Dirty John: Seduction and Deception

From a reader:

The LA Times has a front page story along with several other full pages in the first section devoted to a piece they are calling Dirty John, along with a 6 episode podcast.  It is a true story that happened over the last few years about a sociopath named John who married a lonely rich woman and then became abusive and went after her daughter.  [SPOILER EDITED] It happened last summer and it’s amazing to see how this is playing out as a feature story. Anyway, it should be a pretty good portrait of how an SP gets released from jail,  immediately finds, seduces and marries his next victim and deals with her suspicious children.  The wife secretly recorded over 100 of their conversations after she finally came to (she ignored thousands of red flags and believed every one of his lies), so the podcast includes many audio clips of him trying to seduce/con her.  And she gave the newspaper all their pics.  They are publishing a piece of the story every day this week.  I’m not sure when the first episode of the podcast starts, maybe tomorrow.

A red flag from the article:

He had thick dark hair and a warm, friendly smile that invited trust. His eyes were hazel-green, with the quality of canceling out the whole of the world that wasn’t her, their current focus.

Good seduction?

I was talking a friend recently who was having a little bit of relationship trouble, specifically a little bit of a lack of reciprocation in interest with a new paramour. My friend is (for various reasons) the type to value being straightforward and direct about things -- the type to bemoan the gamesmanship of modern love, e.g. waiting to respond to someone, not appearing too interested, etc. "Don't wait to text back" are the sorts of platitudes you sometimes see in sappy and misguided social media posts, as if it is so brave and honorable to text someone back right away rather than trying to doing them the favor of making them desire you more than they thought they could ever desire another human being.

This has been a topic that my post-graduating-from-therapy-self has been thinking about for a little bit now -- what role does seduction or other types of potentially "good" manipulation have in healthy relationships? Because my first thought when my friend was telling me this story was maybe my friend needed to read the Art of Seduction, or Dangerous Liaisons, or get any sort of game for the sake of the paramour and for the good of the relationship. Because seducing and game aren't necessary always insidious. I've said it before, and even after dropping most manipulation from my emotional daily vocabulary I still believe it -- everyone wants to be seduced.

I asked me friend, "what is it you like about your paramour"? The answer: mystery, and the charming way the paramour goes about doing things in which everything feels like a pleasant surprise. It's the little things, so little that my friend was almost reluctant to tell me because it seemed silly. Things like giving up your reserved parking spot and parking on the street for the other person, working some connections to get into a hip new place, taking care of everything -- planning, paying, and otherwise trying to anticipate and then meeting another person's needs and wants. In the "old days" they called this "wooing", but they could have called it seduction because what it is at its heart is trying to induce feelings of love, affection, or desire in another person. It's manipulation, but it's not "bad" manipulation, and by that I mean it's not at all unwanted (in a consensual romantic relationship, stalking is another story).

I'm not saying to lie or pretend to be someone other than who you are not to get someone to fall in love with a fantasy. But there is nothing deceptive about (to go back to the earlier example) waiting a reasonable amount of time to text someone back in order to heighten the recipient's anticipation and pleasure when they finally do hear back from you. There is nothing deceptive about encouraging mystery and a sense of discovery between each other rather than dumping all of your personal information and baggage on during the first few dates. It's not whether people deserve or don't deserve honesty, it's that people don't really want honesty in that form in this arena. Maybe that's controversial to say, and certainly there would be plenty of people who probably truly do (anti-seducers, for one). But most just say they want the honesty. What they end up choosing is to be swept off their feet by someone who keeps them guessing, by someone who mixes a bittersweet and puzzlingly compelling blend of frustration and satisfaction in their interactions. Romantic love feels better when it's a bit of a challenge and involves a healthy amount of guesswork and angst. I don't know if it's absolutely necessary to use actual seductive skills to achieve this result, but it's certainly one of the most reliable and effective ways. It takes quite a bit of effort to seduce, and at least some skill. Consequently, there seems to be much more demand than supply for seduction. The fact that everyone wants to be seduced but there is such little actual seduction happening suggests that seducing someone, particularly seducing well, is one of the nicest things you could ever do for another person. Don't you think?

W.H. Auden: False Enchantments

I found this quote from W.H. Auden to be thought-provoking:

The state of enchantment is one of certainty. When enchanted, we neither believe nor doubt nor deny: we know, even if, as in the case of a false enchantment, our knowledge is self-deception.

All folk tales recognize that there are false enchantments as well as true ones. When we are truly enchanted we desire nothing for ourselves, only that the enchanting object or person shall continue to exist. When we are falsely enchanted, we desire either to possess the enchanting being or be possessed by it.

We are not free to choose by what we shall be enchanted, truly or falsely. In the case of a false enchantment, all we can do is take immediate flight before the spell really takes hold.

Recognizing idols for what they are does not break their enchantment.

