Tea Party candidates — giving sociopaths a bad name

Get this man OFF THE BALLOT!  Rick Perry is mentally unfit for the presidency.

Sociopathic aspects (or sociopathic modality aspects) of the above:

1.  Rick Perry childishly thinks a commercial break equates to being off camera.  This very shallow, not all possibilities entertained, thinking is very typical of sociopaths and children.

2.  This is intended as a physical threat.  He invades Ron Paul’s space, bullying him off the podium.  The grabbing of Paul’s wrist is a type of assault, his intention is that Paul realize this, imo.  Sociopaths are very elemental – might makes right.  Power is everything.  Civility and civilized behavior is only window dressing that can be dropped at a moment.

3.  A sociopath would realize that Paul is in a position that prevents him from complaining.  Paul cannot say “Oh look, he’s bullying me” because he is running for president and complaining would compound his appearing weak.  Perry knows this.  Simply between Perry and Paul this is an affront without consequence, a sociopathic specialty (graduating up to crimes without consequence).  Thank goodness for the small detail of the rolling cameras.

All the Tea Party candidates should be asked to voluntarily submit bran scans to prove they are not sociopaths.  Sarah Palin’s only qualification for the office of the presidency is arrogance.  Michele Bachmann’s facts seem to come straight from planet pseudologia fantastica.

Search: “pseudologia fantastica do they know they are lying?”

This is a question I’ve pondered considerably.  My provisional answer is yes they do.  However I think they think everyone else is lying also.  For them this includes surgeons, pilots, tattoo artists and other highly trained specialists.  But this would mean that there is no hard reality to them, reality isn’t really real — it’s plastic and responsive to emotional wish.  From the research (A. Raine’s comes to mind) it seems their brains are radically different.

They are one of the few psychopathic subsets that I consider mentally ill and deserving of confinement in mental hospitals — not to cure them, which can’t be done, but to protect society.

I told you, I told you, I told you — the subconscious is where it’s at, Ronald Reagan was a sociopath

I tell you, I tell you, I tell you — to detect sociopaths open yourselves to your subconscious.  But do you listen to me?  Noooooooooo!

Brain damaged aphasics recognized him years ago.  They don’t have the rational language parts of the brain, but still see more of the truth than the majority of us do.

“The President’s Speech” from The Man who Mistook his Wife for a Hat by Oliver Sacks, 1985:
What was going on? A roar of laughter from the aphasia ward, just as the President’s speech was coming on, and they had all been so eager to hear the President speaking…

There he was, the old Charmer, the Actor, with his practised rhetoric, his histrionisms, his emotional appeal – and all the patients were convulsed with laughter. Well, not all: some looked bewildered, some looked outraged, one or two looked apprehensive, but most looked amused. The President was, as always, moving – but he was moving them, apparently, mainly to laughter. What could they be thinking? Were they failing to understand him? Or did they, perhaps, understand him all too well?

http://www.junkfoodforthought.com/long/Sacks_Reagan.htm

Exactly.  They saw right through him.

It was often said of these patients, who though intelligent had the severest receptive or global aphasia, rendering them incapable of understanding words as such, that they none the less understood most of what was said to them. . . .

[. . .] speech – natural speech – does not consist of words alone .  .  .  It consists of utterance – an uttering-forth of one’s whole meaning with one’s whole being – the understanding of which involves infinitely more than mere word-recognition. And this was the clue to aphasiacs’ understanding, even when they might be wholly uncomprehending of words as such. For though the words, the verbal constructions, per se, might convey nothing, spoken language is normally suffused with ‘tone’, embedded in an expressiveness which transcends the verbal – and it is precisely this expressiveness, so deep, so various, so complex, so subtle, which is perfectly preserved in aphasia, though understanding of words be destroyed. Preserved – and often more: preternaturally enhanced…

. . .

