From Psychopaths & Love: “A Hidden Fact of Psychopaths: They Have No Gender”

http://psychopathsandlove.com/a-hidden-fact-of-psychopaths-they-have-no-gender/

“Do psychopaths have a gender?

After my involvement with the psychopath, I got the strange feeling that he didn’t really have a gender. When I learned that psychopaths have no identity — they only create one as needed — it started to make perfect sense. If they have no identity, it only seems logical that they wouldn’t have a gender identity either, doesn’t it? It didn’t seem to be an idea out of left field.

The psychopath in my life told me about many of his sexual exploits that supposedly happened ‘a long time ago,’ and he said that he’d had sex with men as well as women. I asked him if he was bisexual, and he said he was not. He said it would be hard to explain. It turns out he was right about that.

This idea of him being genderless persisted and seemed worthy of further inquiry. I went looking for scholarly works that might validate my theory. In my quest, I plumbed the depths of the web for things like ‘psychopaths and gender,’ but I came up empty handed.

Psychopaths definitely have a biological sex, according to their anatomy. But gender is psychological; it’s the social-sexual role a person self-identifies with. But the one kind of person who will surely not identify in a fixed way with anything about themselves is the psychopath. So why would they identify with a gender?

I suspected that they present themselves to the world as heterosexual, gay, lesbian, bisexual or transsexual, but underneath the facade they’ve chosen, they are truly genderless. So I set out once again to validate my suspicions, and this time, I found it. I only needed to look in a different place. Just as we talk and share information online, so do psychopaths. What better place to possibly find an answer than on their own websites?

 

In their own words, psychopaths say the following about their gender:

“Personally, I am gender fluid and identify neutral.”

“I don’t see gender as being anything more than a biological difference. Much like the idea of morality, it is a social construct. What that means for me is the necessity to choose which side of the fence puts my talents to light to the best advantage…”

“Any research you found (on psychopaths and gender) would be skewed by the fact that the most oft interviewed psychopaths are criminals, and since society generally associates femininity with weakness, the intelligent male psychopath would naturally choose to portray a manly if not completely chauvinistic personality. The only honest psychopath is an anonymous psychopath…”

“Psychopaths of both genders tends to represent the gender they were born with because it is easier, and most people respond to that, rather than the sexuality of minorities.”

“I don’t think that psychopaths struggle with their sexual identity at all. On the contrary, they seem to find it easy to play on both the feminine and the masculine sides in themselves.”

“I’m trying to find something about it (gender and psychopaths) from research sources but there doesn’t seem to be much to find so far. Maybe I’ve just been looking the wrong places, otherwise it would seem that we’re on a wild goose chase.”

“I haven’t talked to anyone who falls under the psychopath spectrum that feels very feminine or masculine, when questioned. Most of the women seem very aggressive, and the males “sound” roughly the same, in how the present themselves…It just seems suspect to me that most of us don’t feel very attached to one end or the other on the gender spectrum.”

“Like others I’ve read about, I never took that diagnosis seriously… But so much has become clear to me, which before used to be a great mystery…One of those things is our tendency to not have an inherent sense of gender!”

“It’s completely unimportant. Sexuality wise, I could go either way. I chose to portray myself in my real life as a homosexual for various reasons. I think what makes it impossible to delineate between how psychopaths view gender is our habit of being perpetually dishonest and chameleon-like. Were I a missionary I’d be the image of demure femininity and were I in prison I would be as masculine as any testosterone-stuffed man.”

“I have noticed that once we shed what has been called our ‘Mask’, the gender differences become less obvious.”

“I’ve never felt attached to a gender role before. I consider my personality and attraction fairly androgynous.””
http://psychopathsandlove.com/a-hidden-fact-of-psychopaths-they-have-no-gender/

And there we have it.  It seems to me that the gender agenda is the psychopath agenda — there simply aren’t enough true transgenders (who deserve everyone’s respect) for this movement.  I would call it the ‘psychopathiforming’ of society (following science and science fiction’s ‘terraforming’ of other planets, i.e., making them more earthlike).  Earlier the song, “Love the One You’re With”, was also a psychopathiforming of society.  In any discussion of that song, one usually finds at least one psychopathic voice rhapsodizing what a beautiful sentiment it expresses — sure, think how many more sex partners they could find, down the road.

