to that task. So methods of therapy need to be developed. I see this blog as a contribution somehow in that direction, if therapist come across it, and have a look, maybe they can develop some insights. I have learned alot from reading George simon's books and his web forums btw, for myself that is.

      But what if there were a website with therapists and children in emotionally damaging homes. What if there were socios on there to help them accept and understand themselves and get a better foot in life? What if, what if, what if... the possibiities are there if only people step up to the plate and offer what they can to this disaster for children, socios and empaths and everyone in between?

    19. So here's a set of questions: how would a child who needs help in that situation search on google? What terms would they use to arrive at a site where they can actually be helped.

      As was said before 'shared experience' is the best source of learning and knowledge and why having a fucked up home environment is so damaging and alienating too.

      Google search terms anyone?

      "my parents are fucked up", "i hate the world", "i like to strangle cats", "my parents don't understand me"... I really don't know what a child with sociopathic brain structure would search for, but i know they would searchc.

  18. My brother is bipolar, use drugs and manipulates doctors, family, everybody around him. We aredesesperated as he cant live alone, we cant pay somebody to watch him end even people in his building wants him out. I don't know what to do. I feel guilt and responsable for him. He manipulates his medicine, money from the family etc etc (excuse me if i make mistakes in english, its not my language) . What should I do? If I just forget him, porbably he in be in trouble and I willhave to solve the situation. My god! I apreciate any response.

    1. Your feeling guilt and responsible for him is part of his manipulation, and so is the belief that you would have to solve his situation if he got into trouble. The first step is to set firm boundaries. If he is over 18, he is responsible for himself. Why can't he live alone?

    2. Alright, I'll be a bit nicer lol. If he's over 21 he is responsible for himself. Best thing you can do is advise him to see a shrink amd let him do the rest. Help him as you can but don't drown yourself for him, especially if he doesn't mind ruining you.

    3. Get needle shots for him so he can't skip medicine. Best way for all people involved. Including himself foremost. . Once your very uphill manic, your moral compass is compromised. You will justify anything. When he is stabilized this is a good thing, but sometimes his guilt and conscious will guilt him into a deep unipolar depression. He can't afford to be this extreme because of the high incident of becoming suicidal. Stabilization is the only way for him to feel dignified and to not go to the two extremes that can hit hard and fast.

      I'm more of a bipolar 3 Cyclothymia and borderline combined. I know bipolar 1 can get very out of control fast. My season seems to be the summer. I get hypomanic during this time, but the rest of the seasons I'm fine. So I just submit to medicine in the summertime or else I won't sleep too well. I'd say I'm mildly manic right now, very managble, very high functioning. I've had one psychiatrist who thinks I'm not bipolar at all, but just borderline traits, not even a full blown extreme one. And I have another doctor who was a military psychiatrist who laughs at the bpd trait diagnose and says bipolar 3 with ptsd. I say im bleeping all. But I can manipulate and bullshit my way out of things. If we had a comorbid diagnosis of Super chick girl, I'd say she acts like a borderline, a bipolar 3 and a sociopath combined. Im nice as hell, but im not, im really not. Or maybe I'm scrutinizing myself again. Lol

    4. DoctorWho, Tii and Superchick I want to say thank you a lot for you careful response. Because the IQ here is higher than average and I love this open mind you all have to see the life. Ansewring DoctorWho why he can't live alone is this because he is 53 years ols and he almost put fire in the house when he is totaly out of control. For me is too long story to write in English, but it certainly began whe we where kids. He needs medicine like Seroquel and Depakote, but he doesn't took it sometimes then he drink alcohol, then cocaine, then a nightmare come. Never sleeps, walk on the streets alone or with his chow chow hours and hours, get paranoic and fight puting his dog against the other, make sex with transexual payed people who brings him drugs and still him, oh, my... another day he asked two transvesters at the same time to go this his house. They get locked inside. He forgot about the second one. The second one started to screan 3 AM downstairs that he was going to call the police... so this kind of things hapening in a high midle class building you know... people say ythat he cant have a dog, wich I think is good and can't stay alone. So my father, now 84 y old and tired still working to pay bills for him like private healty securit, psychiatrist, aprtment bills, everything.Oh, it's so long story. When he was about 17 he went to London from Brazil to holydays. Like 3 months in Europe. He and his cousin it was i 77, went to a concert and start to take LSD. He come back to Rio crazy. Nobody understood what was going on. He start to use cocaine and pot. First maniac epidod. Parents get lost. Did not know what to do. The only medicine working at this time was Carbolitium but he said he will never ever take this one because he feels bad. Also he went to dowstairs building of his shrink( I dont know how to spell it) screaming bad words. The doctor said to my mother that he could not take him because he doesnt wanted, so it was impossible. After this he tried suicide in a horribe way. He tooked 1 liter of benzine expecting to die, but he didnt. Full of pain in his stomac, he went to the toilet and put alcohool in his face and hair and fired. Did not work. So he hanged him with a cuted towel in the bathroom. Then he had convulsion and beated many times with his head on the wall. I was in my room (its a big house) but I felt like something was wrong and went to this bathroom . It was locked. I woke my mother and she opend the door. I founf a knife, she cuetd the towel around his nec. At this very moment he was purple and his head like imense at the size of his shoulders. Blood everywere. Scared me. I losted all my belives at this moment. Forever. Then he passed for three plastic surgerys, six months inside his room with an elephant head. He was a very handsome guy and still after all he never losed his beauty. I did not know what to do with my feelings. I started to use drugs like alcohol, LSD, cocaine, everything but I never losed control. Its a very long story. Can I continue later? Its painful for me and with my spaghetti english I dont want to annoy you my virtual counselors. But at this moment he is out of the city. I founded a clinic for druged. He is like free there like they respect him never containing him with haldol but he cant get out. we were planing to make he stay there for like 2 years, but the owner doesnt want him anymore. He manipuates the others againt the clinic, he is arrogant with the others and etc. They are not specialized in bipolars or sick mentals, but in druged ones. I'm afraid about the other clinics. They make him suffer. He could live in his apartment but not alone. He doesnt wants. So when I see the police calls me because his is in trouble. He also suts his father, a lawyer and me. A nightmare.

    5. If he is self medicating the best thing you can do is get him in a treatment program or Alcoholic Anonymous. Then get yourself to some Al Anon meetings. Al Anon will teach you how to deal with your brother without enabling him and also be a support group for what you are going through. You need to understand that you cannot control nor are you responsible for your brother's actions. I understand what you are going through. My brother is a self medicating schizophrenic. The best thing you can do is get a support group FOR YOURSELF. The only person you can control is you so learning how to properly interact with and when not to disengage from a self medicating person regardless of if they have other issues is paramount.