Thus the feeling I sometimes have – which all of us who work closely with aphasiacs have – that one cannot lie to an aphasiac. He cannot grasp your words, and so cannot be deceived by them; but what he grasps he grasps with infallible precision, namely the expression that goes with the words, that total, spontaneous, involuntary expressiveness which can never be simulated or faked, as words alone can, all too easily…

. . .

This is why they laughed at the President’s  speech.

. . .

If one cannot lie to an aphasiac, in view of his special sensitivity to expression and ‘tone’, how is it, we might ask, with patients – if there are such – who lack any sense of expression and ‘tone’, while preserving, unchanged, their comprehension for words: patients of an exactly opposite kind? We have a number of such patients, also on the aphasia ward, although, technically, they do not have aphasia, but, instead, a form of agnosia, in particular a so-called ‘tonal’ agnosia. For such patients, typically, the expressive qualities of voices disappear – their tone, their timbre, their feeling, their entire character – while words (and grammatical constructions) are perfectly understood. Such tonal agnosias (or ‘atonias’) are associated with disorders of the right temporal lobe of the brain, whereas the aphasias go with disorders of the left temporal lobe.

Among the patients with tonal agnosia on our aphasia ward who also listened to the President’s speech was Emily D. , with a glioma in her right temporal lobe. A former English teacher, and poetess of some repute, with an exceptional feeling for language, and strong powers of analysis and expression, Emily D. was able to articulate the opposite situation – how the President’s speech sounded to someone with tonal agnosia. Emily D. could no longer tell if a voice was angry, cheerful, sad – whatever. Since voices now lacked expression, she had to look at people’s faces, their postures and movements when they talked, and found herself doing so with a care, an intensity , she had never shown before. Emily D. also listened, stony-faced, to the President’s speech, bringing to it a strange mixture of enhanced and defective perceptions – precisely the opposite mixture to those of our aphasiacs. It did not move her – no speech now moved her – and all that was evocative, genuine or false completely passed her by. Deprived of emotional reaction, was she then (like the rest of us) transported or taken in? By no means. ‘He is not cogent,’ she said. ‘He does not speak good prose. His word-use is improper. Either he is brain- damaged, or he has something to conceal.’ Thus the President’s speech did not work for Emily D. either, due to her enhanced sense of formal language use, propriety as prose, any more than it worked for our aphasiacs, with their word-deafness but enhanced sense of tone.

Here then was the paradox of the President’s speech. We normals – aided, doubtless, by our wish to be fooled, were indeed well and truly fooled (‘Populus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur’). And so cunningly was deceptive word-use combined with deceptive tone, that only the brain-damaged remained intact, undeceived.

http://www.junkfoodforthought.com/long/Sacks_Reagan.htm

Nooooooooo!  Get that Howdy Doody face off that mountain (well out of this play pretend image)!

Even chiseled out of rock in this image, Reagan looks like a clown.  The empty eyes of a pseudologue!  The others are deep complex human beings.  Pseudologues are forever waiting for their emotions to tell them what role to play.  There is no there, there.

Practically everyone who dealt with Reagan said they hardly knew him and assumed there was a private Reagan no one knew.  No one knew the private Reagan, because there wasn’t one.  Reagan himself knew the reason, he titled his autobiography, “Where’ s the Rest of Me”.

The Tucson tragedy — reopen the mental hospitals, require candidates to submit brain scans

Gerald Loughner obviously belonged in a mental hospital as a dangerous psychotic.  This post however will focus on the hate mongers and the destabilizing effort to destroy the American economy by our own elite (which is destabilizing psychologically, emotionally and economically).  It is my strong belief that the public should insist that those running for office submit brain scans to prove they are not sociopathic.  “Journalists” of course don’t have to.

Paradoxically, one of the reasons for the incivility of the Tea Party/Fox News (otherwise known as the Republican propaganda channel that went to court to establish its right to lie) is too much civility on our part.  Sociopaths and the corrupt have taken advantage of our good nature.

