(New title:) How are people manipulated by psychopaths?

Originally posted by SonofPeleus
reply to post by wildtimes

 

Labelling someone is a convenient shoe-boxing method. Promotes the illusion of security in an unstable and unpredictable world. Also a great way of establishing control.

Achilles, Alexander the Great, Attila, Jesus of Nazareth, the Prophet Mohammed, Genghis Khan, Casanova, Nietzsche, Mao, Sartre, Machiavelli, Truman, the Pope, etc. All psychopaths, I presume?

I suppose cats and wolves and other predators which stalk their prey are "psychopaths", too, then.

Funny how most people will tell you stories of all the "psychopaths" they've encountered in their lifetime. What foolishness. You might have been taken advantage of by some douchebag but that's about it, sweetheart. Most of your experiences hardly qualify.

Demonizing greatness by the slave-culture mediocrity, afraid of what they don't understand.

edit on 30-6-2011 by SonofPeleus because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-6-2011 by SonofPeleus because: (no reason given)

Responses like this are highly suspect. I know it is hard to tell emotions through words alone in the internet/communication system. But that post reaks of desperation.

1)Achilles- not enough information available.
2)Alexander the Great. Killed a lot of people and his empire crumbled after his death. The vacuum created some could argue enabled Rome to expand as it did.
3)Attila the Hun. Barbarian King, conqueror and slaver. Killed a lot of people to create a kingdom entirely subservient to him, a Kingdom that didn't survive his death. Psychopath.
4)Jesus(now I know your being deceitful), Empath. Not even near sociopath/psychopath status.
5)Mohammed(I seem to get ton's of warning's and points taken off when I express my views about this "prophet").
6)Ghenhis Khan. Set Chinese civilization back, enabled Western Nations to surpass China. Wiped out enough people to make a noticeable effect on the environment. Established largest Human Earth based Empire. This Empire ended up falling apart into smaller domains after his death. He was a butcher and a conqueror first and foremost and set Human progress back.
7) Casanova: Pervert, womanizer/sex addict. Normal run of the mill sociopath, he would fit in well with Wall Street these day's.
8)Machiavelli,, unknown. He is Judged for his one book "The Prince". A book he wrote in sarcastic Jest. A book that if any leader follows one of two things will happen. Either a very painful and unfortunate end or after the death of the leader the leaders family Florence's lawfully elected Republic, of which Nietzsche held some office and was beaten/imprisoned by the Medici family. The Prince, was meant as a gift to them.)
9)Mao, butchered untold millions, egomaniac despot.
10)Sartre: Marxist and Existentialist(From what I read about existentialism, it seems like the philosophy that sociopaths would eagerly subscribe to).
11)Nietzsche-Unknown. Contracted Syphilis during the Franco-Prussian war. His contributions to society have been generally negative. His philosophy of nihilism has most likely caused more harm then good.
12)Truman: Not exactly a great person, an average person that found himself in a powerful position(he was a shoe salesman if I remember correctly prior to entering politics). He could be a sociopath, but it would require nit-picking through his personnel life.
13) Which Pope? Heck most of them where down right evil.

But your reaction is unsurprising.

P.S, It isn't the Shrinks looking at Sociopaths/Psychopaths in a serious light(I wouldn't be surprised if low level sociopath pool in the profession), It is neurologist's and geneticist's. And they are making great progress. Within a decade they should be able to simple tell if a person is or is predisposed to becoming a psychopath/sociopath by just looking at your mind. And within 30 years geneticist's should be able to test embryo's/early pregnancies.

I've read everything...
Just to put a spanner in the works.

There is no sociopaths and brain renderings are just a snap shop of a mindset.
What if they choose not to care about aspects of society that are "deemed" important to significant others?

reply to post by squandered


For me it is not so much a choice not to care, but find a reason to care. What do I care if anyone dies? I do not. However, if someone that has potential to further the human race dies without contributing, I would be unhappy that we lost potential.

Originally posted by Wolf1nManSkin
reply to post by squandered

 

For me it is not so much a choice not to care, but find a reason to care. What do I care if anyone dies? I do not. However, if someone that has potential to further the human race dies without contributing, I would be unhappy that we lost potential.

That's not a huge leap from normal psychology to me.

Using a little skill and effort, meditating away dualistic thoughts invariably leaves you seeing no good or bad itinerant in anything (at least gain a notion of the idea). Similarly if you look for meaning in life you gain a hope for simple truths, symmetry and coherence.

Not being emotionally charged about something based on it's symbols is not necessarily a bad thing. I know people who were born without a sentimental bone. They tend to be driven by their ego's. I see a lot of that.

reply to post by Golden Rule

You reveal that your husband is ex military (U.S. I take it?) and that he is a hunter of wild animals - in other words a predator and a stalker.