  19. I think that he is a bit socio also as he doesnt feel guilt almost all of the time.

  20. So many things in life occur as a result of "dumb luck." This disturbs
    us, so we try to create a "science" (explaination) for why the event
    happened. We would like ANYTHING but to believe the event was mere
    happenstance. This is where "magical thinking" comes in, and how people get fleeced.
    For example, many men can't adjust to the modern changes in male/
    female relationships. They literally don't know how to engage with a
    woman to get her to have sex with him. It's no exaggeration to say that
    many men have gone for years without having sex with a woman. It's
    like a lock they can't pick. But other men seem to have a nack with
    women. There are some men who REALLY believe that the top 20% of
    "Alpha" males get 80% of the female attention. Naturally, any man that
    believes this will resent "women," and look for a remedy.
    Now, it's true that things HAVE changed from the past. This is because
    of the Jews. It's simply part of their ongoing plan to destroy western
    civilization and feast on it's fruits.
    The Jews have invented P.U.A. P.U.A. is a "magical" way to trick women
    to give up sex. It doesn't work. Why does today's women engage in sex?
    For the same asinine reasons that men always engaged in sex:
    ATRACTION. Another words, the luck of the draw. If a man makes
    enough attempts he's bound to get "lucky." It's not a science. It's dumb
    luck. But it's very discouraging to believe that. Typically, the Jews have
    also started ANTI-PUA. The poor white male doesn't know what to do
    so in frustration he grabs a gun and machine guns women.

    1. Maybe. How do you feel about that?

    2. Anonymous, seriously I have respect for you. But I'd advise you to invest in an escort service every now and then. Feel a women inside of you if you want, or just hang out with her a little with no sex involved, but never ever hurt her. No strings attached with an escort agency - but don't get too attached, she's just offering a service to you. That is all. She can help in making you feel like your not a social outcast and we're all a little peculiar in some type of way. Believe in your ability and believe in yourself. I know your Christian beliefs might not support that, but I'd start somewhere so you feel confident. Or go find yourself a nice girl in church. :) just my friendly advice. Or ignore this advise ;)

      P.S. we all have an animal instinct side, I think it's natural, and you might just need a friend to hang with once in awhile.

    3. Sweet Buttery Jesus......
      The Jews are the reason men can't get laid?
      Let me enlighten you. Most men get to have sex. Men who have no social skills or cannot engage a woman cerebrally don't get sex. Men who do not engage in washing and teeth brushing do not get laid. Men who spend the entire first meeting with a woman talking exclusively about themselves do not get laid. This is not a beta or alpha thing. Women still want the same things we always have and will pick a mate who interests us regardless of what they look like most times.

      I have to explain this to some of my more socially awkward male friends. Sex is not a right. Women do not it owe it to you. If you only approach pretty girls and are an unwashed asshole no, you will not get sex. If you consider women to be objects we can actually tell this most of time and no, we don't find it attractive. We find it repulsive. Most women are still interested in a relationship as a partnership whether it is for a short period or permanent so we chose a mate who best suits that. The actual way to find a mate is; Be attractive to the potential mate.

      I don't mean that you need to be physically attractive but be at least clean and well groomed. When you are introduced to a lady, listen to what she says rather than talk. Ask her questions and get to know which of your interests overlap and then converse on those subjects. Do not approach strange females with the intent of having sex with them it is really creepy. If you believe females to be objects please step off a high cliff and flap your arms on the way down. There are lots of pretty women at the bottom of the cliff that want to have sex with you :)

  21. ?
    Are you trying to help me or get me crazy?

  22. Hi Superchick,

    Nice to see you back. Reading now a bit more of this blog, I get to a void of asexual neutered beings discussing in many cases intimate relationships. Does anyone here have a view they would like to express about sex or intimacy?

    My ex paranoid psychopathic disordered character often said he treasured the 'connection' and 'intimacy' we had. I have no idea what these words meant to him, but I do think he meant them. He had a high sex drive and he is not off to his next conquest unfortunately.

    The two main things he valued in me were sex and the endless pleasures of duping and manipulation.


  23. Hey Newbie, hoes it going? Asexual beings are very cool. Friendship and intimacy is very tight and a special bond forms. (That to me is more valuable than anything this world has to offer.)

    I think your ex probably was sincere that he did treasure the connection and intimacy you once had. He probably always will inside. There just seems to be a magnetic spark about them. The chapter ended, but it was shared and written between you both and it was magical and probably intense. God I love fucking like that. Excuse me saying so. :) You'll always have that. Many sociopaths are hyper -sexual. I'm a bit hyper sexual. It's my normal though. But I make a conscious effort to not cheat physically. Ive never done it. But my thoughts at times................................ well you know. ;)

    1. Newbie, I'm not sure about the rest but I don't think that psychopath and paranoid walk along hand in hand. If you mean that he was paranoid in the sense that he kept thinking that you cheated on him, it was probably a way to keep a hold of you. Sociopaths tend to be very possessive, so in that sense he might have seen you as his, and wanted to make sure that you would stay near him in order to assure him that you're not. If you're always by his side and more obedient to show him that you're not cheating, his got the hold on you. If you mean paranoid in the sense that he believed everyone was after him, I'm not sure he was a psychopath.

  24. Hey Superchick,
    I find you amazing.

    Tii, given how little I've written about the character I was with, I appreciate your comments.

    But I am actually interested in how different personalities view sex and intimacy.

    what can connection mean to someone who would write "I realized that I don't have a self. There is no self to be found."

    that kind of thing.

    1. I'd be interested in hearing a sociopaths perspective on this also Newbie? Tii? Or calling all sociopaths, or who think they are on the sociopath spectrum, let's talk about sex, intimacy and connection. Newbie makes a good point.

      ""what can connection mean to someone who would write "I realized that I don't have a self. There is no self to be found.""