Here again, the purpose is to gain access to more sex partners, of all sexes and ages.  Don’t listen to what they say, watch what they do, understand their modus operandi.  The ability to access women’s/girl’s dressing rooms without undergoing the ‘big surge’ (the de-manning procedure) — how convenient for male psychopaths.  I don’t know what to say to naive perma-children who think everyone is sincere and wonderful.

Psychopaths are generally considered to have poor planning and predictive skills — that’s only the low level ones.  SAPs (socially adept psychopaths) can be phenomenal at it.  Setting up ‘dominoes’ (desired future events from their standpoint) and then having them fall in sequence as planned — incredible.  The psychopathiforming of aspects or society are such dominoes.

On a different but related topic, it has seemed to me for years that high level female executives and politicians are psychopathic at a much, much higher percentage than the general female population is.  It would seem that the lack of gender would feed into this.  Feminists tend to give them a freepass and even admire them.  Non-feminist women tend to judge them on their actual record and what they know of their public behavior.  I consider this situation shameful.

This is a subject very close to my heart, so let me make one thing very clear – to the perv psychos, Chris Cuomo (CNN), Pat Kiernan (Spectrum NY1), Bob Gates (destroyer of and mind rapist of the Boy Scouts), etc., no way will you ever be allowed to neuter our boys.  There’s something called standards of the community, you are way past them.

Are we living through an unrecognized double black swan event?

First — it is now possible to objectively/scientifically recognize psychopaths (which will, I’m convinced, support Martha Stout’s cited estimate of 4% or 1 in 25 being a psychopath, ((K. Barry et al. (1997), R. Bland, S. Newman, H. Orn (1988), J. Samuels et al. (1994)), and my anecdotal agreement (from recognizing psychopaths waiting for the subway, at street corners, in the workplace, etc.).  Second — their unhappy response to this, i.e., their machinations to seize power over the rest of us – political, economic, and through the surveillance built into the internet of things of great utility and convenience.  Surveillance that can close like a vise on any chosen target.  We carry our own handcuffs with us.

“If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face – forever.” – George Orwell.  The Fabian, George Orwell, was a psychopath writing how-to books, as was Aldous Huxley also.  H.G. Wells of The Time Machine with the Eloi and Morlocks was also a Fabian and a psychopath.  The books seem to understand our plight from our own standpoint but only because psychopaths have something called “cold empathy.”  They know exactly how their targets will experience their attacks, it helps them ‘twist the stiletto’.

See the two prior posts (A hearsay tale involving Andrew Cuomo, and Commenter: “To borrow your own phrase, this nonsense has got to stop, one cannot recognize psychopaths by sight” — but, but, what if you are actually doing so without knowing it? (Mark Zuckerberg, in this case)).

Think what 1 in 25 being psychopaths mean.  It means that for every group of 25 that you’ve ever known, there was probably one psychopath.  It means we all walk shoulder to shoulder everyday with psychopathic beings who have zero fellow human feelings, emotionless, guiltless beings who see our emotional responses as weakness and know how to use them against us.

So why don’t we all know this?  I see two reasons.  First, as psychopaths always say (and I’ve heard them say this personally),we all believe what we want to believe.  Nobody wants to recognize Dad as a psychopath or Mom, bro or sis.  They just have issues and will put their lives together very soon, any day now.  Second, we should ask The New Yorker why they published the Psychopathic Whisperer, oopsie, my bad, the Psychopath Whisperer, Kent Kiehl’s drivel of psychopaths being so rare most people will never know any.  Who and what is The New Yorker? (https://pathwhisperer.info/2018/01/23/trust-me-im-a-doctor-this-is-a-medical-treatment-psychopath-larry-nassar-md-molests-young-female-gymnasts-for-20-plus-years/#comment-139406).