Where we should have/should still draw[n] the line against sociopathy/sociopathic modality:

  • No, pathologically lying sociopath Ronald Reagan (i.e., a sufferer of pseudologia fantastica syndrome) is not fit for the presidency.  I am aware that he has his sincere admirers.  However there is no shame in being conned, but there is in not waking up.  His con was to present a folksy front for the destruction of the American way of life — the average person being middle class.  A garbage picker class was created specifically as economic terrorism, to terrorize Americans into working more hours for less pay.
  • No, we will not accept NAFTA which cratered American manufacturing and destroyed Mexican farmers (by the millions).  There is no need to repeal NAFTA, the president could simply declare it null and void.  Its passage was absolutely unconstitutional, it never received the two thirds vote treaties require.  Through sociopathic lawyerese it was simply termed an agreement, requiring only a majority vote.
  • No, Clinton, China will not be given most favored nation status. Through this and other means globalism was foisted on the world, before the U.S. and world realized what was happening, let alone voting on it.  China was to be the factory of the world and Americans the consumers of the world (hello . . . how can we be consumers without jobs?  ‘Government is the problem, markets are natural geniuses’ — Greenspan (or something like that).)
  • No, there is no such thing as a service economy, where I work at McDonald’s and you work at Walmarts, there is no such thing as a FIRE economy (finance, insurance, real estate), and today, in a growing number of places, there is no such thing as garage sale or thrift shop economyAn economy requires that value be created.
  • No, Wall Street, we will tell you what “financial products” (hah) you can sell.  Do they further the interest of the greater economy?  And, by the way, Glass-Steagall will stay.
  • No, Greenspan and Bernanke, you will not allow runaway economic bubbles. To those to say, ‘Well gee, how do we know when we’re in a bubble” (and many of them have Ph.D.s), I say ‘Shut up and grow up’.
  • No, Wall Street, there is no such thing as riskless capitalisim –– selling worthless mortgages, distributing the risk through bundling (mortgage backed securities).  And then conning the world to buy them (and derivatives).  Capitalism 101:  those going for the profit, take the risk. Tell that to bankers.  Mortgage originators faced almost no risk.
  • No, Bush, Obama, Geithner, Bernanke, Paulson, too big to fail means just that.  Going forward banks (and other companies) will no longer be so large that their failure would damage the entire economy. Instead, the exact opposite has happened, Wall Streets firms have become even bigger and more concentrated.  But don’t worry, Obama will retire from  the presidency wealthy just like Clinton (whose foundation is worth hundreds of millions).  Become president of the United States and become rich.  (To support these economic points please see Financial crisis of 2008 avoidable, says US inquiry.)
  • No, you will not carry firearms to political rallies and town hall meetings. This is despite the fact that the entire Bill of Rights consists of restraints on government power and the recognition of individual (not collective) rights.  There are still common sense, comparable to no shouting fire falsely in crowded theaters, restrictions.  Threatening deadly force (in the absence of imminent danger) is a crime.
  • No, Tea Party candidates and Fox hate-spewing-mouths, you will not incite violence. I don’t know where the line is, between free speech and the first amendment but it seems to me that Sharron Angle’s “second amendment remedies” is very close to inciting violence and the equivalent of needlessly shouting fire in a crowded theater (which is legally actionable).  But as individuals, we are certainly free to respond verbally how we wish, regardless of any possible criminality.
  • Michele Bachmann, you are insane.  Glenn Beck, with his bizarre diagrams and his fake crying jags, seems insane also, but it’s not on the public dime.

These are very dangerous times.  Whenever there is a crime and tragedy, such as the the one Loughner carried out, it is important to ask exactly where the pathology lays — in the action, or in both the action and the motivation (i.e., was it the pathological expression of a common or understandable stress or the expression of an internal psychotic stress). In Loughner’s case it seems both are true, both his action and motivation were pathological (psychotic) but at the same time based on shared societal stressors.

Reopening the mental hospitals would do multiple things.  Paranoid schizophrenics would be taken care of , and the public protected.  “Over the edge” sociopaths would also be confined.  Sociopaths respond only to outside constraints.  I can’t prove this, but it is my firm belief that the very existence of mental hospitals was and could again be a great restraining factor regarding sociopaths.