    2. I personally have never understood what people mean by I have a self or I don't have a self.

      But on the sex subject, I enjoy sex yes and I guess I have a decently high sex drive, but I won't say I crave it. When I'm around a woman or women I find attractive my default setting is pursue. What I want is for them to want me. Being morally grey and pretty open minded, the facade I put on is neither bad boy, nor flirt, nor player. I usually am myself, meaning I show her that I see her for who she is. Many girl friends (not girlfriends) I have have mentioned that around me they feel naked, because somehow it's like I see through them but, they enjoy it because though I do make obvious their faults and qualities, I don't judge them. I don't look down on them for their mistakes nor do I exalt them for their qualities. So in the end what is left is just pure them, naked, blushing, and somewhat vulnerable, while I watch smiling (I've been told I have a warm, kind smile, maybe it helps make them feel comfortable). I don't try to pry, nor do I try to change anything. I once asked a girl why she actually enjoyed it when she felt that way, her response was that it's almost like the thrill of knowing you're being watched when you're naked masturbating (tsk tsk tsk women, such exhibitionists). Anyways it's pretty much the same with sex, after I have "seen" through her, the only thing a girl still has that I don't know is her naked. So once she's naked I just look for a while to tell her that now I have really seen everything. Only thing left is for her to give herself to me. Then I just play, tease, and keep her on the edge without letting her orgasm, until she's begging and I feel like letting her. Then I try to give her the best one she'll ever have, and the look one her face at that moment is what I like to see (Sometimes I don't care about whether or not I finish, as long as I get her to that point). I find the whole process more exciting than the actual sex. I wouldn't say it's about dominance (except when I'm playing and teasing, I pretty passive during sex, and even when I'm the one leading it's usually gentle and based on what the girl wants next). I think it's more about possession, whether it is temporary, whether she leaves me and cuts those intimate ties with me because she has found someone she loves and wants to date, or whether I'm just her friend with benefit doesn't matter. What I want is for the girl to allow herself to be vulnerable, and feel/want to belong to me when we're together. And by the way that is only on an intimate/sexual level, I don't walk around trying to drag girl behind me by a collar in my daily (professional/social) life.

      PS. I don't force, or try to take. It's no fun if she doesn't give it herself willingly.

    3. So selfish and yet so selfless. I recognize it well. Sometimes i feel like saying (or screaming, or violently gesturing with perhaps some contact).. do it for You, dont do it for me... Not necessarily talking about sex, but in général. So frustrating. Not sure anybody will quite understand.

    4. OldAndWise,
      I am trying to understand. What can you say?

      Paranoid thoughts pop into my head because of my recent, prolonged intimate contact with a complex personality disorder involving DSM-5 traits involving aggression, paranoia, and if I looked back I could remember the others but it truly does not matter.

      So being in a state of paranoia would give rise to random thought processes in that direction. I hope no one actually believes (but if you do so be it) that I b believe OldAndWise is a psychopath. More than 1% chance that's all. So even if it is a low probability a priori, the possibilites are so fascinating that they must be consider.

      First: If that small chance were to be true -- that OldAndWise is a pro-social psychopath -- it would also be a selfish and yet so selfless act.

      But the emotion?

      Where are the psychologists here anyhow? Bob? Dr. Ginger?, oh memory fails.. Dev? anyone on

      good place to start in my view to understand this selfish selfless business.

      Anyhow it is obvious enough to me and probably to many others by now that the comments in this blog are much more fascinating, because they are dynamic processes, than the articles themselves.

      Whoever is making things happen this way, and you are there. the intelligence level of this place is way to high for the internet unless there are some heads behind it.

      Beautiful, really if it is true. There's no need to hide.

      That's enough of my paranoia

    5. Yes selfish and selfless I've heard that before. I think it's one of the reason the ones that fall for me usually get pissed off for. While I can and will make them feel loved to the best of my abilities, a lot of them are fissatisfied with the fact that I don't actually fall in love (though I always make that clear at the beginning of such relationships). The fact that it can seem like we belong to each other and fit together perfectly but, that I seem to be able to do it with everygirl bothers them. It's like having a bunch of puzzles done but they all share the same final piece, if you put it in one, the others don't have it. Now even though some have boyfriends (usually stop before sex with those) and some agree with me about no dating, they still get really jealous.

    6. Hi Tii,
      I am having trouble following this. But I could ask a favour. You have read much more than I, even though you are 19. Amazing! I simply can't believe your storehouse of knowledge.

      Can you explain autism spectrum disorders on a new thread? There's alot of misunderstanding here and in the world at large about this type of personality -- or way of being a person.

    7. Sorry, but to tell you the truth I barely know anything about autism. All I know is what I've been told and have observed, which isn't much. I have yet to research the topic and learn about it before I can really explain anything to anyone. Only thing I can say is, just because a person is different than you are, or because that person doesn't process information, or see the world the way you do doesn't mean that the person is pitiful. People have a tendency to look at people with autism, the deaf, the blind, and people with anything that deviate them from the norm as if they were broken and in need of pity. I have met a few autistic people, and blind people, and I've never seen any complain. They are usually either cheerful or doing their own thing (in the case of aspies). A few blind people I met (so many at the college I go to) have thanked me after a conversation with them, because I show no pity towards them (to the point where we both joke lightly about their situation, I remember one guy who kept pointing forward and telling me to check out this hot girl and I would fall for it every time) and only ask questions out of curiosity and not for the sake of consoling them. People usually feel bad for them because a lot of them have pretty bad social skills and aren't the best at making friends, what people tend to forget is that they usually prefer it that way. If they like it better like that, why feel bad for them. It's like you telling me you don't like ice cream, and me feeling bad for you because I like ice cream and you don't. There's nothing to feel bad about someone's preferences. The only thing though I've read many stories about people with autism being so focused on their thoughts, or on somethings that they forget about their surroundings and sometimes put themselves in dangerous situations, like walking into the street and forgetting about cars. So, it's probably safe to always keep an eye on them to make sure they don't put themselves at risk. But if they want to be alone and don't want to interact, don't try to force them, they like it better that way. It's like me taking of my shirt because I'm hot and people keep coming to me to put shirts and blankets on me because I look cold, no, if I get cold I will put my damn shirt back on. If they want to talk to you they will come to you, if they want to analyze the world, and solve it's problem and mysteries inside their head by themselves let them. People need to learn not to suffocate others by confusing everyone else's comfort with their own. I have to admit though, I'm pretty curious about how aspies experience the world, I would love to be able to see how things look from that coconut of there's.

    8. That doesn't only go for Aspies. That "crazy" guy on the bus who is always talking to himself and always looks like he is in front of a board solving math problems. Don't judge to quickly, "yeah this dude is a complete nut job, he's always muttering to himself and writing shit and pointing at things in the air". For all you know he probably is making calculation, he might have discovered the equation to reach light speed, or might have figured out the secret to time travel. The "crazy cat woman" in your building, who seems to prefer interaction with cats more than interaction with humans. In her head she might have figured out a pattern, habits, and small indistinguishable movements or expression on cat's face that actually allows her to understand them and communicate with them. If one day you woke you woke up and found out you could go Dr. Dolittle with lizards and birds, tell me you wouldn't spend more time with them.