Thought-inspiring statement/questions indeed. My husband was reared in a rural setting, and was taught how to hunt for game as a FOOD SOURCE as a child. He was also taught a profound respect for his "prey", and has never hunted except to put food on the table. I was not reared as a hunter. I was taught how to go the grocer's and read a label to determine which package of ground beef was a pound. I have never killed an animal for food, not even fish.
I have often considered this paradox -- and I have come to feel that when it comes to flesh-as-food-source (if meat was a requirement, which in my mind it is not) it is far 'sicker' to raise enormous herds of cattle, or swine, or chickens, or any other of our 'domesticated' species, (even feed them their own species' remains!) for the excessive appetite of those who demand it than it is to 'cull' one deer, or two, from a herd that has lived a normal wild life, and whose numbers are growing to the point of some of them starving during the winter.

Now, as for the ex-military aspect. My husband's basic nature is to see to the protection of those in need or being explotied. He does not go looking for people to exploit.

Yes he is not considered a justifiable object of your analytical studies, because he hasn't committed the sin that the other two culprits did which is predate upon YOU. Yet, in the past when the psychopaths who comprise the elite behind the corporate body which is the United States, asked your new white knight to defend their interests at home or abroad by killing their enemies, this was something he was prepared to do?

He joined the National Guard, so that he could go to school rather than being relegated to fixing fence on the family farm as an indentured servant (which was the expectation). He declined when he was solicited by "the psychopaths who comprise the elite behind the corporate body which is the United States" to become an Army Ranger. He did not want to become a killing machine. He wanted to 'serve and protect' our domestic interests. His tours of duty included the great flood of 1993, a stint in Panama to protect those building a school from the geurilla fighters bent on destroying it, and some time as a border-crossing screening officer. He has never shot at a human being, but is capable of doing so. He has never "preyed upon" any other person in his life. Big diff, friend.

Furthermore, he is 'ex' military due to the damage done during his training. He developed PTSD just from the exercises like crawling under a blanket of barbed wire while tracer rounds were flying overhead, going through a 'gas-chamber', and being 'hunted' while disguised as a bush. It was too much for him. He did it, and he excelled, but it left scars on him that will never really disappear.

So, if anything, the "elite" preyed upon HIM, a 17-year-old KID, and did their number on him...attempting to "transform" him into something other than a sensitive young man with a profound sense of justice, honor, and integrity, into a tool. When he eventually realized how damaged he had become, how unable to relate to the world like untrained civilians do, and how destructive to his true self the military training was -- he obtained a premature honorable dicharge on grounds of inability to continue. So there.

To address your inflamatory "labels", then, ..... yes, he is white-knight material (to the degree such a thing actually exists) in the terms of being able, willing, and trained to protect me our home, the children, etc in case of attack, and to ensure that those people under his protection have what is needed to survive.

In other words a trained killer.

In other words, a skilled and able provider and leader.

And you idolize this new husband of yours so much that you have blindly adopted the political conditioning that has been transferred to him via powerful, wealthy, influential psychopaths who sought to use him to further their own greedy ends.

What??!! Sorry, you are clearly not responding with an objective and calm frame of reference. I do not "idolize" him at all. In fact, I see the scars, and I feel sad and angry at the outcome of the 'training'. Nor have I blindly adopted the political conditioning

Ends which have caused the suffering of billions of people globally. But you cannot criticize the system that is responsible for the societal factors (diet, heredity, education) that are responsible for your health and intelligence. Societal factors produced as an outcome of crime, international arms sales, exploitative economics, and concocted global conflicts in order to maintain power, blaming the other for the conditions of conflict much as you understand a psychopath does in order to maintain his power base.

Wow. I'm sorry, I've read this attack and intention to assissinate my character several times and can't make sense of it. I can and do criticize the system. Have I been fortunate in being born here to a family who utilized that system? Yes. Do I agree with how it was developed - at the expense of others? Absolutely not.

then we will see if you and your husband will step up for justice and be as outspoken as you have been on this board concerning the smaller psychopathic fish fry.

Yeah, I guess 'we' will! How will I recognize you?

Two amateur psychopaths enter your life, and despite your training in sociology and psychology they managed to dominate and control you. Reason? Your female ego dominated your reason by mistakenly considering them as covet-able and sexy Alpha-males and now you have attained wisdom in hindsight.

Absolutely correct! Now if only you had erased the degrading, accusatory, provocative labeling and ranting that came before it....you might not have made yourself out to be a bully and a rager.
....sigh....

reply to post by Wolf1nManSkin


What kind of music do you like?

reply to post by Bibliomaniac


Indeed, just because you forgive a person does not obligate you to allow them back into your life or trust them.

wildtimes wrote: "Hi team! Okay, this topic is my pet"

wildtimes, such is your introduction to the subject of Psychopaths in our society and their subsequent analysis and evaluation. You have enthusiastically addressed other posters who would show interest in this subject as "Team" and "Team ATS". This is the reason I said "WE shall see." BTW, If I had narrowly escaped the fiendish clutches of a psychopath and their reputation for acts of desperation to maintain control of their mark, I would not describe the experience as "A pet topic" of mine. Sounds like the subject of an enthralling dinner party tale when described in that manner. But anyway....