The hospitals were closed through the confluence of the extreme end of Republicanism, the sociopathic greed and selfishness of the ‘whatever is for me is the good, and screw everybody else’ philosophy, and the narcissistic end of the Democratic party, ‘Lincoln freed the slaves, we’ll free the mental patients.’ The conservatives wanted to save money and the liberals pushed the model of community based treatment (that didn’t exist when mental patients started being dropped off at street corners).  After the recent tragedy, Tucson’s Sheriff Clarence Dupnik stated that the best mental health facility in the area is his county jail.  I think it’s clear which side won, the side anchored in sociopathic greed and selfishness, liberal narcissists once again played the part of useful fools.  But still too many liberals can’t see this, too many can’t see the mentally ill as being exploited prey on the streets, being too busy admiring their goodness in the mirror.

But back to politicians, Ronald Reagan seems to have opened the door to the weirdosIs Michele Bachmann a pseudologue?  Does she know that reality actually really is real?  She doesn’t seem to. See Founding fathers ‘worked tirelessly’ to end slavery, or PolitiFact’s Truth-o-meter, All statements involving Michele Bachmann, though I see she’s come up to “Half True” finally.

Chris Mathews has asked her, and other Tea Party leaders (such as Sal Russo) if they’re acting under hypnosis for their behavior during interviews.  They seem to just nod and smile and then, to any question, simply repeat the point they have to say.  It’s almost as though, on their home planet, Zatar, they had a conference on how to communicate with Earthlings and came up with this plan.  Oh, oh — to newbies, bizarre sociopathic groupthink is one of my suggested flags of possible sociopathy.  Sociopaths are permanent children, strangers in a strange land — they are always trying to figure out the behavior of the adult normal world.  In an echo chamber of a sociopaths only coffee klatch (I was going to say clown car but . . .) they can come up with some really bizarre ideas and interpretations.   For one of the interviews, see YouTube – Chris Matthews Rips Tea Party Express Co-Founder Sal Russo!.

A problem with attacking a movement’s leaders is that their followers usually feel they are attacked also.  This needs to be prevented.  Tea Party citizens are certainly fearful and anxious, as are probably most Americans.  The reasons for this are logical and understandable.  The America we have known is being destroyed in front of our eyes, as we are being reduced economically to third world conditions. Above I have expressed my own interpretation of recent history.

In closing let me urge again that all those running for public office be asked to submit brain scans proving they are not sociopathic, starting with those with runaway-bride eyes.  See Adrian Raine’s work: Abnormal Brain Region Characterizes Those With Psychopathy, Habitual Liar Brains Look Different On Scans.

It turns out I’m echoing Futurepundit on the brainscans (from link immediately above):

“Modest proposal:  Require politicians running for office to get brain scans and publish their gray matter to white matter ratio. If the public really wants more honest politicians (and I’m not entirely convinced that is the case) then the public could vote for candidates that have higher gray to white matter. Also, politicians should have to include any indications that they have brains shaped for psychopathy.”

Search: “Are bankers sociopathic?”

I assume the searcher is asking about percentages, in other words are investment bankers more often sociopathic than the norm?

Well, it just so happens that I spent over twenty years working for Wall Street firms.  A distant second source of employment were law firms.  From my experience I would say that there seems to be a higher percentage of sociopathic bankers than lawyers, which might seem surprising.

I spent at least a year, either as a permanent or freelance, at E.F. Hutton, PaineWebber, Drexel, Salomon Brothers, Lehman Brothers, Union Bank of Switzerland and UBS (after the merger with the dominant partner Swissbank)I was at Drexel during the go-go years when support (operations) staff were buying cars for cash with their bonuses (I was freelance at the time unfortunately).  I was there at then end when support staff were asked to leave a professionals only why-Drexel-is-closing meeting.  I was at Salomon Brothers on Black Thursday, and later, from a computer room, heard names being called out on the trading floor — those called had a half hour to gather their stuff and leave the premises.