All true enchantments fade in time. Sooner or later we must walk alone in faith. When this happens, we are tempted, either to deny our vision, to say that it must have been an illusion and, in consequence, grow hardhearted and cynical, or to make futile attempts to recover our vision by force, i.e., by alcohol or drugs.

A false enchantment can all too easily last a lifetime.

I feel like sociopaths deal in the currency of enchantments all the time. It's essentially what I mean by seducing someone -- to enchant someone, to put them under a spell. But, I also think (using Auden's tautology) that not all of my seductions involve a false enchantment. I know they don't, because many of them have led to life long friendships.

And as Auden's quote applies to this type of seduction, I think that whether or not something is a true or false enchantment often has more to do with the person being enchanted than the person doing the enchantment or the nature of the enchantment. I know myself that I have had hopeless crushes or obsessions on people that were not instigated at all by the person and reflect more a projection of my own ideals or idealizations on to the person. And actually, I think this comports with Auden's own experience -- that most of his early erotic encounters involved a gross inequality between the partners, either between age or intelligence, but were initiated because Auden had constructed in them a sort of idealized "Alter Ego", as he called it. It wasn't until his relationship with Chester Kallman until he found an equal, that he finally considered the relationship a marriage. So, yes, the sociopath is the one facilitating the enchantment (I don't think the sociopath can actually generate it out of thin air, consider the anti-seducer). But the sociopath has not control over whether there is a false or true enchantment.

That said, I get emails all of the time from someone who is under the throes of a false enchantment that has lasted much too long for their preference.

Thoughts on seduction

I think I seduced someone on the plane recently. Usually I don't talk to anyone on planes, but this person was in distress initially, due to some nausea. I initially chatted them up to get their mind off the flight and the reality of their circumstances, but this person seemed genuinely interested in things about me that I think of as mundane, like where I'm from or my profession. And maybe it's an old habit, but I thought, here is someone that could be seduced. And what else am I doing on this plane? (Work, but it can wait, because plane seduction target).

The whole thing gave me a little deja vu because I seduced (my special definition of the word, see all other former posts on seduction) someone else in a similar manner and I'm still very good friends with that person (after a very spotty romance). It's happened in less identical but still similar ways maybe a half dozen other times. I'm charmed that the person is so charmed by me. The feeling intoxicates me, so I keep charming them.

Sometimes it gets a little intense for the person, I can see it in their eyes. Like when a child is begging to be tickled, but at a certain point it can get a little overwhelming -- almost painful. They know that the sensations they are feeling are spiraling out of control, but it's the sort of heady, vertiginous experience of thrill rides. That is, it's a sensation that most people seek out, not avoid.

And I'm quite good at it. That's what surprised me about this episode, because it's actually been a while since I've even thought about it. (It's like riding a bike?) But the whole time during the plane seduction, now with my more self-aware (every other week therapy) self I was wondering -- what is the point to any of this? At this place in my life I can make a pretty good guess that this person will either (1) get chewed up in the forces of my sociopathic traits, the strictures of my religion, and my generally not being (almost not at all) what they think I am, among other things, or (2) they will find enough to appreciate about actual me (despite me not being what they thought) and keep me as a sort of exotic friend pet, to amuse and flatter them from time to time when they know that I'll sense they need it and/or I'll otherwise be a regular supplier of small thrills.

And as I see this all with a little more clarity than the last go around, I wonder -- which will this person be? Be strong enough to appreciate some things about me without getting torn apart by others? And should I have some sense of paternalism to rescue this one? I think it would have to be paternalism. I don't think this particular person would stay away otherwise, because when I got off the plane and we separated, they looked like the nausea had come back, sick at something. The thought of being separated? Separated from this person that seemed so easily to read one's very soul? (I could tell this particular person was suffering from the vertigo that young adults often feel as they become older and their world seems to be shrinking by the second with limitless life possibilities zeroing in on the one they chose, hundreds of friendships narrowing down to just a few acquaintances, etc. It's an odd sensation for the sufferer, but one that I've seen often enough to easily recognize.).

These thoughts of the promise of renewal or destruction (a coin flip's chance of each) used to only be delicious to me. Now there's an odd sense of poignancy. The pleasant dissonance of an altered 7th chord. I can tell this time I feel more attached to my own role as "part of humanity". I'm actually more curious to see how I keep behaving than to see how the other person does.

Seduction 103

A reader recently asked me how he could get back together with his sociopathic girlfriend that got bored with him and took off.

This is how I replied:

Today I went to the beach and was struck once again with the fact that even very very talented surfers don't always catch a wave. A lot more has to do with the wave than the surfer. This is true in seduction exploits too. A bigger determinant of your success is the vulnerabilities and susceptibilities of your target. Right now, it sounds like you're vulnerable and susceptible and she is not. You have no hopes of winning until/if that changes.

I think a lot of people mistake seduction and manipulation as an ex nihilo type of affair. Only god can do that, arguably, and Mormon God can't even (at least it's not part of the theology). Everything comes from somewhere. Even con men intentionally look for particular types of "marks", they don't expect to just make a "mark" out of absolutely anyone they come across. Similarly, people who have good seduction rates are mostly largely (if not primarily) talented at spotting good targets. In other words, the odds of getting someone to fall madly in love with you are great. The odds of getting a specific person chosen at random to fall madly in love with you are quite low, even for sociopaths.

The allure of seduction

From a reader:

Hi, M.E.

I just read this article and was reminded of how socios seem to be very much into seduction.

Is this how you guys operate?

What do you guys look for in a "relationship"? Power over the other person? Access to resources (e.g. money, status, etc)?

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/28/magazine/confessions-of-a-seduction-addict.html


From the link (oddly enough written by Elizabeth Gilbert, of Eat Pray Love fame, which just goes to show that anything can be normalized/mainstreamed? Or that people love redemption stories or something?):

Seduction is the art of coercing somebody to desire you, of orchestrating somebody else’s longings to suit your own hungry agenda. Seduction was never a casual sport for me; it was more like a heist, adrenalizing and urgent. I would plan the heist for months, scouting out the target, looking for unguarded entries. Then I would break into his deepest vault, steal all his emotional currency and spend it on myself.

If the man was already involved in a committed relationship, I knew that I didn’t need to be prettier or better than his existing girlfriend; I just needed to be different. (The novel doesn’t always win out over the familiar, mind you, but it often does.) The trick was to study the other woman and to become her opposite, thereby positioning myself to this man as a sparkling alternative to his regular life.


Soon enough, and sure enough, I might begin to see that man’s gaze toward me change from indifference, to friendship, to open desire. That’s what I was after: the telekinesis-like sensation of steadily dragging somebody’s fullest attention toward me and only me. My guilt about the other woman was no match for the intoxicating knowledge that — somewhere on the other side of town — somebody couldn’t sleep that night because he was thinking about me. If he needed to sneak out of his house after midnight in order to call, better still. That was power, but it was also affirmation. I was someone’s irresistible treasure. I loved that sensation, and I needed it, not sometimes, not even often, but always.

What do you all think? For me I think it is for that and also to create that physical high that your body rewards you for, the intoxication of infatuation. There's also a sense of intimacy about it. And what is intimacy if not a high degree of influence over another person?

The Seducer's Diary

The Wikipedia synopsis (spoiler alert):

Written by 'Johannes the Seducer', this volume illustrates how the aesthete holds the "interesting" as his highest value and how, to satisfy his voyeuristic reflections, he manipulates his situation from the boring to the interesting. He will use irony, artifice, caprice, imagination and arbitrariness to engineer poetically satisfying possibilities; he is not so much interested in the act of seduction as in willfully creating its interesting possibility.

Søren Kierkegaard from the Diary of a Seducer:

I once knew of a girl whose story forms the substance of the diary. Whether he has seduced others I do not know... we learn of his desire for something altogether arbitrary. With the help of his mental gifts he knew how to tempt a girl to draw her to him without caring to possess her in any stricter sense.

I can imagine him able to bring a girl to the point where he was sure she would sacrifice all then he would leave without a word let a lone a declaration a promise. 


The unhappy girl would retain the consciousness of it with double bitterness because there was not the slightest thing she could appeal to. She could only be constantly tossed about in a terrible witches' dance at one moment reproaching herself forgiving him at another reproaching him and then since the relationship would only have been actual in a figurative sense she would constantly have to contend with the doubt that the whole thing might only have been an imagination.

I also like this idea of people loving, but loving in two entirely different ways. Consequently, although neither is lying or otherwise misrepresenting themselves, there is still a gross misunderstanding:

The tragic is that the two lovers don't understand each other; the comic is that two who do not understand each other love each other. That such a thing can happen is not inconceivable, for erotic love itself has its dialectic, and even if it were unprecedented, the construction, of course, has the absolute power to construct imaginatively. When the heterogeneous is sustained the way I have sustained it, then both parties are right in saying that they love. Love itself has an ethical and an esthetic element. She declares that she loves and has the esthetic element and understands it esthetically; he says that he loves and understands it ethically. Hence they both love and love each other, but nevertheless it is a misunderstanding.

The Wolf of Your Street

Andy Jones writes for Men's Health UK about how I (sort of) mentored him to (sort of) success. The article is pretty entertaining. One of my favorite stories:

Olga, our cleaner, has to go. My partner Jennifer adores her, even though her work is sloppy. Also I'm paying 40 a week for someone to break stuff and push a vacuum around. Empathetic Me would have given he a warning; then -- if I had to -- the 'it's not you it's me' talk and sent her off with a tip. Weak. 

Sociopaths don't just take what they want, says Thomas. They take more. "Say a friend is selling a car for 5000 and another is looking to buy one for 10,000. Most people would simply put the two in touch. Not me. I would buy form the first friend, sell it to the second and double my money." Emboldened by Thomas's ruthlessly simple rationale, I corner Olga on Monday, cleaning day

"We're done here. No more cleaning." 