You posted a link to the following site for reference:

aftermath-surviving-psychopathy.org...

Concerning which, I raise some questions regarding quotes from their web page:

"Aftermath: Surviving Psychopathy is dedicated to educating the public regarding the nature of psychopathy and its cost to individuals and society."

Will they educate the public that the identities (both overt and covert) at the helm of what is the corporate body of the United States are psychopathic in nature themselves? Will they educate the public that the very infrastructure which encapsulates American society is the product of psychopathic enterprise on a grand scale?

"Unable to love, feel remorse or show any trace of guilt, they survive by charming, conning and manipulating others." Like the former President of the United States Bill Clinton who, on camera, lied in the face of millions. The U.S. president who, while discussing the serious issues of the then ongoing Balkan war to his advisors by telephone was simultaneously being given oral sex by "that woman".

Clinton may have lost his presidential position on account of the subsequent inquiry, but since then he has made a packet of dough on the motivational speech circuit. Motivating others, with the benefit of his expertise.
But, wildtimes, you do not hold up this individual as your example of "when will the everyday Joes stand up against these deviates?" No, you hold up a classical Muslim-terrorist enemy of freedom and democracy and the American way, i.e. Muammar Qaddafi.

You have externalized and projected the spectre of the psychopath as you have been conditioned to do by the power of the M.S.M. machine, which is another weapon in the hands of the psychopaths of real concern.

"We support research that aims to: prevent or minimize the development of psychopathic traits, reduce the impact of psychopathic traits, and understand and treat the aftermath of psychopathy. Our ultimate goal is to reduce the negative impact of psychopathy on the families and victims of psychopathic individuals."

Which authority is it that would fund the research?

wildtimes, you wrote: "If anyone has read the books by profilers of serial killers or their ilk, and studied the profiling field itself, you might have been exposed to the concept of how HARD it is to NOT become a victim to these very skilled con-artists.

Yet you later admit:

Absolutely correct!

in reply to my claim:

"Two amateur psychopaths enter your life, and despite your training in sociology and psychology they managed to dominate and control you. Reason? Your female ego dominated your reason by mistakenly considering them as covet-able and sexy Alpha-males and now you have attained wisdom in hindsight."

Why is female vanity so difficult to control so that you have become a victim of these "very skilled" con artists?

silent thunder's previous comments contain relevance, IMO:

silent thunder: "Evolutionarily speaking, if a woman can snag a decent, caring, honest, loyal "nice guy" (who may not be all that exciting or interesting in other ways), he is more likely to care for her and her offspiring than a drifter/player/badboy. HOWEVER, if she can secretly mate with an alpha male, she will be able to pass his evolutionarily desirable traits (prowess, strength, ruthlessness, etc.) on to her male offspring. The woman and her male offspring win; the hapless beta-male "good guy" is a sucker, evolutionarily speaking, putting in the time and resources for a child that isn't really him. From the vantage point of passing on one's genes, it's a very good strategy for the female."

The reason I see the relevance - All of your education and training could not alert you against this type of man you described having escaped from. The reason being, you were attracted to him on a deep instinctive and biological level. At that deeper unconscious level you are aware that all the comforts and convenience of the world you presently inhabit was made possible by men like him. Most significant modern conveniences are the outcome of scientific research and invention made prior to or during wartime. America realizes an upswing in economy after the Atom bombing of the civilian population of Japan in 1945.

I suggest you were also excited by the inherent power of this archetype of the savage warrior king - on an unconscious level of course. Under different circumstances in our past where these kind of guys were a law unto themselves, a woman who found their favour would live in great comfort and possess a high status in the society.

At this stage I should raise the point that you have already accused my observations on the reporting of the subject so far as "bullying and "raging" etc. Also you replied to GisfridMailor that his post was completely hostile because he was not sticking to the agenda.

wildtimes wrote:"Your post seems to be a completely hostile and inappropriate response to this topic. I am not claiming "victim". I am asking ATS members if they have ever been the subject -- the chosen person -- of a sociopath."

So ATS members are only allowed to respond if they agree that Psychopaths choose their victim? What if one does not agree with that interpretation and see that the victim is at least 50% responsible for the relationship?

I would just like to comment that I have found every single posting on this thread created by wildtimes confirming, thought provoking and highly educational. I would also like to thank Wolf1nManSkin and 3nlightened for their honest contributions. Just a few quotes I found especially relevant:

LafingWithTears wrote:

Call me superstitious, call me ignorant, but I believe that there is a spiritual aspect to these people; If I tried half the stuff she easily got away with I would have been busted. It seems like they are tools of Lucifer and under some kind of protection.

I have observed similar and thought in almost the same terms - i.e. seemingly under the protection of Lucifer.

RRokkyy wrote:

How many people are sociopaths? Some here say it is endemic.
According to my observation of human nature there are three types of people equally split.
Altruists or Democrats
Independents or Libertarians
Predators or Republicans.
These types are the result of genetics not logical thinking and philosophy or
even environment.