Of these banks I personally knew or knew of sociopaths at E.F. Hutton, Lehman Brothers, PaineWebber and UBS.  I strongly suspected Salomon’s Gutfriend’s wife to be a sociopath but I suppose that doesn’t count.  From news stories, I’m sure some of the Drexel senior bankers and executives were sociopathic but I had no personal contact with them and no entry to their offices.  But if one accepts that one can often recognize sociopathic arrogance and attitude at a glance, as I do, then all Wall Street companies with trading floors have sociopathic employees.

In my opinion, E.F. Hutton was actually a sociopathic enterprise led by the sociopath Bob Fomon (this became obvious about Bob Fomon over time and for many reasons).  Sociopaths of the SAP (socially adept psychopaths) variety, cluster.  As permanent children the world is a daunting place for them — or to put it another way, they are all strangers in a strange land.  They will gravitate towards those SAPs who are more able to navigate the outside world.  Low level, unable to defer gratification, astronomically egotistical sociopaths don’t play well with other sociopaths and “King Sociopaths,” those at the center of sociopathic clusters, seem to often resent interacting with other “King Sociopaths.”  Many people believe sociopaths are loners due to these two reasons, I think, but I believe the majority are not.

And of course, a sociopathic enterprise offers the promise of corruption for all.

Bob Fomon had the self control and ability to defer gratification to be a successful sociopath (in the sense of passing for normal and having a successful career) but he was unable to hire other sociopaths of his caliber.  The sociopaths underneath him could not keep their hands out of the cookie jar however.

Sociopathic stories from Hutton:

  • I recall Bob Fomon having a fondness for teenage female company (of legal age) but he felt he had to claim the relationships were platonic.  I don’t believe he found many believers — sociopaths will try the stupidest explanations, any excuse will do.  When he showed up with a foot in a cast, the jokes went that he must have fallen off that red velvet swing.  And at his age.
  • I knew a high vice president who was rumored to be having a long-running affair with a gay manager underneath him.  When I mentioned this to a young female co-worker she said “No that’s not true.  He merely calls him every morning.”  This same young friend had warned me earlier not to believe any rumors that she was having an affair with the same vice president.  Slow on the uptake, I said, “What!  How do you know that?”  Anyway, when the day came that management wanted the gay manager to leave the employment of Hutton but apparently not wanting to fire him directly, the vice president simply took away not only his office but even his desk.  The deskless manager was forced to wander like a ghost until he quit on his own.  I’m sure it was emotionally devastating for him.  Sociopaths seem to enjoy pulling that emotional rug out from under their lovers when they discard them.  An element involved, I believe, is their resenting having been cast as a emotional partner when they feel no emotions and they decide to show that in the end.
  • The check-kiting scandal that brought down Hutton — just what were they thinking?  Of course that was in the day and age that Wall Street banks relied on their reputation and needed their clients to survive as opposed to trading on their own account against their clients.

Sociopathic stories from UBS:

  • I considered more than one high level officer of my division to be sociopathic.  In addition I have never worked with a higher percentage of children of sociopaths.  The children of sociopaths, almost without exception, are deeply, deeply humiliated (without ever recognizing the sociopathicness of the humiliating parent).  The constellation of traits is actually easy to recognize, though sometimes they internalize the sociopathic humiliator to such an extent that they may be taken for sociopaths themselves.  And, of course, they are very comfortable working with sociopaths (as in, being totally oblivious to it).
  • Under the UBS corporate structure, the regional heads had enormous power.  Many became combinations of screaming babies and lord high potentates.  With outside restrictions removed sociopaths know no restraint.  I’m not saying that they all were sociopathic, but more than one were, in my opinion.
  • The junior bankers were often terrorized by these regional heads and would beg us in NYC to go along and do what their bosses wanted.  I would hear such phrases as “He’ll win anyway don’t fight him“, “He just has to have his own way“.  They knew their bosses were screaming babies but they never drew any conclusions.
  • Some managing directors seemed to be very mild mannered to outsiders but their staffs were utterly terrified of disappointing them.  One sees such manipulation by sociopaths often.  Warren Jeffs comes to mind (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Jeffs).
  • A pathologically lying sociopath (i.e, a pseudologue, the condition is called pseudologia fantastica) found complete safety at UBS for years.  When he was hired he claimed to have just gotten over both leukemia (seemingly, a cancer hoax favorite) and a kidney transplant.  Five years later he brought in a cake one day, saying it was his fifteenth year of remission from leukemia, apparently having forgotten his earlier story.  When confronted he was smooth as silk, an incredible performance.  However others, including management, still protected him.  He was kind of like a Schmoo, anything you wanted in a friend.  But in reality he was the equivalent of a calculating machine always calculating what his object wanted from him — if, a big if, it suited his purposes.  Like all sociopaths he was a genius at getting others to take care of him and quite a few co-workers were heavily emotionally invested in believing in his Schmoo friendship.
  • I believe this same pseudologue found further safety in the embrace of a male sex-party ring, that included members from all levels of employment, that was rumored to exist (ten years worth of rumors and drunken comments).  Also see Not frat boy behavior, sociopathic behavior.    I don’t care what people do in private, but in a corporate setting and with members of management involved such activity is not a private matter.  I believe this ring helped further this pseudologue’s security (not to mention the possibility of explicit or implicit blackmail) and he branched out into puppetmastery, slander and workplace bullying.  The manager whose responsibilities he essentially co-opted was absolutely unaware of it.  She was his biggest devotee — his word was golden, and she seemingly couldn’t stand to disappoint him.  Uncanny.
  • There was something else worth noting about this pseudologue.  In a sense he became a King Sociopath, i.e., one that other sociopaths clustered about and followed.  As a pseudologue he literally had all the certainty of one who makes up their own facts.  (It seems pseudologues know they are lying, but they seem to think everyone is lying and that there is no “real” reality.)  This certainty carried weight with more childish sociopaths (some of whom were much higher than him in the corporate hierarchy) looking for help in dealing with the non-sociopath world.
  • One time a junior banker (later a managing director) came by, all excited that his young children had included him in a discussion of whether folding toilet paper or bunching it up was a better technique.  This was something he could relate to instantly.  Sociopaths, as part of their arrested development, are endlessly fascinated by bodily functions.   “‘[The Manipulator] loves to walk down the street in pride and certainly, knowing he’s but one moment away from an attack of diarrhea.  This makes him unique among the masses.  The Toxick Magician always views his adversary with his head in the toilet bowl“, http://www.scribd.com/doc/11554313/The-Psychopaths-Bible.
  • I recall a junior banker, with a Harvard degree, who was famous for an occurrence of semi-public sex at one of our corporate holiday parties.  He and a very willing, very drunk partner availed themselves of a stairwell with co-workers peaking in amazement around the corner, as I understand it.  She left soon after, but he was there for years, no doubt thinking it was totally normal behavior.  For more on the sociopath’s lack of need for privacy see Menace to society:  Nushawn Williams should be involuntarily committed as a dangerous psychopath.
  • The holocaust gold history of both Union Bank of Switzerland and Swiss Bank, both historical and modern.

Derivatives are a whole other issue — though perhaps more what the searcher had in mind, rather than the vignettes above.  There is no question that derivatives were hatched by a sociopathic mind or a sociopathic modality mind.  The notion of derivatives (essentially insurance but with no need that the buyer be a stakeholder, i.e., they’re sidebets, pure gambling) is grotesquely irresponsible, ignorant of reality, ignorant of cause and effect, ignorant of what drives economies.  Financing is the tail of the dog, not the dog.  The financial service industry has to serve the greater economy.  Obviously if there were trillions of dollars bet on sporting outcomes, the debts would be unenforceable and laughed at.  However the power players are still demanding that derivative bets be paid off, though the value is greater than the world economy.  This is insane, though not to sociopaths. Derivatives are the economic equivalent of perpetual motion machines, another great sociopathic favorite.  Being permanent children scientific cause and effect are beyond them.