"Ok, I see you next week." 

"No, I no longer need a cleaner." 

"But Jennifer..." she starts. "No, I am saying I don't need a cleaner."

Now for the profit: I like to Jen that I have booked the cleaner for the next week then do a deliberately half-arsed job of cleaning the house myself. Jen notices the house is still a tip. "You know what, you're right -- we need to let Olga go." I offer to do the firing -- covering my tracks while looking both decisive and strong -- and pocket the 40. Later on, conscience racked, I pay for dinner. This kind of stuff doesn't come naturally. Deep down, I'm a nice guy. On a night out both the drinks and the jokes are on me. I'm ambitious but cautious and often think what I could achieve with sharper elbows.

I really enjoy hearing about empaths trying out sociopathic traits, although I wouldn't have bothered cleaning the flat, even half-arsed, I would have just told Jennifer that she decided to move back to Estonia (but I guess he did get some money out of it?). It's funny that many of them see it as something to aspire to, as if they could accomplish many more of their dreams if they just toughened up a bit. But frequently as they start toughening up, they start realizing that accomplishing the dream is not actually the most important thing to them. And I think that's good for them. Good for them to realize that there are other things they would rather have than that particular brass ring, so they can stop pining for it and feeling miserable when they don't get it. Because it is not all that sociopathic to be envious (except for the mythological covetous sociopath, whom I sort of suspect is just a malignant narcissist?).

But don't stop at that realization, I say. Explore the experience for what exactly it is that you really do want above all else. For instance, later in the article he describes being sociopathic in his relationship:

In the bedroom, I've been persistent in my campaign against Jen's negligence with negligees. It's working. "I like this power game," Jen purrs, as she tries the lacy ensemble I've picked. But I don't enjoy manipulating her. Being a sociopath is fine in emails. Face to face, it's a very different matter.

Not to read too much into what is mainly just an entertaining piece, but it's interesting that he says he doesn't enjoy manipulating her. And I'm sure he doesn't. But why? Is it because he thinks she doesn't like being manipulated? Because it seems like she does, at least in this seductive way (everyone wants to be seduced). The problem seems to be more that manipulation doesn't suit his "nice guy" vision he has for himself, even if that is exactly what his partner desires from him apparently. If so, this example sort of supports my theory that one reason that sociopaths are such charming chameleons is because they have a weak sense of self, i.e. that they don't allow their own need for personal integrity and identity to interfere with their desire to please another.

Also, apropos of nothing, but have I noticed before that "pathetic" is in "empathetic"? There must be some interesting shared root analysis there.

Seventeen face of psychopath

In a little bit of a twist on the movie Seven Psychopaths, this post (on a website for victims), gives 17 basic classifications for psychopaths. It's not at all scientific (doesn't really claim to be), but I think it's an interesting exploration of how different sociopaths can appear. Also, there is only 1 of 17 that is a killer (and I think only one other where violence is a predominant trait). You can read the descriptions on the site (some of them are rather lengthy), but here are the categories:

1. THE LIAR/CONTRACT BREAKER

2. THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC "CLIMBER"

3. THE SEXUAL PSYCHOPATH

4. THE EXPLOSIVE PSYCHOPATH

5. THE VIOLENT PSYCHOPATH

6. THE CHARMER, OR "SOUL MATE"

7. THE THIEF OR "COVETOUS PSYCHOPATH"

8. THE QUIET PSYCHOPATH

9. THE BRAINWASHER

10. THE RISK TAKER/THRILLSEEKER

11. THE PARANOID PSYCHOPATH

12. THE 'BAD BOY' OR 'BAD GIRL' ANTISOCIAL PSYCHOPATH

13. THE USED CAR SALESMAN (OR WOMAN)

14. THE MURDERER OR SERIAL KILLER

15. THE MORALIST OR SAINT

16. THE CREATIVE ARTIST

17. THE ACADEMIC PSYCHOPATH

According to this taxonomy, I guess I would be closest to an academic psychopath (somewhat literally). It seems pretty clear that there is overlap between the categories and that one person could show aspects of multiple categories.

Thoughts?

Female and sociopath: double-edged sword

There was something about this comment that I thought illustrated well how a female sociopath both plays to and fights against gender-based expectations:

Anonymous,

I assure you I am not deeply sad or troubled.

Actually, I feel pretty. Very pretty. I think you would find me very pretty too.

I can look deeply into your eyes and immediately find your gentle, delicate soul. I will know exactly how you wish to be held, caressed.

My touch will be tender as I run my hands over the soft swell of your adorable derriere. My lips moist and yielding. My tongue hot and seeking.

You will want to consume me, but I will consume you.

Now that I have your attention, please take note: I do not want or need your pity, unless, of course, I can use it to my advantage.

Cheers. 

Vampires vs. zombies

Vampire movies and television are a guilty pleasure of mine. I like them because I think there are fun parallels to my own life. I watch zombie movies or television because I think there are fun parallels to the way everyone else lives their lives. That's why I enjoyed this article in the New York Times so much, "My Zombie, Myself: Why Modern Life Feels Rather Undead."

A lot of modern life is exactly like slaughtering zombies.

IF THERE’S ONE THING we all understand about zombie killing, it’s that the act is uncomplicated: you blast one in the brain from point-blank range (preferably with a shotgun). That’s Step 1. Step 2 is doing the same thing to the next zombie that takes its place. Step 3 is identical to Step 2, and Step 4 isn’t any different from Step 3. Repeat this process until (a) you perish, or (b) you run out of zombies. That’s really the only viable strategy.

Every zombie war is a war of attrition. It’s always a numbers game. And it’s more repetitive than complex. In other words, zombie killing is philosophically similar to reading and deleting 400 work e-mails on a Monday morning or filling out paperwork that only generates more paperwork, or following Twitter gossip out of obligation, or performing tedious tasks in which the only true risk is being consumed by the avalanche. The principal downside to any zombie attack is that the zombies will never stop coming; the principal downside to life is that you will be never be finished with whatever it is you do.
***
This is our collective fear projection: that we will be consumed. Zombies are like the Internet and the media and every conversation we don’t want to have. All of it comes at us endlessly (and thoughtlessly), and — if we surrender — we will be overtaken and absorbed. Yet this war is manageable, if not necessarily winnable. As long we keep deleting whatever’s directly in front of us, we survive. We live to eliminate the zombies of tomorrow. We are able to remain human, at least for the time being. Our enemy is relentless and colossal, but also uncreative and stupid.

Battling zombies is like battling anything ... or everything.

“I know this is supposed to be scary,” [a friend] said. “But I’m pretty confident about my ability to deal with a zombie apocalypse. I feel strangely informed about what to do in this kind of scenario.”

I could not disagree. At this point who isn’t? We all know how this goes: If you awake from a coma, and you don’t immediately see a member of the hospital staff, assume a zombie takeover has transpired during your incapacitation. Don’t travel at night and keep your drapes closed. Don’t let zombies spit on you. If you knock a zombie down, direct a second bullet into its brain stem. But above all, do not assume that the war is over, because it never is. The zombies you kill today will merely be replaced by the zombies of tomorrow. But you can do this, my friend. It’s disenchanting, but it’s not difficult. Keep your finger on the trigger. Continue the termination. Don’t stop believing. Don’t stop deleting. Return your voice mails and nod your agreements. This is the zombies’ world, and we just live in it. But we can live better.

I say that this is how everyone else lives their lives, but my life is remarkably similar. Someone asked me recently why do I seduce people, why do I play games, what's the point? I guess I wasn't aware there was some other choice for how to live your life other than find things that keep you engaged and entertained. But yes, empaths play one version of this game, and I guess we play another, and you can say that one is about love or emotions and that is somehow better than having it be about power and winning, but is it? Seems like a matter of personal preference.

How to Manipulate People

This was a good Lifehacker article on how to manipulate people (quick read, worth reading in its entirety). The following are the headings from the article along with my thoughts on each suggestion:

• Emotion vs. Logic: Appealing to emotion rather than logic in manipulation is a little bit of a no brainer. Not only do most people respond better to emotion than logic, irrational people often best (only?) respond to fear. 

• Master Your Own Emotions: Mastering your emotions means essentially two things -- being able to divorce your emotions from what is happening externally (look at this article for helpful suggestions of how) and being able to project the right emotions in the right circumstances to create the desired illusions. 

• Be Charming and Flirt Often: I love to flirt. I flirt with everyone. I used to flirt only with people that I could see myself wanting to seduce, but then the person who first called me a sociopath famously told me that she flirts with everyone, gay or straight because everyone likes positive attention everyone wants to be seduced.

• Overcome Trust Issues and Heal Doubt: Building trust with your target is often critical, see number 2 here (does Lifehacker read this blog? or have a sociopath on staff cluing them in?)

• Conceal Evil in Altruism: This step means pretty much what it says and is super popular with celebrities, billionaires and politicians.

• What to Do If You're Discovered: In addition to backpedaling and creating doubt in your target's mind as to whether you were actually manipulating them, I also suggest starting a counter insurgency campaign against them where you are spinning the message to favor you and disfavor them (Oliver North is a good example of this) if they're an enemy, or possibly proposing some sort of alliance if they're a friend or loved one (think Skyler White in Breaking Bad). Of course the best course of action is to prophylactically insure against this by building an actual, legitimate reputation for good (at least in certain areas) for people to cross-reference. 

Also, beware the anti-seducer, for they cannot be manipulated.

A tale of seduction: Der Erlkönig

From a friend:

To my favorite sociopath-

Musings on the art of seduction and Schubert’s Der Erlkönig, poem by Goethe.

Goethe sets us up with a seduction that leads us slowly to the Erlkönig's lair. First we think we see him, but others (the father) assure us that it's just mist. Then we hear him, but others say it's just the wind. Finally, we see him, but others see only a tree.

Schubert’s music takes it all to another level- listen to the range of the Erlkönig. He pleads in a magnificent and tender high range. First he offers beautiful and expensive items, then he offers experiences, servants, dancing. In his final persuasive moment he says that he loves you -- then he says he will take you by force! All the while Schubert builds the tension of the boy and father to unbearable heights, while the voice of Erlkönig is our only relief. We slip with the boy into a sweet death. It is only in our final submission that others consider the awful reality that our senses were accurate and theirs dull, but it is too late.

And so is seduction.

Thinking too much of oneself

One of the funnier reactions that people I know personally have had about the publication of the book is to re-evaluate our shared time together and impugn nefarious motives to our otherwise benign interactions. Some have suggested (wrongly) that I must have been trying to seduce them. Some believe that I was using them for some otherwise unremarkable and talent or interest of theirs -- using them for their extensive knowledge of French noir films, perhaps, or for their accordion skills? It's funny because almost in every case, their accusations are based on some inflated view of their own worth, desirableness, or even of my interest in them as a person. I say this not to be insulting. No one can be everything to everyone, but for some reason a lot of people have arrived independently at the conclusion that they must be the equivalent of catnip to me? Although I admire their megalomania (unless it's paranoia?), I have a lot of interests that take up a lot of my time. I couldn't possibly seduce or exploit everyone I meet.

This overestimation of one's usefulness or desirability reminds me of one of my favorite scenes from a favorite actress (last line):

Missing you

A lot of people ask me why a sociopath who has ended a relationship would still go through a great deal of effort to ensure that contact is never cut off completely.

When sociopaths are involved in any serious relationship, they become a special version of themselves just for that person. I think the sociopath's desire to check in is a desire to reconnect with that person that he once was, the same way that people might nostalgically flip through photo albums, even if the photos are only of themselves. Why to people go to a reunion? Is it really to catch up with old friends, or more to remember who they used to be?

And why can't we be multiple things to multiple people? I've been thinking recently whether I collect other people, or whether I allow myself to be collected. Even worthless junk can become priceless in the hands of the right collector.

Sociopath kryptonite

One my friends is kryponite. By that I mean she is totally immune to my charms. This is my favorite characteristic about her. I love being around someone for whom any mask I wear is completely ineffectual. There is no temptation or expectation that I be anything other than myself. Some of my other favorite people will sometimes become weak and require me to wear a mask -- the mask of understanding or compassion or humanity, when they feel they need it. With her, it's all completely unnecessary. She may wish that I was something other than what I am sometimes, but she knows nothing's going to change that.

I don't know what it is that makes her so immune. I do know that she is consummately reasonable. Are the two connected?

In Robert Greene's, "The Art of Seduction," he talks about different seduction targets, including the anti-seducer. He warns seducers, "Root out anti-seductive qualities in yourself, and recognize them in others." And warns against choosing an anti-seducer for a target: "There is no pleasure or profit in dealing with the anti-seducer." There may be no pleasure or profit for the seducer, but maybe there is a benefit to being the anti-seducer -- invulnerability.

Sometimes I envy my friend's kryptonite qualities. Unlike her, I can actually be seduced or manipulated relatively easy, if you know what buttons to push. This friend remains unflappable in all circumstances, but as you can imagine, she also lives a relatively lonely, arguably sad, and perhaps soulless life. Everyone wants to be seduced, probably even part of her. With risk comes reward, and with nothing ventured, nothing is earned. I wouldn't want to be incapable of being seduced/manipulated, like she is, because I think it can frequently be fun. But I still think that invulnerability would be a useful skill. Is it just a matter of being difficult to please?

A story of exploits: love and marriage (part 1)

Here is a fun story from a reader about his recent exploits:

Dear M.E,
I would like your view point on something that's recently happened on my side of the cage.

I have a "friend" of a friend of mine who on his bucks night decided to get a stripper, now that seems like the norm, not something I'm personally interested in, Anyways back to the story. On his bucks night after the stripper came to his house we moved on to the city to have a few more drinks and to see where the night took us, we ended up at another strip club....fun.

The groom to be proceeded to have coitis with said stripper. I said nothing I like to keep "information" because you never know.

From the strip club to another club we see my wife and her friends dancing away we meet up and have a drink together my wife and I go outside to chat and be "married" we come back in my buck/groom to be is gone, I ask around about the groom and he is said to be in the toilet with none other then my wife's friend, they are making woopie (cute term for what was actually going on). Once again I keep this to myself. We go to the wedding they wed they buy a new house its all happy days, till recently they wronged myself and my wife, I wont say how or why but none the less wronged. I put into action my plan.

THE PLAN - by ME(not you me)
Step 1.Don't let them know I'm upset, I like acting so this will be easy. Have lots of conversations about "adultery, cheating, infidelity". She is a paranoid person in general so making her think about these subjects will be easy as well.
Once these subjects take root in her mind we play the waiting game, I wait till Valentine's Day. I send her a bunch of flowers to the school she works at, then within the flowers is a note "your husband has committed adultery play the game and try and find out WHEN!"
My thoughts on this were as follows.
Flowers in front of her kids and fellow workers = Happy
+
Note that brings up a lot of topics shes already paranoid about = Sad
=
Confused

Happy + sad = Confused

Confused people make for an easy target, she will inevitably seek out someone to talk to about these "thoughts" she has been having, cue me, I can be very nice and helpful on hard to talk about subjects.
I will lead her to the "right" conclusion.

They had a BIG fight he admits something happened she forgives him we are all happy friends again.

One year passes, they get pregnant. time for step 2.

Step 2.
Month 1 and 2 - I have a new phone to play with, I start sending him random messages saying how I enjoyed myself so much with him.
He did as I thought played them off as a wrong number.

Month 3 and 4 - while around for barbeques and fun activities I started putting perfume into the air conditioner in their room. My wife has a great selection of perfumes she really has good taste I always compliment her on it.

Month 5 and 6 - myself and a mate start showing up every Friday night and Saturday night and taking him out with out making plans she comes home to an empty house, we take him to a strip club so he doesn't want to tell his wife where he has been, I tell him not to say anything because I don't wont my wife to know either, being as though he has already been in trouble with strippers we wouldn't want them to break up. She starts freaking out, but it seemed like she didn't want to say anything because of the baby.

Month 8 - I find some of my wife's lingerie and... well leave evidence on it.....I leave it in his Ute, wait a little to let it dry out etc. I start with the phone calls again and the messages. I send a note written in a woman's handwriting with the same perfume from month 3 and 4. I love how subtle a smell can be but how much power it can have at the same time its very exhilarating, the note says sorry. I send him another text that says I'm sorry I had to tell your wife I couldn't be the mistress anymore and that I accidently left some lingerie in his Ute.... his wife reads it and finds the lingerie - game over for them, they get divorced and she now has a baby by herself and they sell the house and are no longer happy. I win.


My wife has found out about this... from me, I think I wanted someone to know what I did maybe get some credit, but alas she is very.... upset that I have done something like this....I don't know I don't think I'm a sociopath in the basic sense of the word more so I just don't like being fucked over...anyways, what I was wondering is reading that do you think could I of approached it in any other way ? maybe a way that would get me in less trouble... I don't know.

Cheers.
some other me.

Addicted to a sociopath

A reader asks about his troubled relationship with a sociopath:

I have a confession to make. A sociopath was in love with me.  It was the highest high I ever experienced.  She abandoned all sense of common sense, but not her sociopathy.  She still flirted with other men, and still longed to be the center of attention in every situation where more than two people were involved. 
What changed?

I found her behavior to be untrustworthy.  Her flirtations aside, her need for me and her need to please me at every turn exposed her in-authenticity, making me doubt that this person would be accountable in the context of a long-term relationship.  I quietly and secretly began picking up clues and further cues from her behavior.  I soon realized that this person could morph herself into anything and anyone at any time.  Although fantastic as an actress, or a career as a skilled negotiator, I felt with gut wrenching conviction that this person could sell me out if she fell out of love, just as easily as she could change skins to meet the needs of a conversation. 

I decided to try out an experiment to see if this was so. 
Words to the unwise:

Be sure you are ready to know the truth of the questions you so passionately seek answered.  Sometimes trusting your gut and abandoning the need for experiments is the more sensible choice.

I'll just simply say I was correct in my assumptions - although she didn't sell me out as fast as I thought, once she did, she sold me out for concert tickets (example). 

The problem lies in that I am devastated by the loss of that love she gave, and the high I received from it.  I tried not to let it grow roots in me, but I was apparently unsuccessful.  Her cruelty near the end, and the pain that ensues as a result, shakes the roots and trembles within me, making the absence feel even greater. 

What's confusing is that now she contacts me all the time.  She wants to get together and know how I'm doing and tells me she still loves me.  For the most part I have turned her down each time.  A few days ago, I point blank asked her:
What do you HOPE for in your contact with me.  Do you want to be FRIENDS?  Or are you hoping to rekindle a relationship?  There is a large can of worms between us and for us to even have a friendship, that can of worms must be cleaned out and healed.  Then I went on to reiterate some of the pain she caused me.
She answered that she felt attacked again. That until she doesn't feel safe, she can only think of a deep and honest friendship.  I found that hilarious, since she lies so much about almost everything.  Has she truly changed?

Needless to say I remain confused about this situation.  She lied, she hurt, she flirted, she emotionally cheated.  The problem is that she did all that once I was in love with her.  When you love someone, what do you do?  You grow into them, understand them and forgive them.  I feel I am in a very challenging position.  Feeling a bit like your brother Jim who was able to see your needs and allow himself to get beaten up so that you may get what you needed, and he could therefore have a sense of peace.

The things I wonder are: 
Does she still love me?
Does she see that the things she did were wrong?
What options does this situation still hold?
If none, how can I walk away with some dignity?

Thank you for listening and for putting yourself out there.  Your influence is of Christian proportions!

My response:

She sounds like she is genuinely fond of you if she still stays in contact with you. I don't know if that's what you (or she) means by "love". She probably thinks she did some things wrong, but they probably are not the same things that you think she did wrong. Maybe she wishes that she hadn't done certain things that made her attitude towards you and your relationship so explicit to you, or maybe she wished that she had indulged you more than she had, to keep you happy. Apart from these small things, though, I don't believe she will fundamentally change. Rather I think that she would take your return as evidence that you were ok with who she is and how she approaches relationships. So those are your options -- take things on her terms, or don't. I don't know what more dignity you could want apart from being the one who decides what you want most in your life and acting on that. Everyone trades good things for things they want more.

Sociopath quote: virtue

"Most virtue is a demand for greater seduction."

-- Natalie Clifford Barney

Interview with a seducee (part 4)

(continued from here)

I didn't think too much about it when I got home. I remember thinking just one or two times thinking about the whole night in general and remember afterward telling people that I hadn't been talking to you anymore, but it was specifically, it was really when we were going to get those cables. You had driven and we were in the parking garage area and we had to get into an elevator to get into the store, which I found odd. All of the sudden there was a lightness and a comfort between us, and maybe it was a newfound comfort in someone that you've kissed or shared enough conversation or time in one day that we're able to coexist in the same store or the same location with a lightness as opposed to all of the awkwardness of times past, that was very refreshing and exciting.

We were talking about this person you were dating long distance and also this other person who you told me about with whom you felt there was something going on there, something less than a relationship so far but that person was going to go to see you play and was either more interested in you than you wanted, but essentially you were sharing with me the parameters of having to balance three people at the same time and that that was a little bit more, perhaps, than you had anticipated at the time. I remember distinctly feeling at the time that I was no better or worse than them and certainly wasn't competitive with them. I either stand on my own or I don't. I wasn't taken aback in any way by the idea that you were either dating other people or you weren't, it was more the fact of the matter. But I remember, just by the way you were characterizing those people, thinking about how I would be characterized and thought of myself in terms of an explanation to someone else through your words and cautioned myself when I noticed even just standing in the elevator that I wanted to be physical with you, to touch you, kiss you, push you against the wall and kiss you, and show that physical sexual aggressiveness because of an intensity I was feeling. I knew that had to be controlled because whatever feelings I was having had to be tempered by the fact that it didn't appear that there was anything sustainable about whatever this was.

[regarding different sides of m.e.] I wouldn't say you seem like you have been different persons, I realize I have said that a lot in this narrative, but for me it's more those first impressions that you take from someone -- all those assessments that we make about people based in that blink and we roll from there and they either end up proving or disproving initial theories. I don't feel like you morphed into some different person or character so much that I had made different assumptions about you, and that's not even to say that your actions in one particular instance proved or disproved those assumptions, it just felt as if it was an out of character experience based on those assumptions. I don't know if the narrative sounded negative, I hope it didn't. I tried to be honest about what I felt in the situation, but I wouldn't be talking to you tonight if I thought that you had been disingenuous with me and showed all these different characteristics that had you as angry, liar, etc. If I thought those were actual aspects of your personality, I don't think I would still be in contact with you.

My biggest frustration with you is openness, transparency. I wish you would be more open with me, even if it was blunt or harsh. I guess because you don't tell me everything I assume there are lots of bad things that you aren't telling me; I feel like you are holding things back, calculating. You're just more reserved about things, I guess. That's probably smart, to approach things that way, be more protective of yourself. And I'm the opposite, this verbal diarrhea thing. At first, I probably should have never been as open to you, but by now I'm convinced that we've shared enough experiences, whether you can add them up on one hand or not, that I do have an idea of who you are. I don't have a problem sharing myself with you. I can't ask that you return that, but I feel that particularly where it feels the most confusing is that there was such an awkwardness about that email and us being together, there were these awkward moments for me and I guess I think that nothing is ever entirely clear but I just wish that this was a little more clear. Can't that just be the case? I just remember you saying things like "I thought about what it would be like to date you," and what goes through my mind when I hear that is that you've thought about the possibly of (1) dating and being with someone like me and (2) whether that would be a secret relationship, because I think of you as a plotting and calculating person, because you wouldn't go through any decision making process blind, so I was trying to think about what you would even think about to make that sort of statement to me.

You know, I still wonder why. Why the manipulation?