      "Sociology offers a distinctive and enlightening way of seeing and understanding the social world in which we live and which shapes our lives. Sociology looks beyond normal, taken-for-granted views of reality, to provide deeper, more illuminating and challenging understandings of social life." - I don't remember who
      "No great mind has ever existed without a touch of madness." -Aristotle

      In the end what's left to say is live and let live.

    9. I don't understand people's obsession with believing that anyone who is different is miserable.

    10. "People need to learn not to suffocate others by confusing everyone else's comfort with their own." I am claiming this as mine, this time!

    11. Only fair I suppose ^_^.

    12. Beautifully put Tii. I have talked to some deaf people who would rather be deaf since they believe the hearing are at a disadvantage due to all the distraction in their world. True silence is rare and amazing and to be treasured. As to the sex I am mostly asexual by nature but when I engage in sex it is very intimate and I, like Tii am a performance junkie. The other person's pleasure is more important than my own. It is important to me to make sure the other person knows they are my whole world during the act. I love watching the play of emotions and pleasure overtake a person. That might be a power thing. I dunno. I picked my lifemate based on personal criteria and because I find it more convenient to not have to find and dispose of mates. I will seek another if I outlast this one. While I cannot love I can be extremely fond of people. If the other person is OK with this I don't see the harm. I am honest starting on the first meeting with a potential mate about what I am and what they can expect. I also let them know my rules. No kids, yes cats or dogs, I will go do my own thing, I prefer them not to cheat and I never will, a few other caveats. If this is acceptable, we share some interests, and they meet my criteria for a potential mate we can move forward if not I thank them for a nice evening and move on. I will take whatever intimacy level a mate or friend is willing to share. I never push them to give more.

      I can give respect, understanding, affection, and attention. These coupled with my learned reactive facial responses make a response that looks more like love than love does to most people. My mates have had no complaints. Since men tend to get "addicted" to me I have adaptive a strategy to get rid of them once I am done with them. I find a female friend who wants them whom I think they would be a good match for and get them together. I find most men don't mind being "released back into the wild" if they don't have to find their next mate themselves.

    13. Tii and Puppy Basket, I know exactly what you mean about sex being a performance. I've always done my best to make sure the other gets all of my attention and gets off first. I do try to get off too, but it is usually of secondary concern.

  25. The oddest part by far was being in bed with a different "version" of my ex -- he would shape shift from one roll in the sack to the next. I once mentioned it to him and he said that often people he had sex with had freaked out about it. I found his fluidity fascinating at the time. I figured I wouldn't get bored.

    I guess that goes to @Mach comment on a different post "Let's say the sociopath is represented by the color blue. If confronted with red, it will turn a situation purple. If it interacts with yellow, what results is green." {BTW that whole post, liberation-unleashed, is awesome, but for an empath kind of sickening too.}

    Except I was always "me".

    Anyhow, I wonder if the vulnerability can be a 2 way street, or, instead, that asymmetry is an intrinsic part of physical intimacy for non-empaths. So sex is simply the end result of seduction, along the detailed meticulous lines described by Tii -- where intimacy equals possession.

    Is it so simple?

    1. Well i wouldn' go as far as saying that intimacy is possession. Intimacy is more like a checkers game to me, you dance arpund the board and eat your opponents pieces. What I like about it is the feeling of possession.

    2. I agree with Tii. Almost everything is game to sociopath. That does not mean that the pieces are unimportant to us, though sometimes they are. It is just the way we think about everything. For each sociopath though the "win conditions" are different. Take the "sex game" for instance. Tii's end game is to possess, another sociopath's end game could be to destroy, mine is often to acquire a companion or mate. For some they keep what they win for others once the end game is reached they move on to the next one.

    3. how BIG is your COCK tease Connection.

      I'm just joking, fooling. I just have laugh.

      ………………„-^*'' : : „'' : : : : *-„
      …………..„-* : : :„„--/ : : : : : : : '\
      …………./ : : „-* . .| : : : : : : : : '|
      ……….../ : „-* . . . | : : : : : : : : |
      ………...\„-* . . . . .| : : : : : : : :'|
      ……….../ . . . . . . '| : : : : : : : :|
      ……..../ . . . . . . . .'\ : : : : : : : |
      ……../ . . . . . . . . . .\ : : : : : : :|
      ……./ . . . . . . . . . . . '\ : : : : : /
      ….../ . . . . . . . . . . . . . *-„„„„-*'
      ….'/ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '|
      …/ . . . . . . . ./ . . . . . . .| 
      ../ . . . . . . . .'/ . . . . . . .'|
      ./ . . . . . . . . / . . . . . . .'|
      '/ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .'|
      '| . . . . . \ . . . . . . . . . .|
      '| . . . . . . \„_^- „ . . . . .'|
      '| . . . . . . . . .'\ .\ ./ '/ . |
      | .\ . . . . . . . . . \ .'' / . '|
      | . . . . . . . . . . / .'/ . . .|
      | . . . . . . .| . . / ./ ./ . .|

    4. Wouldn't it be funny if we saw things like this on the net, and they were coochies?

    5. My end game is to always have fun although it's a twisted fun. I always hope that people can pick up on my tongue in cheekiness, and my black humor. If someone doesn't, they must think I'm downright diabolical.

    6. Wait! I'm catching on Dr. Ggggg's HAHAHA. You sneaky girl. Omg. Your a hoot.

      P.S. If I see a coochie, I'll post onr just for you. :p

    7. Hi Tii, about your comment "What I like about it is the feeling of possession", what is it that you like about that feeling? It is something I am not familiar with myself.

    8. ok is this site really just like Pleasure Island in Pinocchio, and we're all havin fun, and then we get captured, and turned in to donkey's :P:P

    9. Newbie,
      I don't think it's anything in particular. It's just fun. My best guess would be that it's the effort and game play it takes to reach that point. Think of Tetris or and that running and jumping around the maze game app that people were crazy for, not much to it, isn't the best game, but the challenge itself is fun.

    10. Thats the fun of it Dr. G. I enjoy you. Your so much like me in away! You have a serious side, but a FUN side. Good assets to have :-))

      My little coochie gal. X hugs

  26. I have a confession to make to all sociopathworld community... I have been viewing and participating in the threads for 2 years and your guys were much more prone to listen and advice me during my hardships and issues in my life. This blog and its threads was much more useful and helpful in my life than my own personal psychologist. I find it ironic how could a blog full of sociopaths and people who suffers from other personality disorder can be much more helpful than real life empaths but its true. Anyways thank you all for making me feel less like a "monster",as society view us, and thanks for making my brain feel less like a "train wreck".
    Love you all although your guys are Wolfs in a sheep shell.