A hearsay tale involving Andrew Cuomo

Hearsay can’t be considered evidence.  But individuals are certainly free to decide if they believe a particular hearsay account to be more likely true or more likely false.  This story is at one level of hearsay (to me, and two levels to you), there is an individual who alleges to have been an eye/ear witness to alleged bragging by Andrew Cuomo, then there is the individual who relayed the story to me.  I trust my source did not make up this account, and I believe my source believes his source — the foregoing doesn’t necessarily mean anything but I want to add it to the mix.

If I could suggest how others approach the following, I’d suggest the these questions.  Does this account square with what you know of Mr. Cuomo, either personally or from the public record?  Could you see him planning and doing the following?  Is he Machiavellian enough?  If so, could you see him wishing to brag about it?  Is he arrogant enough to commit to such a strategy?  Etc.

This account, involving his divorce, goes as follows.  Nobody, of course, wants a divorce to publicly devolve into a blackmail contest of mutual dirt slinging and airing of dirty laundry.  Particularly not a politician.

Allegedly, Andrew Cuomo and his wife agreed to a trial separation, with a stated (not in writing) agreement that sex with others was acceptable.  A setup for a trap?  Mr. Cuomo allegedly then hired a private detective to follow his soon to be ex-wife.  At an appropriate time to catch his wife in flagrante delicto, alledgedly the private detective and Mr. Cuomo burst into the hotel room (or whereever), cameras in hand and flashes a-poppin’.  Voila, a nice quiet divorce.

What’s your opinion, could you see Andrew doing such?  Is he the type of personality that would want to brag about it?

Would you want him to wield facial recognition/AI tracking powers?  https://www.vocativ.com/396745/memo-new-york-called-for-face-recognition-cameras-at-bridges-tunnels/index.htmlhttps://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-07-21/big-brother-surveillance-begins-cuomo-unveils-facial-scanning-new-york-toll-plazas.

After the last election, I recall Mr. Cuomo being asked what he thought of Ms. Teachout.  Paraphrased from memory, ‘Ahh, political season.  Gotta love it.  Opinions, everyone has one’ and then laughed.  Let me translate that from psychopath-speak.  He was calling her an asshole.  The complete phrase, of course, is ‘opionions are like assholes, everyone has one.’  I’m sure all the other psychopaths laughed too.

Then there is his latest “America was never great”  flap.  Psychopaths in the thrall of groupthink are dangerous, they easily lose the thread.  He and his advisors no doubt thought they were destroying Trumps’ trump card, his ‘Make America Great Again‘ campaign.

Finally, on Andrew, have you noticed his voice?  Its very ugly.  I believe he lacks the empathic soul that animates a normal human voice.

Moving on, how about Chris?

 Fox News host Tucker Carlson poked fun at CNN’s Chris Cuomo Friday, playing a bizarre video Cuomo posted on Instagram.  . . .

In Cuomo’s video, he makes a few vague comments about last summer’s “Wonder Woman” movie before making air kisses.

Cuomo says, “‘Wonder Woman,’ amazing. We finally had a female director of break the $100 million mark. The film means more than just its box score. What does it mean to you? Here’s a little intrigue–I wanted to be like Wonder Woman, and I’m gonna wear a shirt that says it.”

“What does it qualify as intrigue that Chris Cuomo wanted to be Wonder Woman? Did he ever wear that shirt? What’s with the air kisses? There are so many more questions,” Carlson said.

He sarcastically continued, “It’s better to understand Chris Cuomo for who he is. An artist, poet, seeker, shaman. The question is not, what the hell is Chris talking about, but what is Chris Cuomo trying to teach us, all of us, humanity itself?”  http://dailycaller.com/2017/10/14/tucker-plays-bizarre-clip-of-cnns-chris-cuomo-talking-total-nonsense-video/

At what age does an child’s gender identity solidify?  It would seem that significant parts of Chris’s personality are arrested prior to that point.

More, CNN’s Chris Cuomo Excuses Antifa’s Violence Because ‘All Punches Are Not Equal . . .’ —  Chris Cuomo: We At CNN Can Possess WikiLeaks Emails, But You Can’t —  CNN’s Chris Cuomo: ‘Fake news’ insult ‘equivalent of the N-word Uh, . . ., guys, gals,  . . .

Finally, if someone would give me a toothbrush from each of Mario, Andrew and Chris plus 15 thousand dollars, I’ll give you the Cuomo bloodline, the Cuomo psychopathic bloodline.

The psychopathic gang stalking of Judge Roy Moore

I wouldn’t have voted for Roy Moore, we are too far apart on the issues.  But that’s what should determine elections – issues and vision of the future, not character assassination.  We all deserve fair play whether in the political arena, courts or life.  Without judging the allegations (though I’ve never, ever, witnessed a tearless fake crier who I ended up believing.  Tearless fake crying is a psychopathic pity play specialty, they think we are too stupid to notice), I’d like to focus on the psychopathic gang stalking strategies used against him.  Even if it turns out he is guilty of the allegations, which we have no proof of and mostly aren’t as serious as the inflated terms used, the media approach was very improper.

The attack was essentially through a very sly and improper use of English plus a kind of word inflation.  “Accused pedophile”, “accused molester” were terms that were used across the media (in seemingly organized fashion, but then our fake news industry is really a social engineering industry).  There is no such thing as either of those terms.  ‘Accused pedophile?’ — ‘what’s the pedophile accused of?’ — the phrase assumes the actuality of the subject of the sentence being a pedophile.  This is a purposeful psychopath-think strategy to ‘slide’ the pedophile accusation into the realm of reality.  The proper term of course is ‘alleged pedophile.’  However in this instance Roy Moore was never accused of pedophilia.  He was accused of sexual activity with a post puberty minor by a then 14 year old.  Pedophilia is the sexual interest in pre-pubescent children.  He was never accused of that.  If the then fourteen year old’s assertions are true, the crime would have been lewd behavior with a minor — not child molestation or statutory rape (which is consenting sex with a minor before the age of consent).   But the terms, pedophile, child abuser, molester, perv have been thrown around by the so-called journalists.  Katy Tur and that fake journalist with his own fake news show, Chris Cuomo, come to mind.  Roy Moore should collect instances where the term alleged was not added and sue.  I don’t know if he’s guilty of any of these allegations but I do know the media is guilty of psychopathic gangstalking through the purposeful sly use of language and word meaning inflation plus general moral sliminess in the cause of character assassination.

There were many elements involved in the character attack on Moore.  They obviously hoped to stampede him out of the race.  It started with a piling on of allegations (none of which had ever surfaced before in his controversial and contentious political/judicial career — this doesn’t prove them false, but does raise questions) with no time for a where-does-the-truth-lay investigation.  There is no such thing as ‘Oh, the accuser is credible, so we should just believe the accuser.’  We’re not mind readers and no court works like that.  In a ‘he said, she said’ law case, both stories are examined and both parties cross examined.  If an accuser is credible then you take the accusers accusations seriously and examine them, not take them on faith.  That public assertion by so much of the media otherwise is simple nonsense and a symptom of their moral corruption.  Then of course, there was the frequently raised question of “what motivation would the accusers have had to lie” and thus that they must be telling the truth.  That’s naive and childish at best, and assumed similarity disorder at worst.  There are as many motivations to lie as there are types of mental illness (each with its own peculiar motivations), as there are individuals desirous of more money, as there are individuals who can be blackmailed, etc.

Going back to tearless fake criers, we all recall Juanita Broaddrick.  A number of years ago I was going to do a post analyzing a couple of her accusatory (against Bill Clinton) videos but never got around to it.  There were moments where in the midst of her fake crying and shoulder shaking she would get still and look out through her outstretched fingers that were ‘hiding her grief’ and seemingly judge, with cold tearless eyes, the effect of her performance.  I found her totally unbelievable and strongly suspect (extremely strongly suspect) her of being an actual psychopath and probably that rarest of rare, a pseudologue.

I haven’t analyzed the video of Berverly Nelson’s claims in detail, but my instinctive reaction to the parts shown on the news was that this woman was lying, not merely faking the crying.  There should be no public prohibition on asking and examining whether accusers are psychopaths or other pathological liars.

Finally, honest journalism would have reported both sides’ claims and responses and leave the opinion making to the viewers/readers.  But obviously todays ‘journalists’ see their job as being opinion drivers and will use dishonest psychopathic strategies to do so.  That’s evil.