Are Republicans AntiSocial to a pathological degree? Could they be described as
a form of Sociopathy?
I would say yes.
Republican Philosophy:
1.To control a womens body by not allowing abortions.
2.To eliminate the minimum wage and create an economic slave class.
3. To eliminate ALL social programs and privatize them. Schools,Medical care,
social security,welfare,government run services. The exceptions would be the
police and military.
4.To give tax breaks to the rich and shift the tax burden to the poor and middle class.
5.To wage imperialist wars, with a drafted army.
6.To control people through the illegalization of drugs.
7.In favor of torture and long prison sentence for minor offenses.
8.To create a society by survival of the fittest.

Now being too liberal may also be a form of disease but that is another story.

Yes, this certainly seems to be the strategy that psychopaths in the highest echelons of power have enacted upon the working class people of their nations. But as you say there are also liberal forms of the same divide and conquer strategy. Family Court laws which dis-empower males financially in the name of equality between the sexes, thus neutralizing their potential for rebellion against the system rulers is one such strategy, as I see it.

wildtimes wrote:

I would think the Antisocial person won't be able to feed the Narcissist's self-love issue, and the Narcissist won't buy into the Antisocial's manipulation.

This observation I found very informative and reaches way deeper than the superficial partner compatibility guidelines found in Chinese horoscopes etc.

korathin wrote:

on some level most people want to be manipulated. Well not really, but people enter into semi-hypnotic states all the time. Driving, reading and watching tv's/movies.

Also most people(normals) are just adaptive, meaning they themselves could become sociopaths/psychopaths in certain social situations without even realizing it.

Just imagine reading a book, well not just reading a book, but being fully engrossed in it. How everything else around you fades away.. That is kind of what psychopaths do to people. They focus all of a persons attention on themselves. Add in basic human emotions/sensations and human hormones like Oxytocin(that one could argue puts couples into a mutually hypnotic state if both are being effected by it) it is of no surprise that a lot of people can get drawn in by psychopaths.

By instinct many can hit all the right triggers to set a person into a hypnotic state(hypothesis)

I do believe that as well as having an intellectual understanding of the psychology and nature of the predators in this life, we need to also understand how we manage to become prey for them. An understanding of hypnosis and hypnotic states is one important asset. Whatever education or knowledge we might possess exists only in the conscious layers of the mind and it is the subconscious and unconscious layers which end up being far more dominant and influential.

A quick web search will discover many forums and such where women seem to be queuing up to tell their own story about how they were exploited by a narcissist and group-hugging and sharing the latest pop psychology terms on the subject. The thing is, it is very rare to find any one of them admit to having invited the devil into their lives due their own lust and vanity, thinking "oh what a swell example of manhood I have caught, won't my girlfriends be impressed and jealous!" Then when the fine fish they imagine they have caught turns out to be a barracuda and bites them on the bum, their ego takes a fall, they break the hypnosis and then declare that the fish caught them.

We can learn to identify narcissists and potential psychopaths among our everyday acquaintances and denounce them to the 'Authorities' when their exploitations include us as victims but without question,it is the predators on the level of the global elite or T.P.T.B which present the greatest and most significant threat to humanity.

The problem is though, that hidden behind the banking systems etc they are untouchable and they and their advisers are masters of the knowledge of human nature and its weaknesses. I believe personally that if there exists a group of human beings who are capable of bringing them down, then it is women. I see women as being the unwitting accomplices of these psychopaths as a particular program has been embedded into the female mind as a result of evolutionary history. Women hate these fellows only when their own interests have been compromised. All the time that they do unto others and provide women the circumstances of success, then they are admired or honored.

Women have the power to change the whole paradigm of life on earth for the simple reason that no life can come into being without their agreement and cooperation and if a psychopath is born he is born through their own womb.

Well I think --- every --- living human should be FORCED at gunpoint, into a PET scan. Those who come up lacking in the amygdala, instant execution. This time, we can make good and practical sense of the cattle car trains and the ovens and gas chambers. (My apologies to all Jewish people, I'm not meaning to be insensitive to your history.)
Does it make me a psychopath to express this? Does it make me a psychopath to say we neeed to aggressively eradicate AIDS and Ebola? I don't think so.
Every pregnant woman should be forced at gunpoint, to have the fetus examined for psychopathy. If it comes up lacking, again, instant forced abortion.

Here are some items of interest:


"The Role of Ideology in the Development of Evil Regimes"

"How Societies Regress to Become Pathocracies," by Time for Change]

"Beware the Psychopath," by Clinton Callahan

"Leaders With No Conscience," by Rand Clifford

"Why Does the World Feel Wrong?" by Will

"Twilight and the trick of the psychopaths

"Evil Among Us," by Bret Burquest

"Psychopathy, Divinity, and 'Positive Disintegration," by Richard Fairbanks

"Screening Psychopaths in Government," by Pavel Podolyak

"The Permanent Dehumanizing of Humanity?" by Dr. Judith H. Young

"Twilight of the Psychopaths," by Dr. Kevin Barrett

"A Structural Theory of Narcissism and Psychopathy," by Laura Knight-Jadczyk

"Limbic Warfare and Martha Stout's 'Paranoia Switch'," by Harrison Koehli

"On the Nature of Psychopathy: A Thought Experiment," by Harrison Koehli

"Pathocracy: Brave New World or 1984?" by Harrison Koehli

"The Psychopath: A New Subspecies of Homo Sapiens," by Brent Kopenhaver

"Environment of Evil," by Henry See,

"Insiders and Outsiders in Washington," by Henry See

"Insiders and Outsiders in Everyday Life," by Henry See

"The Politics of Narcissism," by Avigail Abarbanel

"Moral Endo-skeletons and Exo-skeletons: A Perspective on America's Cultural Divide and Current Crisis," by Andrew Bard Schmookler

"Zero point of economic collapse," by Chris Hedges

["'Primordialism' and the decline of human culture," by Gordon Duff

Dr. Hare's Psychopathy Website

Fried Green Tomatoes and Steel Magnolias: Online Resources for Victims of Psychopaths and Narcissists

How To Spot a Dangerous Man

Women Who Love Psychopaths


BOOKS:

Hervey Cleckley. The Mask of Sanity. Fifth Edition. C.V. Mosby Co., 1976.

Robert Hare. Without Conscience: The Disturbing World of Psychopaths Among Us. Guilford Press, 1999.

Martha Stout. The Sociopath Next Door. Broadway, 2005.

Paul Babiak and Robert Hare. Snakes in Suits: When Psychopaths Go To Work. Regan Book, 2006.

James Blair , Derek Mitchell, Karina Blair. The Psychopath: Emotion and the Brain. Blackwell Pub. Ltd., 2005.

Hugues Herve, John C. Yuille. The Psychopath: Theory, Research, and Practice. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2006.

Christopher J. Patrick. Handbook of Psychopathy. Guildford Press, 2007.

Robert Altemeyer. The Authoritarians. 2007.

Mary Astor. The Incredible Charlie Carewe. Dell Pub. Co., 1963.

Sandra L. Brown. How To Spot a Dangerous Man Before You Get Involved. Hunter House, 2005.

Sandra L. Brown. Women Who Love Psychopaths. Health and Well-Being Publications, 2008.

Stéphane Courtois, Nicolas Werth, Jean-Louis Panné, and Andrzej Paczkowski. The Big Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression.

Kazimierz Dabrowski. The Theory of Positive Disintegration. 1964.

Steven Levy. The Unicorn's Secret Murder in the Age of Aquarius. Simon & Schuster, Inc., 1988.

Barbara Oakley. Evil Genes: Why Rome Fell, Hitler Rose, Enron Failed and My Sister Stole My Mother's Boyfriend. Prometheus Books, 2007.

Steven Pinker. The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature. Penguin, 2003.

Martha Stout. The Paranoia Switch. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2007.

Philip Zimbardo. The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil. Random House, 2008.
Copyright 2008 Red Pill Press

Originally posted by ldyserenity
reply to post by summer5

 

I think that this is all men I certainly never met a man who didnt fit this description honestly.

This is the danger of this thinking. I knew it immediately from the start.

How can you say something like that? Makes me feel like I shouldn't even bother. But then I realize that I should.
I should so that maybe one day some girl out there won't have to say something like this ever again. it hurts.
As a tough guy, fighter, hockey player, i'm not very weak, mentally or physically but something like this, your deep pain towards us, I can feel that. It's like, every good thing i've ever done is overshadowed by the bad that others have done. I open doors for little old ladies, but in their eyes I could be a potential psychopath?

reply to post by yourmaker

...I open doors for little old ladies, but in their eyes I could be a potential psychopath?

Reminds me of the lines from an Alice Cooper's ditty:

"I used to be such a sweet sweet thing, til they got a hold of me. I opened doors for little old ladies, I helped the blind to see."

This morning on the news, I learned that our Narci/Socio/Psyco President has made the decision to let the Republicans slash away at Social Security and --- Medicare --- ..........
Just as long as we are able to, with NATO, continue bombing civillians, thats whats important.

reply to post by Partygirl


That, my dear, is an awesome "Additional Reading" list. I very much appreciate your efforts to addend it to our thread here...

reply to post by yourmaker


This is a very good point. Unfortunately, some people who have entered into these destructive relationships are scarred so badly that they can never "trust" anyone again who even remotely resembles the person (even their entire gender).

I have not devolved into a "man-hater", and am still a basically trusting person. The aftermath of self-inspection, healing, and scar development has (I believe) taught me to be more alert to signals - to see the "red flags" and to disengage immediately.

OTOH, I can understand that never-ending hatred and anger might be the "remedy" for some, and that itself is a maladaptive mechanism. Sadly, some people then can develop their own "personality disorder" of Avoidance.

