Out for blood

Our friendly narcissist correspondent reader shared this article about Lance Armstrong. I thought the reporters action oddly paralleled that of what I've seen from a lot of people who have been burned by sociopaths. Worth reading in its entirety, here is main thrust of the reporter's reactions:

What I wanted was to find him slumped in his uneasy chair, naked nails on the wall, haircut in his hands, not even a poodle by his side.

I wanted someone who was sorry -- sorry for what he'd done, sorry for what was next, sorry to be stuck in his new, sorry life.

But that's not what I found.

Lance Armstrong is happy. In fact, he looks better at 42 than I've ever seen him, less gaunt in the face, thicker in the chest, bluer in the eyes. I found a man sitting in his den, surrounded by his seven Tour de France chalices, his 3-year-old, Olivia, on his lap, kissing him and laughing.

Really pissed me off.

I came to see ruins, not joy. I came to see a man ruined for lying to me for 14 years -- and letting me pass those lies on to you. Ruined for lying to everybody. And not just lying to the world, but lying angrily, lying recklessly and leaving good people wrecked in his lies.

It wasn't enough he'd been stripped of his seven wins, not enough that, so far, he'd lost half his estimated $120 million fortune to lawsuits, had to sell homes, his jet, lost every single endorsement (another $150 million), his earning capacity, and his association with the very foundation he started and built, Livestrong-- with two more lawsuits to go.

Yet here he was telling me he was "at peace" with it. I didn't want him at peace. I wanted him in pieces.
***
"People are going to call bulls--- on this, but I've never been happier. Never been happier with myself or my family. My kids suffer no bullying at school. Nobody says anything to them. They're doing great. Anna and I are extremely happy and content. It's true."

As I left, I thought about my motives for coming at all.

If a man has suffered the loss of more than half his wealth and 100 percent of his reputation, how much more blood should I want? I felt a little shame in coming at all.

As I come to the end of my sportswriting career, I wonder whether I need to make peace, too. Peace with the athletes who thrilled me, then disgusted me. Pete Rose, Ben Johnson, Mark McGwire, Marion Jones, Tiger Woods, Lance Armstrong. Peace with letting myself be thrilled, and then fooled, time and again. Why carry it as I go? And if Armstrong is over it, why aren't I? "You've got to live life no matter what's going on," Anna says. "Cancer teaches you that. Life isn't going to wait."

So I forgive Lance Armstrong for all the lies, though he's not asking for my forgiveness. And maybe I forgive myself for letting myself be lied to in the first place. And I thank him for the hope he still gives the millions who still believe in him, though I'm not one of them.

I like that the reporter was aware that a lot of his negative feelings were his own pride being hurt because he was duped, but you wonder what did he expect?.The reporter thinks he is somehow special that he would be treated differently than everyone else in the world? (For a better reaction to Lance Armstrong, see Matthew McConaughey.) And maybe part of me has a hard time taking sports seriously, but it also reminds me of this quote from Eleanor Roosevelt "you have been honest with yourself and those around you"? Really? Because I think word on the street is that Eleanor Roosevelt was a closeted gay woman in a sham marriage as someone's beard, which may or may not constitute fraud on the entire American people. But we aren't pissed at her, I guess because she didn't hurt hundreds of other cyclists who would have placed slightly higher than they otherwise did (although, again in weighing pros and cons fashion, Armstrong arguably did more to benefit cycling as a whole by raising awareness and popularizing it than he ever hurt it as a whole or hurt individual cyclists, even in the aggregate.)

Our narcissist reader's thoughts:

When narcissists like Lance stop caring about being admired, they change in a fundamental way.

Before his striving was focused on winning and getting away with it - securing as much admiration as he could. Now he's probably focused on helping his kids, staying on good terms with his wife and managing his investments. That is, more utilitarian concerns. If you offered Lance enough money, he might star in a porn film to benefit cancer victims, because he'd think, "well, my reputation is worth nothing now, but we can turn my celebrity into money for cancer victims, so let's go!"

He is probably still noticeably psychopathic. If Lance thinks, "that was a good day", and you ask him why, it is probably because he ate some nice food, had a big orgasm and made a lot of money in the market. That is, thrilling. He might not remember days as the one where he had a deep emotional conversation with his partner, someone opened a door for him and he felt gratitude or he took a walk and felt wonderment and awe that he is alive, has legs that work, eyes and a mind that sees, etc.

Truth serum?

I had dinner with some doctor friends of mine who were relating stories about how people react under anesthesia. My favorite story was about a 14 year old kid started hallucinating and feeling like he was being kidnapped by his doctors. When the doctors told him, "No, we like you, we're your friends."

The kid screamed back, "You like me?! You want to rape me?!"

After like 10 minutes of trying to calm him down, they decided to give up on the procedure for the day. The patient had stopped screaming enough for the doctors to explain that they were about to get his parents, and that seem to relax him. While the doctor was in the waiting room explaining to the parents about the child's adverse reaction to the drugs he heard a nurse yelling, "He's running!"

The child had apparently faked compliance to trick his captors into thinking he would cooperate with them. Really, he was just biding his time to escape. Unfortunately, as he sprinted away from the clinic, he seemed to be headed directly for a busy street and was still in his impaired condition. The doctor kicked off his clogs and started running after him in his socks. When the kid saw the doctor behind him, he freaked out again, running even faster. Finally the doctor caught up with him and tackled him to the ground before he ran out into the busy intersection.

But the stories that I thought were most interesting from a philosophical point of view were the stories about patient reactions to the drug Versed/Midazolam. Apparently it is a psychoactive drug with some funny side-effects. From Wikipedia:

In susceptible individuals, midazolam has been known to cause a paradoxical reaction, a well-documented complication with benzodiazapines. When this occurs, the individual may experience anxiety, involuntary movements, aggressive or violent behavior, uncontrollable crying or verbalization, and other similar effects. This seems to be related to the altered state of consciousness or disinhibition produced by the drug.

From the doctors' stories, it seems that the most common manifestation of this in female patients is to cry. For the male patients, a very common manifestation of the verbalization is to turn into complete perverts. One of the female doctors was telling me that it was really eye-opening to her to have this uptight conservative businessmen come in for their procedures and then say raunchy-as-hell things once the Versed gets flowing.

I asked them perhaps the age old question, which is the real them? is the Versed version the more authentic version of the patient? (In vino veritas?) Or does the Versed alter their natural thought patterns? The doctors seemed to think it was definitely the former. As an example, one doctor told me about one of her patients that seemed so inappropriate on Versed that she looked him up online afterwards and found out that he was a relatively prominent public figure who had a history of sexual indiscretions and cover-ups. The thing about Versed is that it also causes temporary amnesia, so the patient doesn't typically remember how they behaved on the drug.

I, of course, thought that an enterprising unethical doctor should start taking video of these patients and using the tapes for blackmail. What better way to ruin someone's life than to shame them in the court of public opinion, right? And they deserve it too, I bet. Best case (?) scenario, the patient/target is not aware that he has these particular flaws and we're doing him/her a favor by letting him/her know about them in no uncertain terms. Worst case scenario, the patient/target already knows about his/her character flaw and has been working overtime to mask it from the general public. Fakers. We should not have to tolerate this level of deception and/or hypocrisy from our fellow humans. These people deserve to be outted. If they are innocent, harmless, or if there is nothing really wrong with what they're doing then I'm sure they'll be fine. If bad things happen to them, then they obviously must have gotten what they deserved. 

Problems and (no?) solutions

A certain type of reader of this blog would find this comment to be incomprehensible, stupid, disingenuous, short-sighted, illogical, immoral, deceitful, offensive, over-simplifying, and dozens of other terrible things:

We do not always have a choice as to whom is part if our life. If a close relative or a co-worker is a sociopath, we may need to make room for them in our life. My point is that if there was better awareness and acceptance of sociopathy, there could be better harmony and less pain, destruction, awkwardness, hiding and running away for both sociopaths and empaths. 

Our society has learned to accept, even embrace most genetic, behavioral, physical and mental differences - people deformed by polio, people of different races, creed and religion, homosexuals, bisexual, transexual, people with down syndrome, autism, amputees, blind people, deaf people, etc. Are the sociopaths so different that they should never be accepted? Is our society too rigid to make allowance for them? 

The trouble is that sociopaths intentionally hurt people, whereas all of these other types don't, right? Or is it that those other types might intentionally hurt people, but they don't do it for sport? Or is it that those other types might intentionally hurt people, but sociopaths are so much more effective at it? Or is it that those other types might intentionally hurt people, but the types of hurts that sociopaths do are worse? Or is it because those other types are not categorically defined by their propensity to hurt people, but sociopaths are?

It's kind of convenient to say that sociopaths do terrible things and aren't at all treatable (where is the proof?). It basically allows society to wash its hands of this particular subset of people while providing a palatable scapegoat for all of the nastiness that normal people get up to but can't quite face in each other (or themselves). The tricky part is that a lot of us live in civilized cultures where for most people with psychological issues like this we try to treat them or accommodate them. But maybe you argue that sociopaths don't need to be accommodated because they thrive, you say. But what happens when you identify them and then take away their ability to thrive? If they are outted are they thriving? If they are imprisoned, are they thriving? Once you take away their ability to thrive, then do you treat them? Accommodate them? Never, because they don't deserve better? They don't seem like victims to me. If anything they are always victimizers. But what happens if one or more of them truly become victims? Collateral damage in the service of a greater cause?

Maybe even if they eventually become victim they still deserve what they get because they decide to be that way? They decided to be born with the genetic predisposition and decided to be raised in a particular way to cause them to be a sociopath? But they would chosen to be that way if they were given the choice over again? Would you choose to be who you are if given choice? How about they didn't choose to be the way they are, but they do choose to do the things they do? As much as we all "decide" to "do" the things that we do? So they should be punished just like an empath would for the same crimes? More harshly? Less harshly?

I'm being sincere. Let's hear people's best solutions, not just the first step, but all the steps that follow until we've reached some sort of equilibrium. (Or ignore the real issues and start the personal attacks, as some of you like to handle these types of posts, even though there is nothing at all personal about this post).

[Also, we all agree that there should still be leper colonies, right? Kind of their fault getting leprosy in the first place, and if any of you got leprosy you would voluntarily ship yourself off to some dungeon to rot so as not to risk infecting anyone else? I think that's how Jesus would us to handle it?]

Conned

A reader recently suggested a reason why people are so upset to learn that someone they know is a sociopath: "The normal person figures out they have been dealing with a sociopath only after they have been screwed and they see that the person they thought they were dealing with never existed. The distaste is both for the deception and also recognition that they were "had"- never pleasant."

It reminded me of this Radio Lab episode "What's Left When You're Right," which starts off with a segment on the game show Golden Balls. The end segment to each episode ends with a classic game theory prisoner's dilemma. So the deal is that if they both choose split, they split the money. If one chooses steal, the other split, the person who steals gets the money. If they both choose steal, no one gets the money. This clip is one of the craziest versions of it:



To me, this seems like an easy choice. I would split, because unlike most prisoner's dilemmas where it is much worse to cooperate/split when the other person defects/steals (20 years in prison for you) than to both defect/steal (10 years in prison for both of you), you end up with nothing if both of you split. The game show gets to keep its money. To me, that seems like the bigger waste. I would rather ensure that someone besides the show got the money, even if it meant giving it all to another person. And I don't actually get upset when someone gets one over on me. People manipulate me all of the time. I've been led into some pretty terrible situations (seen or heard a couple of my worst media appearances?), been conned, cheated, or whatever, but it doesn't really bother me. If anything, I'm often impressed, or at least try to learn something from the situation. (Although if it was less of a one time thing and more of a continuing power struggle, I'd probably try to figure out some way to hit them back).

I don't think most people think this way, in fact the Radio Lab episode tries to explain why so many people choose split (apart from the obvious greed) by interviewing previous contestants. The interviewees seemed to suggest that their main motivation in stealing was to avoid the feeling of being conned, tricked, or otherwise taken advantage of.