    1. Shared experience is a better teacher than all the book learning in the world.

    2. ^diddo that. :)

    3. Beautifully put Puppy Basket.

  27. It's extremely important to know how "the powers that be" "play" us.
    (How they orgrastrate our behavior) so they gain control over us.)
    There are two determaints of behavior: Personality type and Social
    Programming: Nature & Nurture.
    There are 16 basic personality types, involving interversion/extraversion.
    Sensory (Visiual) Intuative (abstract thinking) Thinking ("Let them eat
    cake!") Feeling ("Oh that poor stray! Let's take him in!") Jugdement
    ("I told you to be here by 9 0' Clock! Now the whole project is ruined!"
    Show some RESPECT.") ("What's the problem? The task will be completed!") (Perception).
    Nurture: How can we expliot control, and influence people. How can we
    direct their behavior to obtain power, sex, and money? Means: The
    methods outlined in the book "Influence" by Robert Caldini.
    You will have to take into account the natural differences of the
    personality types. "Happiness is different things to different people,"
    but like a pimp once said: "I can take a bag of poop, and convince a
    girl it's perfume."

    1. "You will have to take into account the natural differences of the personality types. 'Happiness is different things to different people'" with this one sentence everything else in that post crumbles down and becomes jack shit.

    2. @Tii,

      I have no idea what happiness means. What does it mean to you?

    3. To me happiness is "Hakuna Matata"

  28. I must put the finger to the comment about the boy falling off a train platform. The fellow describes most accurately how I feel about society, in general, tho I highly doubt I'm in that spectrum.
    I think the whole emotional spectrum is much wider than just empath/a-path, so throwing all people act as said in given situations (laughing, being hysterical or taking out their phones to take a picture instead of giving a helping hand) as empaths is rather crude.
    I too don't always feel the way I act, I just think it is right, close enough. I found myself in scenes as described and acted, instead of oogling like the rest of the sheep. Sheep is what I call them, not "empaths". It's not like acting in described situations is unique to a fearless socio, I've seen "empaths" do the same. When I do intervene and act in a situation similar to these described, I too get these sheep clapping (or just standing there, jaws dropped) and telling me some upbeat crap and I don't feel flattered in any way, just enraged at why are these idiots just loiter about and wait for someone else to do something? Or these fucks who "make noises of being helpful", kind of like this caricature I have seen, of a man standing in a hole , while another just reaches out from out of it with his hand, while having a ladder on the side.

    I don't find hypocrisy in acting in a positive manner in spite of not feeling anything to it, rather challenging and more commendable. In the same manner, said "empaths" can "turn off" their guilt/remose/morals when it suits them, they can turn off their fear, or at least ignore it for a while. It's more commendable to overcome a fear and do something terrifying like jumping in front of that dog, or off a train platform, when you are capable of fear.
    What I do find hypocrite is all these jackasses telling you what's right and don't follow their own rules or rather stomp on those who do. I'm not religious, I simply follow principles, maybe it's pride. Don't know, don't care. Aristotle's quote best describes my general conduct: "What I do without being commanded, what others do from fear of the law".

  29. Excellent discussion. Easier to read when large paragraphs, or walls of text, are broken up into smaller ones. Use paragraph breaks!

    1. @Tii

      Holy shit fuck, man. Where did you get that rithym? I 2nd the previous suggestion to use paragraph breaks. You remind me of my son, and anti-authoriarian personality diagonsed with ADD (not physically hyperactive) at the ripe age of 20.

      His mind races 100 miles a minute with thought after thought. It goes so fast that he gets entirely irritated with himself i guess, but acts out. But he is very wise, intelligent. As Dr. G posted a while ago, Einstein would have been medicated out of existence today.

      I don't know how you have developed your relationships here with OldAndWise and others. And I don't know why. But why is a question that can only be asked after asking 'how'. My own view is that asking questions in the wrong order often is what leads us astray. It's not that the question is wrong. It's just that if everyone were to take the time it takes to carefully word that statement, we'd all be dead by now.

      So the scientific method when facing the unknown is to FIRST ask: How could this be right? Then ask, later after thinking this through as carefully as one wants,

      then ASK, how could this be wrong?

      And anyhow what do you mean by fairness?

    2. ^Excuse me saying so, but don't you think your acting just a little impatient and unkind by attacking his thought process and the way he writes. He developed interaction & a good reputation here with people because he's straightforward and truthful about his sociopathic traits and how it plays out in his mind.

      I had no idea Tii you were so young. Your well advanced for your years. I like the chest play analogy and the puzzle piece analogy. Look up love styles, you might be interested in the "ludas" type of love play. I'm one of those players too. But I keep my players as friends, little trophies. When it starts getting romantic, it can havoc the relationships long term.... when it was just as good as friends, and even better in my opinion.

    3. Alright I will try to make better use of the paragraph key from now on. When I'm typing, and I don't proof read I don't take the time to separate ideas.

      As for my relationship with OldAndWise and the others, I wouldn't call it a relationship. I'm no closer to them than I am to you. The only relationship we have is the back and forth discussion, questions, and answer on this blog.

      How? By answering and commenting on their posts.

      What do you mean by what do I mean by fairness? What do I mean by fairness when?

    4. @Superchick,

      Thanks and yes, Ludus love is pretty much it. There's no strings attached since none of them are ever my girlfriends (though jealousy sometimes takes place), and the girl usually accepts those conditions before it gets to that point. Though I don't date those girls, I usually do treat them the way I think one should treat his girlfriend, some say I like a boyfriend without all the lovey dovey emotional hassle.

      It doesn't always have to involve sex though, some of them are purely mental ( I guess that would be emotional for them), that usually applies to girls with boyfriends or who just don't want to have sex. We might sleep together in the same bed, cuddling, talking, in some case naked, but without actually having sex (on some occasions light to mild foreplay). I guess I'm just fascinated with the complexity of the female mind. And like you say, every time I get to the point where I know them inside and out, it like adding another trophy to my wall.


    5. Hi Superchick,

      I don't disagree with anything you said, but in my own mind (and I think you can see from all that I write) I read Tii because I respect his point of view and am interested to look at the discussions he has with others. Otherwise I wouldn't bother.

      And Tii, in case there was a misunderstanding, I meant that you have an online relationship. It is a relationship too, so we have miscommunicated on what the definition of a relationship is.

      It is still valid to ask how and why about these relationships. Isn't that what sociology is all about?

      I didn't mean to come across as attacking his thought processes. I can see how I might have though. My point was more general: in the scientific method often 'how could it be right' has to proceed 'how could it be wrong'. Otherwise we would never get anywhere.

      One can agree or disagree with that statement. I was trying to provide feedback to Tii based on that thought.

    6. Oh and I too remain friends with them. Without the feeling of embarrassment it's easy for me to keep it without awkwardness, so the girls usually stay comfortable around me. In some cases they tey to detach themselves, usually when they fall for me, but when we do interact it's usually pretty cool between us. I have to admit though, sometimes it's fun to bring those times up and tease them.

    7. ps I have often made the mistake of asking questions in the wrong order myself. It is something I had to learn, not to just jump at things. We all do this to varying degrees, no?

  30. Honey, it was the doctorHow character I was suggesting it too in my previous comment. No big deal. I just didn't think it was too productive attacking him with his thoughts and writing comments.. Just my two cents thou. It's how one perceives it I guess. I never spell proof on my phone. I find it annoying. I'm at the rib fest, will check in later. My hands are sticky....sticky.

    Tii, I so get you. It's the chase, the mystery, the tease, I love to marvel in as well. . We'll stated. ;)

  31. Hi Tii,

    Did you find my remarks to be an attack? That's useful feedback for me if that is the case.

    "I guess I'm just fascinated with the complexity of the female mind." Is it because it is something you do not understand -- that we love what we don't understand?

    1. Dr.H,

      No, not really, I very rarely feel insulted, to the point where people get annoyed at my enability to realize I was insulted (guess the density is strong in that one). To me it was just another comment on my habits, one which could make me better. But, as Superchick mentioned, it's a hassle to do it when I'm using my phone.

      I wouldn't go as far as saying that it's because I do not understand them. I find it actually pretty easy to understand what makes them tick, their self esteem, their habits, and their likes. Like I said, after a while it's like I can see through any front they put up. It's like one artist examining another's artwork. Not to criticize, not to fix, not to interpret, just looking at it as it, and appreciate every detail. The old man up there isn't too bad at designing, take your time to observe and he's actually a genius (my opinion).

  32. I don't understand clearly the interest to put on one side sociopaths and on the other empaths. It's not a war, there is no best one, but different ones!

    As far as i know, the sociopaths are kind of "pragmatic" people...their actions are direct most of the time, without asking several it good or bad or someting like this. (But we can think that there is sometime a kind of scam...).

    Something that is maybe not well understood about certain empaths, is that the direct action to do is not means that we need to think about a situation to find what we should do. And we may have different options in mind, and then there is a choice to make...
    I don't think that empaths spend their life asking themselves if what they will do is good or bad...most of the time, they have an inner sense of goodness, and the bad solutions are not even coming to their minds. That's the main reason why they DO NOT understand sociopaths...Empaths don't understand where sociopaths bad ideas or feeling are coming from, and what it can bring to them.

    I guess empaths have a strong sense of the "community" and see human beings as a whole, so they can't plan to do to others what they wouldn't like others to do to them. They are not self-centered, but universaly-centered or community-centered.
    It's not a choice, it's a way of being, certainly linked to their brain system.

    One day, several years ago, I was around 22 years old...I felt disappointed in this world, I felt strongly that some human behaviours were not understable to me.
    I spoke with an old family friend, quite empathic, who told me "you should be more egoist".
    I sat on my chair for days, asking myself how I could be more egoist...i didn't understand what it could be and how I could be more egoist. It has simply no meaning to me.

    I know that sociopaths and empaths can hardly live close to each others...we are thinking and acting too diferently. But as we are living in a society, a human community, I guess that empaths, even without knowing it, are working to gather and secure the social group. Sociopaths have maybe other missions, it could be to take risks when it has to be taken. I don't really know.

    But lets be clear, empaths are also a small % of the population. Most of the people are somwhere between empathy and selfishness.
    All the people who are not sociopaths, are NOT empaths!

    1. I do not agree that sociopaths are pragmatic! They are selfish.. only out for themselves. I encourage people to get & do what you want on your own!!! You do NOT have to use people. Sure.. we can use connections and someone to vouch for our character. but really? We all have certain talents within ourselves to make it happen without using the measure of bull dozing over someone else to do it.

      Socio have a lack of being the better person. letting their own light shine & letting others lights shine as well. For some reason they believe they have to rip & tear someone apart to come up. Their "intent" is evil and just not right.

      Socio only take the easiest risk to the top. That is what they do.

    2. I have risen.

  33. DoctorHow, DoctorWho, DoctorWhat? OMG it went over my head. Haha. Your so funny! Peace. Peace. Sometimes I get on defense mode, cause I think it might have offended another. And i get uncomfortable inside. It's like I must try to defend them. I must learn to stop that. It's seriously part of my dbt work. Don't defend other people.... just let it be as it is. Sounds weird. But when you call out grown men to fight them because there beating up on one of your girlfriends, my instincts go wild. I'm really trying to stop that. Haha.

    Please continue being funny. ;)

    1. This is the first time in ages anyone has thought I was funny. You feel protective of Tii and you are a 'good' person at least sometimes, so you want to act. Tii has got the thickest skin I have ever seen online. He's sort of like Spock. In some sense Tii is actually simple. In some sense not. But you my dear are a mystery beyond my imagination.

    2. Has now become one of the "girlfriends" ^_^. You can't be "IN" any deeper than that.


      Now that it's been confirmed that you are one person, yes I must agree it was funny in a way.

      A friend of mine has one told me that the reason I'm so complex and hard to understand is because I am in fact too simple. People tend to want to believe that everything is more, means more, represents more, and is more significant than it actually is, because of that they overlook many things.

      I'm not saying we should take the world for granted and view everything simply. No, far from that. I'm only saying, we should take a good look at what we are seeing, and make sure we understand it before we assume anything and give it our own meaning. As an "artist", ever since I was a child I was always told I had great observational skills, I guess it's too make up for what I lack as a color blind.

      And yes I concur, Superchick is indeed a story of her own.

    3. @Tii

      Your remark is concise and to the point: "I'm only saying, we should take a good look at what we are seeing, and make sure we understand it before we assume anything and give it our own meaning."

      that's perfect! especially here in the sociopath world emporium -- where tigers roar, elephants stampede, crocodiles snap their jaws, gazelles jump and scatter, and life goes on.

    4. TiI, what do you mean when you say, "Im a story of my own. " tell me more, i'm interested in hearing this. :-) haha :P

      I dont think Im too protective over Tii, Dr. Aspie. He's just a kid, I have to remember that. I do that for anyone, which I have to stop that, because I can end up putting myself under the bus. It can get deflected back, when I was just trying to help. :( I seriously thought the boy was in his thirties the way he presents himself. And I agree, like you mentioned, he's simple, but he'd be fun playing with if he was older of course (as a friend). Guys like him are a mystery in itself, yet so simple in figuring out, I agree. Id make sure he'd feel powerful, superior, meanwhile SMILE that I have him figured out and see his flaws. That's the fun of the game, seeing everyone's flaws, and working and toying with them. I try to do it kindly thou. Because I'm a women of flaws myself. Its the flaws that draw me in the game. But Id challenge the shit out of him. hahahah. Thats the fun of the game.

      In my mind, the power belongs to me when I humble myself and give it to others. I really enjoy it when people feel elevated. :P

    5. Superchick,
      I don't know, maybe it's just the way you express yourself when typing. There's just this vibe that tells me you're an especially interesting character. You seem like you'd be fun to play with as hell, maybe even more fun to play with as more than just friends ^_^.

      Haha it's been a while since anyone called me a kid. Don't let the age full you, feom the feedback I get, it seems like it doesn't decrease the fun one bit... maybe it even increases it. Plus, I think you'd find me even more of a challenge than you'd expect. Flaws can't be used against me. In my eyes, I have no flaws, just characteristics, and many qualities. All of which make me the interesting, as you say, and awesome person I am today (or maybe it's just that ego thing talking, though I'd say otherwise).

      Yes, as you say, especially in a place like SW. Many tend to see those beasts and feel like just because because the road, stampede, or snap they are attacking and are a threat, while forgeting that it's just another trait of their being. As long as no one is biting, they shouldn't feel so threatened and assume the are a prey.

    6. Thanks Tii and Superchick, Puppy Basket, June, OldAnd Wise, Dr. Ginger and others who are here.

      These titles Doctor(who, how, what, no, thoughts, fuckoff, feelings, language...) refer to salient features of kind of thing, difficulty, or experience at hand that I want to address. Its like writing the title of a research paper for me.

      As I've written so many of them, and found it so useful to first write the title before anything else, that's what I do. Indeed from decades of writing such papers, over 100, this is how I have been changed into a person who operates with the kind of determined, sometime relentless focus to learn something new about the world.

      I might get the titles wrong. For instance, I might write why instead of how, thoughts instead of feelings. Please don't misunderstand that I think I am better, or anyone else should try it (although it is a suggestion like OracleFeelings, orAssholeYouAreStupid). I am not telling anyone what to do I do it for myself. It helps me identify my state of existence, with more clarity, and i believe it is a good way to get one's point across.

      Language here is key. As I think Puppy Basket wrote yesterday, we need to develop a language about feelings that can make sense to a much larger number of people that share common understanding about feelings than at present. Words that have clear definitions (and here I admit Aspie can get a bit overboard), where we all understand the definitions, hash it out, and then come to a common agreement on what such terms mean in terms of our own personal experiences as conscious beings, regardless of neurological type.

      So Tii, along those lines, what does the word possession mean to you in the context of an intimate relationship. I can say that I have got no clue, I cannot empathize with that experience. Can anyone hear help me understand and empathize with it so I could for perhaps on a painful millisecond I could experience that 'sensation' or 'feeling' and understand it well enough to be at peace with that pain, and be able to let it go?

      I really do feel we talk past each other a lot sometimes. Sometimes we hit each other with metaphorical sticks. The world would be a more magical place, for sharing if carrots can be offered to, and I see so much of that too. Otherwise I would not waste my time here.


    7. Doc,
      By possession, I mean that at that moment, she will do almost anything I ask to keep the game or play going. So while she isn't necessarily submissive, she would be willing to become so in order for me to dote on her. Though I can't remember a time where I've actually used that fact to my advantage, knowing that it's there is nice. Maybe it's some sort of ego stroker, knowing that I'm capable to have that kind of hold on someone.
      Some girls say they get a boost of confidence, afterwards, because of the lack of judgement. I guess it just reaffirma their identity as a person of their own instead of the millions of ways people view and interpret them in their daily life.

    8. I love to write papers, I play like a child when I do. It's that engrossing engagement with mysteries of the world. Sometimes it sounds maybe too high brow to believe that I am actually playing, but it mostly is so.

      So TiiFoolYou, are you saying that possession is achieving a goal of a con-game? Can you say anything more? @Superchick "That's the fun of the game, seeing everyone's flaws, and working and toying with them"

      TiiAwesome referred to the beauty created by a higher power and about being able to see through women, to see their vulnerability, and most importantly to have them give themselves willingly to his arts and crafts,
      so I guess what you are saying is not only about flaws, but about beauty?

      What does beauty mean to you? Anyone?

      And Superchick, is the play related to why we love what we don't understand for you? I read somewhere that women a prone to say "I'm sorry" too much, or feel that an apology of some kind is in order. It's a statistical fact. men and women speak in different languages, they use different sets of words, the complexion of their expressed language is different.

      AndTiiFoolYou feel free do address me as he or her, but please not it. I am a gender fluid person.

    9. ps I see that Tii's and my messages crossed. Also I did not mean to imply that Tii referred to me as an 'it'.

    10. Tii seems like such an anti-authoritarian person -- how he goes about things -- writing about being free to shit every ten steps if he feels like it, out in a glorious and private beautiful part of nature. But at the same time, Tii submits to a higher authority.

      This seems like a complete paradox. Am I describing this more or less accurately? Would you use the verb 'submit' where I have here? Is it the same kind of 'submit' you used before to describe beautiful, intense experiences with women. And I understand why you would not look for a submissive woman, because the game is not a challenge, it has no surprises, and there is nothing to learn. At least I understand it that way. Is that how you see it?

      It seems from what Tii writes about art and natural beauty that his goals are in large part to create and experience beauty in the natural world. I guess we all have different ideas about beauty too. Tii? Anyone?

      My expression of gender is a paradox to me. The closest I've found is gender fluidity, but it's first a paradox. I simply don't fit into any established types that I read about on wikipedia. It is also the case, and I've seen written here on more than a few occasions, that folks might first think someone is a woman and then discover they are a man -- vice versa too. that's another part of why I find this blog so fascinating.

      And when I wrote above, about 'wasting my time' -- well that shows something about my psychological state. I could have written a positive end, like that's one reason (a WHY) I spend my time here. The creative, intelligence and mystery here is the best opportunity I see for myself now to stop feeling like a victim(as OldAndWise) wrote, and start enjoying life again.

      I have felt on many occassions, and indeed this is what ended things for me, that I was wasting my time. I don't know what to do with my life. I had lost a sense of purpose.

      What does purpose mean to you?

    11. Doc,

      No, I wouldn't call it a con game. It's an intimate relationship, and I seek nothing more thsn to pleasure the other person and make them feel better when we go our own way. I guess you could call it a special type of seduction. I'm a confidence and energy booster, and a stress and worries eater.

      It's easy to put pepple down and make them feel bad, where's the challenge, no game play or talent is required. Making someone feel good in/ through any situation requires skills, not everyone can do it. Some people don't try, some try but make things worst, somentrt but all that comes out is pity, others try and only achieve a thanks for trying smile. I do it and the person usually forgets about the problem when with me, and feels like they can stop stressing and deal with/ overtake the problem when we part. It's not a con game, I'm the benevolent dealer who gives the lady the good cards in a game of black jack.

      As for flaws, like I said, I don't believe in flaws, just characteristics. Sure, some people have characteristics that I fine annoying, others have characteristics that make me hold myself back to refrain from punching them in the face but, how are they flaws if the same can make others smile ir swoop them off their feet.

      Take paintings for example. Cubism, surrealism, abstract, all those reflect nothing of the real world, though they represent things from the real world. Can we say that they have flaws, no what we can do is loom and appreciate the genius of the painter. In the end every line, point, shape, or form is to create one beautiful piece of art. Critics can interpret them as they want, each with their own things to say and their own projections on the image, but what they forget is that the artist made it a certain way and not in another for a reason. Sure, there might be meaning behind it, just like there arw opinions in every mind. The end game still remains, the painting is beautiful, and at times even inspiring.

    12. Doc,

      By submitting to a higher authority, are you referring to my belief in God, and him being most of the reason I do good? If, so no. I do not feel like I am submitting to anyhigher authority. God gave me free will. What I see is an exchange, he gives me somethings (for that matter everything), so I'll give him something.

      One thing I see pretty often around my family (cousins, aunts, and uncles included) is "give me a 10 minute massage and I'll give you a 10 minute massage" and then the exchange happens. No one is submitting to anyone. In my situation, God gave me life and a world to enjoy, he told me live well and I'll give you even more unomagineable beautiful marvelous things, so I've chosen to take up his offer. Sure, the first person to receive the massage could always take and then decide "screw you, you don't get one" which would result in the first masseuse never giving that person another massage, unless they apologize and promise to be better next time. The same way as I could cash in in this life/world and say screw you amd your afterlife. Which I technically do everytime I do something bad, and if I keep on doing so, well he won't give me what we had exchanged for since I didn't keep my end of the bargain. He also allows me to apologize and try to be better.

      So, no I don't see it as submission. It's an exchange between me and God. He made me in his image and so sees me as worthy of speaking with him in equal terms, of course I should still show respect since not only is he the first masseuse but, he is also the one who will give me even better things next time.

      "Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder". It's up to you to decide what's beautiful, you can see things as ugly, you can see them as beautiful. I chose to try and see as many things as I can as beautiful. You get to decide too.

      Purpose? Why is everyone obssessed with having a purpose? Purposes is why we can't have nice things. People base all there life on trying to achieve one thing, and because of that they only achieve one thing. I'm not saying not to have a goal, goal are what keep people moving forward. What I'm saying is forget about purposes and live life by enjoying it instead of missing out on everything to achieve only one thing.

      Like I said if I were to describe my religion it would be Rastafari Catholic Sufi. The Sufi part plays a big role.

      Now Doc, I'm curious. Does your gender fluidity also make you sexual orientation fluid, or are you straight up gay or straight? I read that while gender fluid people usually aren't satisfied with just accepting one gender, it doesn't always affect their sexual orientation. So based on your body, though you might not identify as strictly male or female, are you straight, gay, or bi? I'd like to see the thought process when deciding that without basing it off the body. Since, you wouldn't identify as girl or guy, or on somedays more girl or guy, would you only say I'm into guys/girls, or would you still refer to it as gay, straight or bi?

    13. Wow. This particular thread is just amazing.
      Tii said "I'm a confidence and energy booster, and a stress and worries eater." This describes me also for the same reasons as Tii performs these services. It is so easy to destroy and so challenging to create. I am an artist and I have a drive to create so that might influence this aspect of me as well. This whole thread has provoked another question for me which concerns the imagination of sociopaths.

      Tii and I as artists obviously have good/well developed imaginations. It is essential for the creative process. How about the rest of you? I have never seen the imagination of the sociopath discussed unless it is in terms of the serial killer and their f-ed up fantasies. My socio friends have brilliant imaginations, but then all my friends do as I have that as requirement for becoming my friend. Therefore I don't know if this is a commonality, aberration, or if we have the same bell curve distribution of creatives to non-creatives as the general population does. I am curious.

      Tii you remind me so much of my roommate it is scary. In a good way.
      Doc I am going to echo Tii's curiosity here but since you say you don't find yourself anywhere on the common or even uncommon little labels that our sexuality is usual shoved into I was wondering if it might be easier for you to just describe how you see yourself.

    14. I personally do see myself as "serving god/goddess". I submit as a way of reducing my ego. While Tii sees it as a contract I really don't. I do what goddess wishes but the more of my ego I submit to the lifeforcewhole the more I become part of it. The more that I can reflect back. I become more by becoming less. By giving up my desires I am not enslaved to them and considering the selfishness and destructive nature of most of my desires everyone benefits from this. Ego is the destroyer of becoming one with the infinite. As long as I hold on to the lie that I am separate from the infinite I will never be fully embraced by it. The more I let go of the illusion of who I am the less I am bound and the deeper I can embrace the infinite. In my religion selfless service is the highest form of worship. Probably not an easy mindset for most to grasp though.

  34. If you don't know a person, you can find EVERYTHING you need to
    know about them from their name. There is a particular type of
    numerology not known in the west called Chaldean Numerology.
    This is better then the more common Pathearogian Numerology that
    requires the EXACT name on the birth certificate. Chaldean Numerology
    only requires the name that the person is currantly using.
    If you REALLY want to know about M.E.'s true nature, get the book
    "Chaldean Numerology For Beginners," by Heather Lagan.
    You will see why you love her so, and why the love is so deserved.
    Science can do NOTHING to change human nature. Spiritual wisdom

    1. Have you ever seen the site Does it make sense to you?

    2. Holy mother of fuck Damaged that is an awesome schizoid train wreck of thought. Thanks for sharing. I think Anon is just trying to sell books though. I do love me the internets sometime. Last time I heard something like that it was coming out of a homeless guy wandering down the street.


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.