For a healthy, balanced state of mind it is critical to be able to look at one's own frailties, and be cautious not to demonize everyone. Each individual encountered throughout life, in any and every situation, is dragging behind them an assortment of unique bags of experience, and each person is wired just a bit differently. We ALL have trigger points, and knee-jerk reactions to something or other -- in my opinion, it's knowing what one's trigger points are that MIGHT lead to counterproductive behavior or approach, and then carefully gauging one's CHOICE to respond or not.

Hang in there, and thanks for the thoughtful reply.

reply to post by Golden Rule

I would just like to comment that I have found every single posting on this thread created by wildtimes confirming, thought provoking and highly educational. I would also like to thank Wolf1nManSkin and 3nlightened for their honest contributions.

Golden Rule, thank you for this thoughtful and appreciative post. I have read through it several times, and even composed a lengthy and thoughtful response, which disappeared, followed by another, which also disappeared into the "Look but don't touch" drawer. Now, some hours later, I am attempting to relax with a book on my patio, but your post keeps coming to mind, and I will try again to give it the response it deserves.

You quoted this bit by Rokky

How many people are sociopaths? Some here say it is endemic.
According to my observation of human nature there are three types of people equally split.
Altruists or Democrats
Independents or Libertarians
Predators or Republicans.
These types are the result of genetics not logical thinking and philosophy or
even environment.

Are Republicans AntiSocial to a pathological degree? Could they be described as
a form of Sociopathy?
I would say yes.
Republican Philosophy:
1.To control a womens body by not allowing abortions.
2.To eliminate the minimum wage and create an economic slave class.
3. To eliminate ALL social programs and privatize them. Schools,Medical care,
social security,welfare,government run services. The exceptions would be the
police and military.
4.To give tax breaks to the rich and shift the tax burden to the poor and middle class.
5.To wage imperialist wars, with a drafted army.
6.To control people through the illegalization of drugs.
7.In favor of torture and long prison sentence for minor offenses.
8.To create a society by survival of the fittest.

Now being too liberal may also be a form of disease but that is another story.

I, too, agree with this set of evidences. Part of what Rokky posted prior to that confused me in the context of the thread, lacking clarity as to whether it was meant as literal or facetious.

You wrote:

Yes, this certainly seems to be the strategy that psychopaths in the highest echelons of power have enacted upon the working class people of their nations. But as you say there are also liberal forms of the same divide and conquer strategy. Family Court laws which dis-empower males financially in the name of equality between the sexes, thus neutralizing their potential for rebellion against the system rulers is one such strategy, as I see it.

Not sure I follow this reasoning. It seems a bit loaded; how does Family Court neutralize men's potential rebellion? Because their financial resources are seized and partly redistributed to those for whom they have pledged to provide and are now withholding that support? Consider the "feminist" theory of the glass ceiling. I am not a feminist. I appreciate the traditional roles of male as provider and woman as caregiver. I believe that to be an evolutionary fact, as you also have described. Yes, women are unconsciously drawn to alpha-male, attractive, strong men. In terms of survival of the species, it makes sense. If a man protects the more petite and compassionate female who has borne his offspring, there is an inherent expectation that he will continue to protect her and see to her wellbeing, as she is the primary person who provides his "creature comforts" and (in general) the lengthy rearing of his children into productive members of society. Without her, his burden is overwhelming. Likewise, without him, she is unable to focus on her more natural tasks.

wildtimes wrote:

I would think the Antisocial person won't be able to feed the Narcissist's self-love issue, and the Narcissist won't buy into the Antisocial's manipulation.


This observation I found very informative and reaches way deeper than the superficial partner compatibility guidelines found in Chinese horoscopes etc.

Thank you for that acknowledgment.

korathin wrote:

...what psychopaths do to people. They focus all of a persons attention on themselves. Add in basic human emotions/sensations and human hormones like Oxytocin(that one could argue puts couples into a mutually hypnotic state if both are being effected by it) it is of no surprise that a lot of people can get drawn in by psychopaths.

By instinct many can hit all the right triggers to set a person into a hypnotic state(hypothesis)

I totally agree with this. That is, in fact, the physiology of 'lust' and 'mating'. Some consider it a sort of mental disorder. It is not disputed that the feeling of being 'in love' or 'in lust' is a natural biological drive.

You wrote

I do believe that as well as having an intellectual understanding of the psychology and nature of the predators in this life, we need to also understand how we manage to become prey for them. An understanding of hypnosis and hypnotic states is one important asset. Whatever education or knowledge we might possess exists only in the conscious layers of the mind and it is the subconscious and unconscious layers which end up being far more dominant and influential.

No question about that at all. Hence I admitted freely that my female 'vanity' or 'alpha-male radar' or whatever you like to call it was definitely triggered. Sadly, I ignored the signals that indicated I was being duped, and the alpha-male's intentions were unsound in terms of "wholeness of character" and consistency.

A quick web search will discover many forums and such where women seem to be queuing up to tell their own story about how they were exploited by a narcissist and group-hugging and sharing the latest pop psychology terms on the subject. The thing is, it is very rare to find any one of them admit to having invited the devil into their lives due their own lust and vanity, thinking "oh what a swell example of manhood I have caught, won't my girlfriends be impressed and jealous!" Then when the fine fish they imagine they have caught turns out to be a barracuda and bites them on the bum, their ego takes a fall, they break the hypnosis and then declare that the fish caught them.

Very astute analogy. How is it mistaken? Healthy human beings, socially adapted and skilled human beings, are programmed to EXPECT that those who exude certain qualities will indeed possess those qualities. When they discover they have been betrayed by a pseudo-self, one who only poses and has learned to put on the mask and speak the words and go through the motions of actually HAVING those desirable qualities, and who then reveals themselves with an "aHa! Gotcha!" (similar to a soldier disguised as a bush in warfare, and THAT is predatory), it seems to me a person who was thusly fooled has a right to be angry and resentful, and SHOULD be. In other words, every one has the right to "protest unfair treatment". Otherwise, we would all be a bunch of doormats and dishrags, which would, indeed, be the downfall of the world.

We can learn to identify narcissists and potential psychopaths among our everyday acquaintances and denounce them to the 'Authorities' when their exploitations include us as victims but [u/without question,it is the predators on the level of the global elite or T.P.T.B which present the greatest and most significant threat to humanity.

Agreed. And what do we do with that?

...if there exists a group of human beings who are capable of bringing them down, then it is women. I see women as being the unwitting accomplices of these psychopaths as a particular program has been embedded into the female mind as a result of evolutionary history. Women hate these fellows only when their own interests have been compromised. All the time that they do unto others and provide women the circumstances of success, then they are admired or honored.

Women have the power to change the whole paradigm of life on earth for the simple reason that no life can come into being without their agreement and cooperation and if a psychopath is born he is born through their own womb.

Women are hardwired to preserve life; to provide for their young and to support and care for their men/providers. I'm not certain what your master plan is, then, as it might be resolved into the ubiquitous "Mission Statement".

I detect a note of bitterness, and disenfrachisement in your "voice", and a certain degree of having been "victimized" yourself.

But, all in all, I appreciate very much your contribution.
I want to clearly admit that I am aware of my tendency to have "knee-jerk" reactions (Triggers, as has been previously discussed in the thread recently) easily hit by word-choice. There is no point in my deconstructing this tendency in this venue, but I want to admit that I am aware of it, I own it, and I strive to keep from "reacting" when I feel that trigger being tickled. It may illuminate the wherefores for me to state that I am a writer. The correct choice of word, with all its connotations and nuances, is of paramount importance to me. From time to time I hear or read a word-choice as being provocative, and inflamatory, when the speaker/writer may not have intended such a connotation.

I do not claim to have any answers to this mystery of human behavior. My use of the term "pet topic" meant only to emphasize my fascination and undying, life-long curiosity as to "what makes people tick." There is no human alive who is not toting along a unique set of bags containing responses to the world. Our experiences shape us in collusion with our temperaments and our upbringing.

It seems to me, a middle-aged, retired psychotherapist ("helper"), that many, many people who are highly educated and can logically be expected to recognize red flags often do not, due to their OWN baggage blocking the view, so to speak. None of us is immune to this.

The fact that some people are simply remorseless, lack any kind of compassion or ability to "relate" to the responses of others, and are oblivious to the wake of damage left behind by their self-serving policies and procedures stands alone.

For my part, I will leave you with a brief poem that states my understanding of MY purpose in life:

If I can stop one heart from breaking,
I shall not live in vain;
If I can ease one life the aching,
Or cool one pain,
Or help one fainting robin
Unto his nest again,
I shall not live in vain.
----Emily Dickinson

This has been my approach to life since my earliest days of sentience. I am unable to understand how there are humans who do not share it.

But again, Golden Rule, your very moniker implies that you and I are somewhere on the same "wave" here.
And so, I salute you. The first star was from me.
WT

Manipulation can be seen in many forms, and not necessarily just males. Humans are capable of manipulation regardless of sex. But some similar tendencies or behaviors I've seen in those that exhibit manipulative behavior are...

1. Contradiction; they will say one thing and do another, or vice versa
2. Expect compliance regardless of the consequences
3. Make you feel unworthy or some how sinful

Many manipulators can use simple psychological tactics in order to make someone feel wrong or unworthy. And ultimately that will leave you in debt to them in some way.

And if anyone has further questions...feel free to ask here, or via private message. Somehow I attract the manipulators, and can finally pin-point them easily.

reply to post by wildtimes

I admitted freely that my female 'vanity' or 'alpha-male radar' or whatever you like to call it was definitely triggered. Sadly, I ignored the signals that indicated I was being duped, and the alpha-male's intentions were unsound in terms of "wholeness of character" and consistency.