The problem with that is extreme efforts to avoid being "conned" often end up hurting yourself and others. The whole Cold War was basically built on this fear. From a New Yorker review of a book about nuclear almost disasters, "Nukes of Hazard":

On  January 25, 1995, at 9:28 a.m. Moscow time, an aide handed a briefcase to Boris Yeltsin, the President of Russia. A small light near the handle was on, and inside was a screen displaying information indicating that a missile had been launched four minutes earlier from somewhere in the vicinity of the Norwegian Sea, and that it appeared to be headed toward Moscow. Below the screen was a row of buttons. This was the Russian “nuclear football.” By pressing the buttons, Yeltsin could launch an immediate nuclear strike against targets around the world. Russian nuclear missiles, submarines, and bombers were on full alert. Yeltsin had forty-seven hundred nuclear warheads ready to go.

The Chief of the General Staff, General Mikhail Kolesnikov, had a football, too, and he was monitoring the flight of the missile. Radar showed that stages of the rocket were falling away as it ascended, which suggested that it was an intermediate-range missile similar to the Pershing II, the missile deployed by nato across Western Europe. The launch site was also in the most likely corridor for an attack on Moscow by American submarines. Kolesnikov was put on a hot line with Yeltsin, whose prerogative it was to launch a nuclear response. Yeltsin had less than six minutes to make a decision.

The Cold War had been over for four years. Mikhail Gorbachev had resigned on December 25, 1991, and had handed over the football and the launch codes to Yeltsin. The next day, the Soviet Union voted itself out of existence. By 1995, though, Yeltsin’s popularity in the West was in decline; there was tension over plans to expand nato; and Russia was bogged down in a war in Chechnya. In the context of nuclear war, these were minor troubles, but there was also the fact, very much alive in Russian memory, that seven and a half years earlier, in May, 1987, a slightly kooky eighteen-year-old German named Mathias Rust had flown a rented Cessna, an airplane about the size of a Piper Cub, from Helsinki to Moscow and landed it a hundred yards from Red Square. The humiliation had led to a mini-purge of the air-defense leadership. Those people did not want to get burned twice.

After tracking the flight for several minutes, the Russians concluded that its trajectory would not take the missile into Russian territory. The briefcases were closed. It turned out that Yeltsin and his generals had been watching a weather rocket launched from Norway to study the aurora borealis. Peter Pry, who reported the story in his book “War Scare” (1999), called it “the single most dangerous moment of the nuclear missile age.” Whether it was the most dangerous moment or not, the weather-rocket scare was one of hundreds of incidents after 1945 when accident, miscommunication, human error, mechanical malfunction, or some combination of glitches nearly resulted in the detonation of nuclear weapons. 

Finally, Radio Lab discusses a contestant who comes up with a strategy that successfully avoids people's fear of being conned:



So I guess this explains why the people I've told myself about my diagnosis take it drastically better than the people that hear it from other sources? They feel like I've conned them? Here's the trick, though. You start indiscriminately telling people you're a sociopath and see if they still treat you well. 

Coming out to your family

With the holidays upon us, a story about being out with your family. From a reader:

You're going to love this. Dad's a US Army chaplain (former civilian pastor), Mum's in seminary getting her M.Div, and younger sister's, well, she's still an innocent high school student. That would make me a sociopath pastor's kid. Once everyone got over the initial shock of my nature, we had a good laugh about the irony. Parents are empaths by occupational hazard, whilst my kid sister is an empath by nature. They all know about it, and they don't necessarily dislike talking about it. I'll ask for their perspective on certain things, and they respond with wholehearted earnest. They just dislike hearing about my exploits and modus operandi, haha. Perhaps it's less dislike and more morbid curiosity due to our brains being wired so radically differently, because they always ask about the outcome. I guess you could say that they're my greatest cheerleaders. Just not when I'm lying to lie, manipulating others for my benefit, or pursuing sexual relationships since I'm not married, etc. That's why it's kind of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, haha. And I do things for them, like putting up a believably genuine front for Dad's congregation, people I have to impress at university, etc. The thing that bothers them most is the characteristic lack of conscience. No surprise there.

My own family is equal parts disbelief and acceptance about who I am. I guess that way they get the best of both worlds -- deniability, but also an easy excuse for my ill behavior that doesn't necessarily reflect poorly on them. My parents are religious too. Sometimes my mother asks me about the blog, says do I ever have the chance to share my religious beliefs with others. I tell her yes. They think I'm helping others, and I don't think that is wrong, necessarily. The older they get, the funnier they get. Like at a recent family reunion, they were talking about my cousin having a viral youtube clip. My mother started telling them about my blog and about how crazy "technology" is these days. I didn't realize what was going on until she yelled over to me, "What's the name of your blog again? Psycho something?" in front of my entire extended family.

I'm really grateful for my family. I think they have helped me more than anything else to feel like I am an integral part of the human race and that my choices define me more than anything else. Whether or not those things are actually true, I think it makes my life better to believe them (even compartmentalize-believe them) and act on them (for the most part).

80/20 rule

The 80/20 rule, or the Pareto principle, states that 80% of the output comes from 20% of the input. In business parlance, it means things like 80% of your customers are coming from 20% of your efforts. For purposes of this blog, it means that 80% of the blog material comes from 20% of my life.

The blog is less a accurate reflection and more of an inverse of my life. In real life i act like a normal person, speak about normal things, while having an unspoken, inner dialogue. On the blog I give voice to the inner dialogue, but leave out all the normalcy: hobbies, work, family, friends, birthdays, holidays, funeral, vacations, personal hygiene regimens, and all the banality of everyday life that has little to nothing to do with my unique worldview.

The really interesting thing about this has been interacting and "meeting" people only via the blog. In real life, people see me act normally and try to incorporate any idiosyncrasies they perceive into their idea of normal me. People that only know me on the blog treat me entirely differently. Sometimes they give me an odd deference. Sometimes they are afraid. Sometimes they are rude and judgmental. It's not just that people are making random assumptions about me, that happens in real life all the time. These assumptions are different, though, perhaps because people aren't giving me the benefit of the doubt, or perhaps because they only see 20% of me. Neither set of assumptions seem better or more accurate than the other, but I still prefer one set over the other. In any case, these interactions make me question whether I really want to be "out" with the general populace. I know that has sort of been my (naive) goal, but given my fear of angry mobs, I think I have since thought better of it.

Everybody needs somebody sometime

A reader asks: "Do sociopaths feel lonely? Sure, you can make yourself loved and adored by all, you have that brilliant gift. But what does it all feel like when that is stripped away? And also, is it common to have just a couple of close friends who know you as well as you can be known, and then just hundreds of people who barely know you at all?" My response:

Karl Marx says that religion is the opiate of the masses. That may be, but it's not the only drug in their cocktail. They have a lot of things that sociopaths don't have, one of which is the feeling of interconnectedness that comes from allowing considerations for other people to dominate their decision-making. It makes them feel that they are part of a web that is society. But even though sociopaths' decision-making isn't dominated by considerations for others, they still need people.

Our hard-wiring makes us social creatures, even sociopaths. How do you punish a criminal? Put them in prison apart from the rest of society. How do you punish someone who is already a prisoner? Further isolate them in solitary confinement. People go crazy without social interaction. Sociopaths aren't immune to this, despite being labeled "antisocial."

Sociopaths, like everyone else, get satisfaction from sharing our world, which is probably one reason why most of us have or strive for at least a few intimate associates in whom we confide. Even the Wizard of Oz seemed relieved to finally be discovered and be able to share the truth with someone. I am always charmed when someone sees through me. Obviously not everyone can or would want to share our worldview. For those that do not or cannot, it seems best for all concerned that they continue to be deceived.

Human garbage

I found out recently that one of my old school friends has recently been convicted of possession of child pornography. We were pretty good friends, would travel together for work frequently, but we fell out of touch a year or so after I moved jobs. He was very conservative and straight-laced. I think a part of him envied my insouciance regarding all things formal, social, and work. Because he seemed receptive to, even charmed by the cavalier way that I lived my life, I let him see more and more of my real thoughts about things. And he was an interesting guy. I genuinely enjoyed his friendship.

Of course I don't judge him for the sexual objectification of children. If you're sexually attracted to children, there's little that you can do about it. And there is no evidence he ever acted on it. In fact, it's odd that we criminalize possession of child pornography -- seemingly the only outlet for this inclination that doesn't directly harm children (assuming there is a sufficient amount of child pornography in the world such that we do not need to continue making it anymore). Overall, I am pretty empathetic, which is why I haven't been able to stop thinking about the parallels between me and him. I've been talking nonstop with a mutual friend trying to suss out what exactly happened, looking for but hoping there are not further parallels between us and this idea of living separate public vs. private lives and eventually being outted and ostracized.

It's a raw deal, being a convicted sex offender, and his judge doesn't sound like he's sympathetic. Once he gets out of prison, he is basically human garbage, as far as everyone else is concerned. The Woodsman is a really good film that deals with some of these issues. Also this article:


I would like to point out one other thing: our natural resistance to believing the worst of someone.  And "child molester" is the worst.  It is literally the most horrible thing you can do in our society; morally, the child molester sits above only the child molester/serial killer who rapes and kills children.  That makes an accusation of child molesting an extraordinary claim.  And as the saying goes, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Imagine that your best friend was accused of stealing office supplies from his company.  Now imagine that he was accused of molesting a neighbor's child.  The first one isn't very hard to believe; almost everyone takes a pen or two home occasionally, and most companies go through printer paper much faster than they produce actual documents.

[Y]ou wouldn't need much evidence to believe [your friend] steals office supplies.  Nor would you care much if he did. . . . 

Now if a kid said that your best friend touched their genitals . . . well, if it's true, and he did it deliberately, you're pretty much going to have to end the friendship.  His life will, of course, be completely destroyed.  And you face knowing that this person you thought was your best friend did something indescribably evil.  You're going to want quite a bit of proof.  And if the action is ambiguous--like maybe his hand accidentally grazed the area in question while doing something quite innocent--you're probably going to err on the side of believing your friend (although you might also supervise your kids more closely when they're around him.)

The problem with this sort of wholesale rejection of a person based on one characteristic is that if you really did have a best friend who was a pedophile, there's really no one that he can talk to about it. My friend thinks that, consequently, my pedophile work friend must have been living a completely double life. Whereas my life, he says, is just "complicated:

"I think you have a lot of confliciting issues, a lot of things pushing and pulling you but a double life involves total deception. Like maybe you could have become something like him if you didn't find people who love and accept you as you are because you would've felt a need to hide it and secret indulgence is the most cancerous."

Because I do have friends like this that know pretty much everything about me, because my family is relatively accepting of how I think and what I choose to get up to, because I have found relatively pro-social ways to indulge and incorporate my predilections into a pretty normal life, am I immune to having my life absolutely collapse and being labeled human garbage? I hope so.

Sidetalking sociopath

The thing I like most about the existence of Dexter as a television show is that it is so widely-liked. This makes talking about sociopath issues without outing yourself very easy. I understand that some sociopaths are incognito, even amongst their friends and family. I myself am pretty out, and am always looking for others to bring into my inner-circle, which is why I am so happy about Dexter. It makes the perfect feel-someone-out-about-how-they-would-feel-knowing-that-their-friend/significant-other/family-member-is-a-sociopath conversation starter. After someone has told you they like it, you can query relatively harmlessly why they do. They may say that they love Dexter the character, or have respect for him, and you can follow up with what exactly it is about Dexter that makes him so likeable. Obviously he does bad things and at the very least has bad tendencies that he has to deal with. Does the way he deals with those tendencies somehow make up for his deficiencies? You can ask if they think he is an accurate portrayal of everyday sociopaths. Does this person believe that sociopaths like Dexter live in real life? Why or why not? If they are doing well so far, maybe ask, do they think that they have ever met a sociopath and not known that the person was a sociopath? If they start getting suspicious, back off. If they start asking you why you like Dexter, say, "Oh, just the same reasons you said." There is a lot of information to be gleaned by sidetalking about sociopathy this way. I'm trying to think of what would be a good analogy in a non-sociopath realm... being in the mafia and talking to people about the Sopranos? Being a spy and talking about Burn Notice? Being gay and talking about Queer as Folk? Being an ex-African warlord and talking about Hotel Rwanda?

Say it loud! I'm S and I'm proud!

A question from a reader:

Do most sociopaths know they are sociopaths, do narcissists know they are narcissists? Under what circumstances would a sociopath reveal himself? same question as to narcissists?

My response:

Sociopaths know that they are different, though they may not necessarily be familiar that the label "sociopath" applies to them. Narcissists tend to be self-deceived, so they think that they are the same as everyone else, just better.

When I was told by a friend that there was a label for people like me and it was called "sociopath," I actually willingly accepted the diagnosis. I knew I didn't have the same emotions as everyone else, I knew I had a weak sense of empathy, I knew I was different, and it wasn't something that I struggled with ever. I feel like narcissists deny deny deny when they are confronted with their identity. They are so self-deceived, though, that it is probable that they don't even recognize the signs of narcissism in themselves.

I don't think a narcissist would ever reveal himself, mainly because he probably doesn't think there is anything to reveal. For sociopaths I think revealing oneself is sort of like revealing a secret identity for a superhero -- generally not a good idea, but sometimes unavoidable. I have revealed myself to close friends (not all, only the ones who would be accepting), and on rare occasions to people whom I suspect to be sociopaths themselves. For instance, I have only once revealed myself to someone I had just met, but it was obvious from our conversational topics that if he weren't a sociopath, he was something akin to it. Even so it was a delicate dance of "how much do you think you empathize with others?" "Do you think manipulation is an appropriate tool for social encounters?" "Does anyone ever ask you if you are a sociopath?" Even from the people who are accepting of who I am, a lot of them can't believe that I am a sociopath, or they sort of pretend I'm not by imagining emotions or empathy where there are none. My parents are that way. I am high-functioning and take pleasure in being exceptionally considerate, so it is not too difficult to believe that I am normal. Bjust because most of me seems good doesn't mean I don't have any sociopath-flavoured bad in me.

There's another good response here:

I'm sure a sociopath realizes that they are "different" from normal people, in the sense that they do not comprehend normal emotional responses and connections. I would assume they don't understand why this is unless they recognize the signs through their own research or if someone tells them.

Growing up a sociopath

Children growing up in this era of digital permanent records have it rough. Every single moment, successes and mistakes, are being recorded and accessible for all eternity. Even if the child himself opts out of the constant chronicling of their early years, their friends are their doing it for them. It's like we have gone back to an earlier era where everyone in a small town knew everyone's personal business. This is bad for empath young people, but potentially devastating for sociopath young people who will make many distinctive mistakes while growing up. From a reader:

I grew up in a small town where everybody pretty much knew each other and being a child i kinda let others see my true self. Everybody there now hates me, i mean everybody. No friends, no nothing, just people hating me. Or so i think...

Anyway. I keep having nightmares and stuff about this. Like people there shooting me or killing me. Is it possible that this is just an overreaction caused by the fact i haven't been there in like a year? Actually i pretty much isolated myself from everyone until i grow up and hopefully not be annoyed by people walking by me on the street, by people. It is hard to say that i am cruel or something, i don't admit anything. But i might be ;). And given this cruelty i am afraid that they might start an angry mob and burn me like a witch. Even as i am writing this i am having some kind of deja vu and that makes me believe that i had dreamt of this. So following this logic i am going to actually get shot by someone who i have wronged. I know this sounds crazy and i know that ... maybe... it isn't real but every muscle in my body is telling me it is real. It is telling me to go back and do nice things, show that i care or something so that it won't come up with me being shot.

When i was younger the people there actually once started an angry mob that wanted revenge for all the bad things i did to them. The leader of the mob knew awful many things about me and that scared me out of doing anything to protect myself. I just sat there and listened how they were angry at me. They got me back against the wall and i panicked. I think that was the best choice at the moment because i didn't know how much they knew. Now when i think back i guess i should've at least protested. Don't even fucking know why i didn't play the victim. Probably there were too many of them knowing all kinds of different things each and playing a victim wouldn't have worked.

Fuck man, this whole e-mail is a deja vu to me. :-s . I wouldn't like telling anybody else about this, cause i don't know where would that lead. I don't even trust a psychologist to tell him. I am thinking that i could go out and make friends somehow but i am afraid of meeting people i previously knew. It's like i can't behave the way i want because people can see through it. I've been worrying about this ever since then and nowdays, when i am interacting with people, i am trying to be as honest as i can. I even keep them from liking me or getting involved in some kind of relationship with me because i know i will end up in that situation in which everything will be revealed. I would pretty much like to get rid of this sensation, so if you have any advice please let me know. Think i am fucking turning into a skizoid. And i also believe that ignoring this and going on with my life will only lead to that day in which i get shot in that coffee shop i keep dreaming about. Anyway. I hope you've seen this before and the whole deja vu thing is just in my head. You can post it on your blog if you want, hope nobody sees it, but keep it anonymous. Even though, in my paranoia, i think that someone that would read this would know it was me. WOW. I'm fucked. I will try to find a psychologist, somehow, someone i can trust, even though i don't know how he would help me. At the moment, i feel like i am going to be convinced that it is all in my head only when i died of natural causes or something different than i think. Anyway, tell me what you think.
Thanks.

Another sociopath story (part 4)

But let me end with a list of unresolved issues... I wouldn't like to give an image of someone who thinks they're so fucking awesome that all their problems are solved. As a matter of fact, I often torture myself. Wearing new masks and constantly adopting new personas pushes the envelope. My impersonations are increasingly demanding, and I'm often confronted with the limitations of what I can know/do/say. I regularly experience failure trying to pull it off, and I've lost friends and allies because I've either (1) chosen to be the wrong person, (2) gave a poor, sloppy performance without studying the part, or (3) locked myself into a role that was too demanding, almost exhausting for the long run, so I had to make a messy "exit." I also lack long-term plans, which is frustrating. I can plan for the short term, maybe up to 1-2 years in the future, but then I'm lost. I don't know whether I should be married and have kids, succeed in the corporate world, settle down or maintain my independence. Without a clear "dream," I constantly feel unprepared and confused. I dare not choose any specific vision, because I know I'm gonna be bored and abandon it before I get a chance to see it to fruition. So far I have remained a student, which has given me time to satisfy my curiosity and has prevented me from committing to any particular "life," but soon I'll have to make tough choices. Finally, I am terrified of sickness. Death, I can deal with. But being incapacitated, in pain, and looking pitiful in the eyes of total douchebags, I cannot bear. Hence, I tend to overreact to minor pains and overly worry about my health.

Well... I think this is the most sincere thing I've written... ever. I totally get why you feel the urge to "out" yourself to people. I very much feel the same way. I wish people were less blind. I get frustrated when I throw characteristically sociopathic opinions their way (e.g., "everyone wants to be manipulated and lied to") and they respond thoughtfully, yet failing to make any further inferences about me. They may think I'm cute, funny, maybe a little eccentric, but as long as I am not holding a knife they're happy believing I'm like them. As such, your blog is truly invaluable. Thanks M.E.

Found out

M.E.: Oh, P thinks I'm crazy, like he knows what's up. He mentioned "serial killer." You're not concerned? I'm sort of concerned. Ha ha.

Friend: A little concerned, but what can you do

M.E.: So funny, because I have been completely normal around him. It's really very perceptive of him. He said, "When i first met you, I thought that you were really directionless. Now I realize it is the opposite, you plan everything. You're like a serial killer." I said, "P, how would you even know anything about me?" He said, "I have you 70% figured out. I learn more from what you don't say than what you do say. When you talk i just hear 'bla bla bla.' I feel like anything you say is more misdirection than anything else. Instead I choose to focus on your body language and other tells."

Friend: Your general demeanor does suggest subterfuge

M.E.: Ha, how?

Friend: in lots of ways

M.E.: Oh, he has always been creeped out by my super calm.

Friend: You tell people about a lot of your scheming. Your calculations that other people (i) never tell other people, (ii) never tell themselves, even, or (iii) never make

M.E.: Ha ha. So you're not surprised. Even given who I am, very few people have accused me. Most are surprised if I tell them.

Friend: Not surprised. A little surprised that he is the kind of person who would tell you that that is what he thought of you.

M.E.: He says he is a great judge of character and he is right. How right, he may never know.

Sociopaths and poker

In the general public's mind the difference between a good sociopath and a bad sociopath is not who they are, but how they channel who they are -- e.g., what they do and accomplish. For instance, what is the difference between the fictional character Dexter and a typical serial killer? Dexter only kills other serial killers, people whom the public would consider "guilty" or "deserving" of dexter's treatment, perhaps in a brutal nod to an ancient eye-for-an-eye mentality, whereas most other serial killers target the "innocent." Even more clear cut than Dexter is when empaths color sociopaths' actions with something like a uniform, a badge, or political authority and reward the sociopath with medals and honors. Some empaths feel that a death is a death, but not the majority of them. High-functioning sociopaths understand these vagaries of the empathic mind and capitalize off of them by using their skills in more socially acceptable ways: politics, theatre, law enforcement... and poker?

The New Yorker published an article recently on the psychology and strategies of poker, "What Would Jesus bet?":

Poker played poorly is purely a gambler's game. Losers tend to think that they didn't get the cards, and not that they were beaten by someone who played better than they did. They return to the table and wait for big hands and lose more. Accomplished players strive to diminish the effects of luck. From the pattern of their opponents' bets and behaviors, they work like detectives to determine their cards. They play opportune hands deceptively, and feckless ones, too, and shed unpromising ones before the cards cause them too much harm. They know that some hands that seem auspicious are not, and that others are stronger than they appear.

As Chris "Jesus" Ferguson says, "you might get lucky and beat me, but you'll never outplay me."

I had recommended that our friend Chris study decisionmaking and game theory, skills that dominate poker strategy:

A player using optimal strategy assumes that his opponents know he is doing so--in other words, that his strategy has been found out. He can announce, for example, that a third of his bets will be bluffs, and then construct the game in such a way that his opponent still can't tell whether it is better to fold or call. If two players have each put fifty dollars into the pot, and the optimal-strategy player is bluffing, and two-thirds of the time he will lose, because the optimal-stratgy player is betting a hand that is strong enough to win. The opponent now has no means of knowing when it is better to call than to fold. This is described as making the opponent "indifferent." He might as well flip a coin. "Now it's a mind game," Ferguson said.

Apart from highlighting how sociopaths might be particularly well-suited to playing poker, I think the connection of game theory to poker strategy is interesting because in game theory, all outcomes for all possible choices are known, but there is still room for gamesmanship. I think this highlights my particular approach to my sociopathy, as illustrated in a favorite quote:

The art of life is to show your hand. There is no diplomacy like candor. You may lose by it now and then, but it will be a loss well gained if you do. Nothing is so boring as having to keep up a deception.
-- E. V. Lucas

And that is why I have the urge to out myself as a sociopath -- nothing is so boring as a deception that you must constantly keep up and from which the game can be played just as well without.

True Blood: Sociopath Rights Amendment

The HBO show True Blood features vampires who have recently come out of the closet (due to the development of a synthesized blood food source called "true blood") and are demanding their legal rights in the form of an equal vampire rights amendment to the United States Constitution -- with regular opposition from the humans. Some think that the show's premise is a metaphor for gay rights, but it portrays equally well the issues that would face sociopaths if we ever came out of the closet and began demanding anti sociopath discrimination laws. The vampires, like sociopaths, are not united in the desire to "mainstream" their lifestyle and become like the human sheep they have long fed on. And for good reason -- although the vampires gain the freedom to live more publicly, they are also the target of violent hate crimes and other backlash from the humans.

Seeing all the problems the vampires are having, one wonders why they chose to come out of the closet at all. Unfortunately sociopaths may not always be able to remain in the closet themselves, but may instead be outed by genetic testing and overt discrimination. For instance, this is a relatively interesting collection of people's musings on the pros and cons of governments genetically screening for sociopaths.

Sociopath utopia?

Many detractors have suggested rounding up sociopaths and sticking them on an island somewhere. This sociopath reader suggests sociopaths rounding themselves up and living in a sociopath commune:

Hey I posted a few times on your site, think its a grand place. I respect your point of view. I live in the middle of nowhere. I decided to build my village into something more. In my homeland we (sociopaths) govern ourselves. Nothing to stop it from happening. Just no one's thought of it yet. I see how it can be made. "Whatever the mind . . . can conceive it can achieve." I want to build homes and one day a University. A place to learn for free, a place for Logical thinkers, dedicated to evolution(of the mind and body). I learned to calculate from empaths (four out of five people in this area), the rest are socios and then the sane (it won't be changeing the over all populations way of thinking/planning/living, just a larger scale).

I don't want to hide, and I want rights. Would you live in a place that you were consittered in the 'norm'? Is that such a crazy idea? Theres enough of us out there. If we have nothing to gain from eachothers defeat, can't we work together as a whole? The last thing on my mind is to make waves for the world. I want -peace-. Is change possable, while maintaining peace? Would it be possable to keep such a place stable? Im tired of singing the Un-birthday song.

I've been called the Devil. I may very well be evil, but thats Just a point of view! I value your thoughts. I may let this pass and let the next generation think of it (But where would the fun be in that?). Is it worth the trek? To be accepted. Through out history, socios would have been labled heros... Im not looking for somethin so high, I would just like to be labled human beings. Maybe Im just ahead of my time.

I hope to call you friend,
-Daemon.

Thanks Daemon. I have sometimes wondered what a society of sociopaths would be like, or at least a society where sociopaths can come out of the closet. I think sociopaths are generally disassociative, though. I wonder if they would willingly band together unless pressured to do so by some sort of empath/sociopath war. And there are some of us who insist that we stick to our old, parasitical ways of doing things, which would preclude outting ourselves and living in a commune. Thoughts?

Dealing with sociopathy

Everyone always wants to know how to deal with sociopaths, even sociopaths themselves. But for many sociopaths, the most difficult sociopaths they will ever have to "deal" with are themselves. Says a reader:

I'd like to communicate with you, I haven't seen much on the internet from the view of a sociopath. Do you try to act normal? I don't know what I am, and I won't try to label myself. I don't want to be normal, but I need to learn to act normal. I want to keep myself out of jail, the mental hospital, that kind of thing that I've experienced too much. I haven't done anything wrong, but that's what people see in me so it doesn't matter what I do. I just want to live my life freely, unimprisoned. I don't feel how I should, but I want to learn to act that way so that I can keep my independence. Please let me know if you have any experience in this area. Thanks.

There were a lot of points in this comment as well as a follow up comment from the same author that I will address in a later post. The thing that struck me initially about this comment, however, was its similarity to another (long) comment I had seen on another site regarding hospitalization, et al:

I was diagnosed with ASPD in 1992, by a psychologist who gave me a "very poor" prognosis, automatically, due to the diagnosis. It took me over a decade to find a therapist who would actually treat me! Most took one look at my records and dumped me on the spot, because of the stigma attached to such a definition. "Doesn't ASK for help"???? HAH!!! How would they KNOW??? I was asking for help, for certain, but no one was listening. One of them actually said "You don't need a therapist, you need an EXORCIST!" Another threatened to call the cops, and I hadn't done anything! Still another called me "scary and dangerous" and instructed security to bar me from re-entering the building. Later she told a social worker that my EYES had scared her "half to death". Right, like I was giving her the "evil eye" or something. Give me a break. So much of it is just because of words: a label. I had a brief inpatient visit this Spring, partly because of this very same issue. I started shouting sarcastically in the middle of a psych-eval interview, "So, you all agree?!! Oh, WOW, watch OUT!!! I'm a PSYCHOPATH!!! I'm going to destroy the WHOLE WORLD!!!" at the top of my lungs. Not the best idea. I didn't exactly get my true point across. And I discovered that some shrinks just don't have a sense of irony at all; so, of course, I ended up getting committed. And during my stay, another patient, obviously of superior CONSCIENCE, tried to beat me with her Bible, to "get the devil out" of me! The nurses automatically accused me of lying about everything, no matter what the issue, and they kept yelling at me because they were constantly suspicious that I was "up to something". And of course, they just HAD to put me in a room alone; fine by me, if somewhat insulting. Did they think I was going to EAT a roommate?? Or maybe just LOOK at them -- because I started getting that business again from some of the patients and even staff, about giving them the so-called "evil eye" -- whatever. What do they see in my eyes??!! It's too much. Just everything. I'm sick of being treated like a female version of "Jason" or "Freddie"! People look at my psych records and get all these weird ideas, and they expect a cinematic show. Oh, and if I cry or show the slightest bit of pain, no way does anyone believe it's real; I'm automatically attacked for trying to put one over on someone with my "dramatic performance". So. I'm giving psychotherapy one last shot, with a therapist who can look me in the eye without suddenly turning into a panicky wreck. I guess that makes her special. That and the fact she sees me as just another human being, not a freak or "monster" or vessel of "pure evil," as I've been called. But now I finally believe that I'm not "sub-human". I've had extensive neurological testing, and I've been told by several specialists that parts of my nervous system are messed up. I sustained substantial trauma to the head as a child. Meanwhile, as I'm struggling through all that, plus (and especially) the emotional and cognitive aspects of my illness, it seems to me that the rest of the world is having a party to which I am always uninvited. I feel that way because they share things I will never know. Ever, as long as I live, no matter how much progress I do manage to make. Accepting that is very hard. Up until very recently, my hatred for the world was formidable. BUT one thing is vital to remember: IT WAS NEVER MY CHOICE to be as I am. People need to be aware that mental illness is first and foremost a PHYSICAL thing. No one CHOOSES to develop any form of it. The human brain is still a largely unfathomed territory. Less blame and judgment, more science and intervention, would go a long way toward preventing or at least much better management of disastrous illnesses such as mine. Hollywood shouldn't dictate all that people know about such things. Well, anyway. I just thought it was a good idea to offer another person's point of view. And, YES, I am a person, not an "it". Despite numerous protests to the contrary. So many people have called me "evil" -- if I believed it all, I'd end up committing suicide. Although the damage that was done to me so long ago, and what I was born with, cannot ever change, a lot can. I have already changed enough to be able to do something like writing here! Now all I want is to move as far beyond my staggering limitations as I possibly can do. I want a life. I live in self-imposed exile, isolated and reclusive. And yet, when someone tells me I'm "hopeless," it only makes me more adamant about breaking free of the mental cage in which I've spent my whole life -- so far. Statistically speaking, my expected lifespan might fall twenty years short of the general average. But I intend to defy that, too. I'm in great pain now, psychologically, because I'm facing things that are quite horrifying to remember, and it is necessary. But in spite of that, I am starting to conceive of having something worth living for...and THAT is brand new for me. One thing I never forget: "When you're going through hell, KEEP GOING!"

The primary lesson to be learned from this comment, I think, is never disclose to anyone that you are a sociopath, and for sure don't yell about it in the middle of a crowded room. For the high-functioning sociopaths among us, I think it is hard to even want to care about those of us who end up in prisons and hospitals. We want to believe that it is their fault--that they give the rest of us a bad name. But sometimes I really do wonder whether we disown them out of fear because we don't want to acknowledge that there could be a prison term and/or hospital cell in the future for every one of us.

Sociopath advise on how to deal with sociopaths, part II

Reading these comments from sociopaths, you may be asking yourself, why does anyone put up with sociopaths in the first place? Can sociopaths love? Can they be in a relationship?

"In the beginning, what people are attracted to in psychopaths is they seem to know what you want, what you need, what makes you laugh, and feel good. They are mirroring what is inside you back at you, and throwing in what they've learned. In return, they absorb part of who you are psychologically. They become what you want as much as they can. The relationship feels good because it seems you've found your soul mate."

"I can't comment on what will be enough to have a specific person leave you alone. I can comment on what his motivation might be in continuing to contact you, assuming he is a psychopath. He might be after something you provide, such as money, sex, comfort/normalcy, a fear or fight fix. You might be considered part of who he is. He has absorbed part of your personality by mirroring and he wants to continue or have that back."

"Co-dependant people are attracted to us because we provide a complete immersion of attention and focus. But co-dependant people are not inherently strong enough of personality. The experiment fails and we begin to despise. If she begins to show weakness, such as eventually seeking our guidance or not maintaining discipline and surety of purpose, we begin to despise. We seek to give in a relationship, but we cannot give love, compassion, or empathy. We seek to give what we have."

"From my point of view a boundary is: "Either don't do this or I will do this unpleasant thing to you" and, "If you do this, I will do this nice thing for you." A psychopath will push you to find out how concrete those boundaries are. Willpower and discipline must be maintained in order to keep the psychopath in line until a natural order is established and a direction given (if the psychopath wants a relationship)."

"As an N, I also memorize other people's emotions. It's the easiest way to seem human because I have no idea how to feel them myself!! I'd be very easy to spot if I didn't know how to pretend to have emotions like everyone else."

"Normal people may sense or feel the presence of 'evil'. It permeates from the P. We react with nauseau, fear, and we often say "Oh, he doesn't mean that". It is often intangible and something we can't really define."

Sociopaths advise on how to deal with sociopaths, part I

There aren't many places for sociopaths in this world, even on the World Wide Web. There's the elite sociopath website, this blog, and a couple other brave souls I've seen outing themselves anonymously. In contrast, there are a ton of sites and support groups for victims of sociopaths. Sociopaths frequently troll these adding their two cents. And so here we have sociopaths giving advice on how to deal with sociopaths:

"If he's not out to get something else from you (sex, money, whatever), but is after a "relationship", then the following is what happens in my experience: For a brief while, the psychopath "feels" something. He can fool himself into being the very thing that he longs for so dearly: normal. When you're gone, though, his patterns begin to slip. They begin to fade as any memory does. Remember that he can't hang his memories on anything because there is no core to hang them on. To him, you've got part of him walking around in you. He wants that back. If someone had taken a part of who you are, what would you go through to have it again?"

"Psychopaths are natural masters of body language and nuance as it is a survival skill."

"I've always had anger as long as I can remember. I'm thinking it is the one emotion it seems I can really FEEL."

"It doesn't bother me in the least if people are angry. I believe I rather enjoy it. I'm thinking since I can't have love, might as well have hate."

"I adore a good fight! Not many things will stop me from causing strife wherever I go. I have to have a pretty good reason not to start disassembling social structures."

"The repeated references to narcissists lacking emotion and being unable to love others seems straight out of the typewriter of proselytising evangelists who couldn't made a sentence without relying on either a misconception, an exaggeration, an outright lie, or, as here, irrational generalisations. Did you study your manual? Do you have it all memorised so you can strike out at your proverbial abuser with incomplete medical information and a malicious lack of understanding? At least I've never accused someone of being less-than-human. I just proclaim myself as greater-than-human. Heh."

Outting Myself?

M.E.: I'm planning on outing myself as a sociopath in my next book club meeting for East of Eden. What do you think? Good idea or bad idea?
Friend: Hm. People don't really understand what you mean by that. They just think you are being facetious, and East of Eden is not the venue for facetiousness
M.E.: Well, it has the one character who is a sociopath, right? People always say she is this caricature of evil when really she is just like a textbook sociopath.
Friend: I dunno buddy. Why out yourself?
M.E.: Maybe I don’t want to be ashamed of it. I feel like it is the topic of the day for me, so to speak.
Friend: are you ashamed?
M.E.: No, but why would i need to lie about it?
Friend: No one is asking you if you are one. Don’t ask don’t tell. :)
M.E.: I seriously feel like these are my people and we are constantly being maligned.
Friend: Buddy... I think the only sociopaths that are maligned are the ones that hurt people. You don’t hurt people.
M.E.: Don’t I?
Friend: Well, maybe the approach should be like--hey, I have problems, don’t understand social norms, but I adapt and learn... blah blah blah. And that's not entirely true... I think people are really coming around about people with autism and Aspergers. Sociopath implies serial killer.
M.E.: I know! Oppression!
Friend: Well, considering the other popular -path is psychopath...