Derivatives and the sociopathic philosophy behind them and the insane notion of a riskfree capitalism have crashed the world economy. See Welcome to our sociopaths-gone-wild economy and Commonalities between Wall Street speculators and/or Fed bankers and sociopaths.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Search: pseudologia fantastica treatment

There isn’t any.  Pseudologues (i.e., sociopaths who are also pathological liars) are the way they are born to be.  Neither freewill or individual psychology plays any role.  Their brains are even different (www.futurepundit.com/archives/001998.html, www.futurepundit.com/archives/003035.html.

However, there are other types of psychological liars so each individual should obviously be evaluated.  A problem with this, though, is that those individuals we would assume to be experts, therapists, probably have less experience with pseudologues and sociopaths than we do in daily life.  Pseudologues and sociopaths, being perfect in every way, simply do not often present themselves for treatment.  Further, if they do, their purpose is not to change but to learn how to pass for normal more easily — in effect they seek to use talk therapy to become more adept as sociopathic predators.

I agree with those that believe pseudologues and sociopaths should never, ever be accepted into talk therapy.  I would go even further to state that any therapists who do in fact do this should lose their licenses — since it is only by their being out of touch with their own soul that they could fail to recognize the soulless, could fail to recognize that they couldn’t reach the sociopathic client.  Any therapist out of touch with their own soul can not be of any use to anybody, is by definition not even a therapist in the first place.

The worst situation I have ever known of in this regard involved a therapy group that allowed sociopathic members along with the depressives, neurotics, incest victims, etc.  I’m sure the therapist (Nancy Becker, LCSW, http://nancybeckertherapy.com/, https://therapists.psychologytoday.com/rms/name/Nancy_Becker_LCSW_New+York_New+York_145736) would never have thrown piranhas into a goldfish bowl, but this she found acceptable.  I’m not a fan of group therapy in the first place (I believe it is a grotesque lowering of boundaries before strangers one can not know) but accepting sociopaths into group therapy should be grounds for automatic malpractice suits against a therapist.

A universal among sociopaths (including pseudologues) is delight at manipulating the non-sociopathic into behavior betraying their souls.

In the instance above I consider the therapist to be a rigid or malignant narcissist herself (one of Scott Peck’s mentally ill evil described in his book, People of the Lie).  Many people object to the concepts of evil and mental illness being joined, I can only assume they have never dealt with any malignant narcissists.   Group therapy with such a flawed therapist would become a celebration of her defect.  Sociopaths would effortlessly join that effort.  In addition narcissists are very attracted to sociopaths, narcissists themselves have to spend eternity fighting their souls, their consciences, their dreams and do in fact wake up to their true humanity occasionally.  Sociopaths have none of these problems.

A small grotesquery in an extremely grotesque story is that this therapist was called Mother by her clients.  It is hard to imagine a greater perversion of reality or semantics.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Unusual search: Can cats sense someone is a sociopath?

This is the first time I’ve ever seen this search.  All I can say, the most extreme female sociopath I’ve ever known said cats and dogs hated her.  Was this just something unique to her or do dogs and cats have some innate sense of fairplay?  Did they recognize her as a rapacious, reptilian-minded predator?  I don’t know.

Other searches

Pseudologia fantastica in real person: Yep, it’s real alright.  Actually if one is not immediately caught up and swept away by the pseudologue’s “pity play” then they are more obvious than regular sociopaths — their stories are so extreme and fantastical.

How to get a workplace sociopath to leave: Good luck.

How to let go of a sociopath: This will happen when your soul (not your mind) realizes there is no soul in the other person.  If this doesn’t happen, perhaps the other person is not a sociopath or perhaps you are actually fighting a realization that one of your parents is sociopathic ($50 please).