The term Alpha male as it applies to primate groups concerns dominance hierarchy. This ranking programs members as to who to defer to and who must be submissive to them.
I get the impression that due to being duped, an impostor in Alpha's clothing entered your life and boudoir until insurmountable evidence proved to the contrary - that he was not a true Alpha male at all.
So it would appear that there are genuine Alphas and impostors? One with redeeming qualities and one without them in reality?

Healthy human beings, socially adapted and skilled human beings, are programmed to EXPECT that those who exude certain qualities will indeed possess those qualities.

There are a host of websites which list the recognizable traits of the "Alpha Male" and which then offer advice on how to mimic those traits. Purpose being? To have access to more sex with more women. e.g:

naturallyseduce.com...

But what qualities are expected of our beloved genuine 24 carat Alpha male to exude?

"The top monkey is always looking over his shoulder. He needs constant vigilance against predators and the constant threats of bodily harm from challengers. He needs to show constant readiness to defend females, infants, and children from any and all threats. He needs the ability to, from a lonely distance, oversee the harmony in the group of females and children. He must behave fearlessly, even pretending to be unhurt when injured."
www.pdrecovery.org...

I detect a note of bitterness, and disenfrachisement in your "voice", and a certain degree of having been "victimized" yourself.

More like disappointed at having been incarnated into the physical form of a talking baboon and the society of baboon values that talking baboons have created in which I have to function.

Women are hardwired to preserve life; to provide for their young and to support and care for their men/providers.

This is just basic primate biological conditioning, nothing special or divine.

I previously emphasized:

...if there exists a group of human beings who are capable of bringing them down, then it is women. I see women as being the unwitting accomplices of these psychopaths as a particular program has been embedded into the female mind as a result of evolutionary history. Women hate these fellows only when their own interests have been compromised. All the time that they do unto others and provide women the circumstances of success, then they are admired or honored. Women have the power to change the whole paradigm of life on earth for the simple reason that no life can come into being without their agreement and cooperation and if a psychopath is born he is born through their own womb.

To which you responded:

I'm not certain what your master plan is, then, as it might be resolved into the ubiquitous "Mission Statement".

Well how about this for starters:

Aristophanes' play Lysistrata concerning the women of ancient Athens and Sparta (two opposing warring factions) refusing to have sex with their husbands until a peace treaty is made.

Along those lines: Women could refuse to reproduce until a peaceful formula for human civilization is created. The enemy needs bodies to get around and to dominate - so women deny them that very foundation. In other words, women take total control over the reproductive process, even resorting to the role of the convent nun if need be, and denying all alpha males "special treats" - their very reward for their "altruistic" Alpha behaviour.

This would be the true and authentic woman's movement which would require female leaders of exemplary character and fortitude. After all, should the present conditions of human culture be projected into the future, that future is apocalyptic, so what is there to lose?

Previously I wrote:

We can learn to identify narcissists and potential psychopaths among our everyday acquaintances and denounce them to the 'Authorities' when their exploitations include us as victims but [u/without question,it is the predators on the level of the global elite or T.P.T.B which present the greatest and most significant threat to humanity.

To which you replied:

Agreed. And what do we do with that?

Well, the survival of women,their offspring and the natural world depends upon women rising to the challenge. Cut the weed at the roots! Human society no longer needs to be protected by the Alpha male - he is an outdated archetype - there are no more sabre-tooth tigers prowling outside the cave and no longer are animals needed to be hunted down by Big Chief Hatchet Harry and his pals to feed the squaw and her squabs. No more the Neanderthals chugging down booze around the camp-fire with the blood of the hairy mammoth streaked onto their cheeks talking about the big game, while the women congregate together snickering about which of the lads is the most hung.

You wrote:

When they discover they have been betrayed by a pseudo-self, one who only poses and has learned to put on the mask and speak the words and go through the motions of actually HAVING those desirable qualities, and who then reveals themselves with an "aHa! Gotcha!" (similar to a soldier disguised as a bush in warfare, and THAT is predatory), it seems to me a person who was thusly fooled has a right to be angry and resentful, and SHOULD be. In other words, every one has the right to "protest unfair treatment". Otherwise, we would all be a bunch of doormats and dishrags, which would, indeed, be the downfall of the world.

It seems to me that the agenda of the Alpha male is to dominate and protect women and children and intimidate junior, beta and omega males in return for as much sex as he can get primarily. This is realized in the form of status for which he competes aggressively in society. To me, there seems to be a very thin line between the positive attributes of the Alpha male and the twin natures of narcissism and psychopathy. Lord Acton surmises: Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. After all, I'm sure we are in agreement that the objective of discussing the subject of the psychopath and the narcissist is to identify the corrupt power elites that are in control of human societies and more importantly the power they have to now lead human societies down a path to destruction on an unprecedented scale.

So this being the case, what relevance does it have that Alpha males express the desirable qualities of caring and protecting their women and children (for whatever personal gain), when both the functional and dysfunctional families fall into the same fiery pit?

That, will indeed, be the downfall of the world.