Or in the emotional immediacy of transsociopathica‘s words:

A few months after you have recovered you will wonder what you ever saw in these things. They will rapidly seem cold, ugly, empty, pathetic, distorted and almost deformed to you. That’s because this is what they are, always were, and you are finally perceiving them in their real unmasked state. This ‘broken beast’ is all that’s left and the only memory you’ll have of them going into the future. It’s all they deserve, because it is all they are.  http://transsociopathica.blogspot.com/2009/10/farewell-my-sociopath-hello-real-love.html

Sociopath at parties: Due to few inhibitions and no shame they can be real lives of the party.  Read “The Incredible Charlie Carewe” (http://www.amazon.com/incredible-Charlie-Carewe-Mary-Astor/dp/B00005W69S). Some are also very, very skillful at party crashing. (https://kat.cr/the-incredible-charlie-carewe-mary-astor-mobi-t7972573.html, https://openlibrary.org/books/OL5798604M/The_incredible_Charlie_Carewe).

Sociopath and blackmailing: Goes together like ham and eggs.  They love crimes without consequence.

Pictures of  Thomas Capano: Hmmm.  This is a repeat search.  He’s the only one of my blog’s possible sociopaths (more than possible in his case) whose picture people seem particularly interested in.  I don’t know why.

I was with a sociopath for 8 years…why? For one thing, since no one is ever informed of this possibility as they are growing up or upon reaching romantic age, it often takes years for someone to realize their situation.  Also, as the sociopath often cons relatives of the non-sociopath, individuals in your position are really on their own.  Addressing this is one of the main missions of my blog.

You have a lot of company.  Ann Landers was married for thirty years to the sociopath, in my opinion of course, Jules Lederer (who she described as the best salesman in the world).  They met while she was shopping for a wedding dress for her upcoming marriage to another person.  Just the kind of challenge that might appeal to a “super” sociopath.  Also, as I recall, her sister, Dear Abby, criticized her after the divorce for not understanding her husband.

Are sociopaths giving to neighbors and friends? I have witnessed such behavior, but it was only used to engender goodwill to set up later depredations.  Like a “pity play” (all sociopaths excel at inducing people to feel sorry for them) it brings people to their side emotionally.  Often, it seems, they want a reservoir of protectors before they commit their antisocial depredations (such as date/friend rape, “dress gray” rape, tricking a teen neighbor into prostitution, outright thievery, “murder by suicide” bullying (this is no exaggeration), blackmail, etc.).  They want the accuser to be met with angry disbelief (anger that such a nice person would be accused).  Not only do they wish to protect themselves through “plausible lies,” they want to place their victims in the position of having to claim “implausible truths.”

Can God change a sociopath? The short answer is no.  That would be akin to changing a stone into a block of wood, or lead to gold.  If the question is actually can sociopaths be lead to see the error of their ways and cease being sociopaths, unfortunately the answer is absolutely not.  Sociopaths have their own nature, they are the way they are born to be.  “Socially acceptable psychopaths” (SAPs) who, by definition are capable as passing in normal society, can choose whether or not to follow society’s norms and laws but they can’t feel them.  Justice and empathy are just empty words, even to them.  This searcher might be interested in the post,  “More structural brain abnormalities seen in psychopaths,” over at Psychopathy 101, http://psychopathy101.wordpress.com/2009/09/28/more-structural-brain-abnormalities-seen-in-psychopaths/.  I think its clear that most sociopaths are born with these brain structures.

Drifter & sociopath: The drifters and rolling stones of life are in fact often sociopaths, driven by boredom and lack of emotional bonds.  Boredom is simply one of their prime driving forces.  Thus the backwaters, catch basins and outposts of empires or large nations have a much higher sociopathic percentage — for example, California, Australia and New Zealand.

Will my baby be born a sociopath?: Here’s a heart breaker.  From the little I know, it seems the genetics of sociopathy is very complex.  I’ll try to look into this further.  If this searcher was attracted to a sociopath because one of her parents was sociopathic the odds aren’t good.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine