The following is an article about the film documentary Catfish.

Before I could really get into writing on it, I needed to see what I could discover about validating the documentary as something factual, rather than write upon something based on a mock-up. I had read the Wikipedia entry and criticisms against its validity as based on anything factual. However, while researching, I found a site for the 20/20 tv show (transcipt from that site below body of this article.)
The story behind Catfish was revealed on the show and this site contains video footage of interviews of some of the key people involved, namely Yaniv (Nev, pronounced ‘neev’) Schulman, a 24yo photographer living in New York City, and Angela Wesselman, a 40yo married woman in Michigan and the instigator of the controversy that is Catfish.

So how did Nev, his brother, a filmmaker Ariel (Rel) Schulman and their friend Henry Joost come about making a documentary that concerns something that any social network user may pause to consider: is that new online friend really who they say they are?

- especially when it appears they might be ‘too good to be true’, one would think.

My own opinion on the validity of the documentary is that it is a film that has been created by the filmmakers in terms of a story, it’s a beautifully and poignantly edited work – and one that may appear to suspend credibility for how nicely it pieces together. This is to the credit of the filmmakers and is, in itself, an entertainment while exploring the supposition of the outcome of a situation where an innocent (Nev in this case) is taken in by a manipulator.

I think what might have happened is that Nev was flattered by the attention that his photograph brought him and receiving the painting by ‘Abby’ and all the gifts, he was emotionally drawn into the world of the sender of these gifts. Rel and Henry, being filmmakers had been filming from early onset this event – of Nev receiving this peculiar attention – and decided at some point to run with the whole scenario of it. Thus were they able to manipulate the film’s making to produce the documentary to a credibility whereby the viewer is presented with elucidation to question the genuineness of who they are interracting with online. This in itself is worthwhile and the film can be described as events that are documented for one reason, amongst any other, that it poses this reasonable question.

So what is the Catfish story?

One cannot help but like Nev, he’s a bright, good-looking young man drawn into a relationship with 8yo Abby Wesselman, a prodigious child artist. Nev has had one of his photographs widely published, a photo of a pair of dancers from a dance company. Abby has sent Nev her artistic rendition of that photograph. Nev, Rel and Henry and impressed with her amazing talent. And so, for some months, Nev has friendship with Abby on Facebook, and Rel and Henry have been recording that. Abby’s mum, Angela, continues to send him paintings and prints of her daughter’s paintings. Through the relationship via Facebook, Nev connects with Abby’s contacts, including Angela and Angela’s older daughter, Abby’s step sister, 19yo Megan Faccio.

And so it begins. The romantic relationship Nev ends up having with Megan, who is apparently a veterinary technician, a really attractive multi-talented -sings, writes songs, dances and also paints – single girl. The relationship extends to phone calls and over 1,500 text messages that become sexually explicit over time. Nev is in the throws of love, and he must meet this girl that’s so intrigued him.

Left: an image constructed by Nev, superimposing a photo of Megan with him. The jpg is titled, on his Facebook site, “Someday”.

But he’s got his doubts now as he, Rel and Henry have since discovered that the sound wavs that she’s been sending Nev of her singing and songs she has apparently written for him, are actually those of someone else’s: the men have found the proof online.

Nev expresses how gullible he’s been.

“They’re complete psychopaths!” he says of Angela and Megan.

Feeling very foolish now he adds, grinning, “I’ve probably been chatting with a guy the whole time!”

Rel and Henry are, however, very interesting in continuing to film Nev’s relationship with Abby, Angela and Megan.

Rel, Henry and Nev get the opportunity to film a dance company near enough to Michigan state. They decide to visit Abby at her home at Ishpeming. Meeting Angela for the first time, she’s, naturally, nothing at all like the image she’s posted on her Facebook site of herself, except perhaps her long braided hair.

Upon meeting Nev, she behaves shyly around him, letting her braid out for her long hair to be admired, and Nev’s friends suggest to Nev that Angela’s actually “in love” with Nev, and has probably been the whole time.

By now, and after some more proofs, some coming from the child Abby herself. (yes, Abby admits, she does sometimes paint), but it is actually Angela, who is the artist and the creator of those paintings. By now everything’s falling into place for the three men. When they try to track down “Megan’s” farm, she and her horses are not there. Angela tells her that Megan has gone into a rehab facility. But that’s just one of the many lies that Angela has cooked up, even telling Nev that she (Angela) has cancer, which she does not.

What Angela does have is a marriage to husband Vince (also not looking at all like his facebox) and Vince’s two very retarded twin sons. Angela spends her time looking after her husband, her step-sons who require intensive and constant care, and Abby. She paints prolifically. The other thing she spends time doing is fooling Nev into believing that he’s been having an love-affair with ‘Megan’. Angela does in fact have an eldest daughter, estranged and not seen in the film.

What Angela does do is pull images off the net of a real girl by the name of Aimee Gonzales, a model and photographer. She also ‘creates’ other ‘family’ members and friends of ‘Megan’s’. Angela becomes all these people interacting on Facebook with Nev. The ruse has been an elaborate one.

Below: one of the many photos that she poached and fraudulently used to pose as ‘Megan’, the images belonging to Aimee Gonzales, model and photographer from Vancouver.

When all the truth comes out, she shows Nev the two phones she uses, one for when he converses with her Megan persona. She expresses how deeply sorry she is for fooling Nev – not that her humilation stopped her there and then and at that point.

So why is the documentary film called “Catfish”?

From the words of Vince, Angela’s husband, recorded as he sat on his front porch and one of the final scenes of the film:

“They used to tank cod from Alaska all the way to China. They’d keep them in vats in the ship. By the time the codfish reached China, the flesh was mush and tasteless. So this guy came up with the idea that if you put these cods in these big vats, put some catfish in with ‘em, and the catfish will keep the cod agile.

And there are those people who are catfish in life and they keep you on your toes. They keep you guessing, they keep you thinking, they keep you fresh.

And, uh, I thank God for the catfish, because we’d be droll, boring and dull if we didn’t have someone nipping at our fin.”

So, what do you think of what Vince says? Do you think what he says has merit, that if we didn’t have catfish encounters, would we be “dull” and “mushy”?

And is the pain and humilation experienced with these catfish worth enduring, just for the life experience?

In hindsight, everything, hey…?

One wouldn’t want too many catfish in life. They would wear you out. However, I think that after one has had such an experience, it could not be easily forgotten and would serve to remind of that question – just how well do you know, or how easily might you accept, that person for who they say they are – or who they try to sell themselves as. And what is it that they want from me? And if they are not genuine then what self-gratification are they seeking to gain from my attention?

Anyway, Angela and Nev have a conversation before the three men leave to return home to New York:

Angela: “A lot of the personalities that came out where just fragments of myself. Fragments of things I used to be, wanted to be, never could be…

…and I don’t know most days who I am.”

She seeks Nev’s comfort in her words, but he lets her speak. Clearly Nev has compassion for Angela at her house, while nursing his own humiliation, Rel and Henry filming the exchanges. It’s only after they arrive back in New York, when Nev receives another box in which there is the pastel drawing that she drew of Nev while he sat with talking with her. In this final scene in the movie, you can tell that he’s been altered by the whole nine month experience with Angela, his personal ‘catfish’. There’s an edge of anger in his voice from the humiliation but in his face the filmmakers have shown, in that short scene, Nev has matured.

I couldn’t help but admire Nev for his bravery: the film having a lot to say and contains a timely message for those who use the internet. The film is extremely good for an indie. If you have not seen this film, I can recommend that you do and you’ll see what I mean. In this article, I’ve drawn from the main points of all that is featured in the film, but there is much more in it – the myriad of lies, reminding of the old saying “Oh what a wicked web we weave, when at first we practice to deceive.”

Yes, interestingly, Angela’s lies to Nev did not stop after Nev’s, Rel’s and Henry’s visit to Ishpeming. I had looked at Angela in some psychological profiling and thought that she could have schitzophrenia. The 20/20 online article proved that to be correct (for those interested in reading more, see that below).

Link to article from The Quietus: Fishing for the Truth: Social Networking Doc Catfish Reviewed

Link to Moviefone blog: ‘Catfish’ Creators Tell us if it’s Real or Not

Also a link to Angela Wesselman’s art (goes by the surname of Pierce here).

…………………

Transcript from 20/20 site with the feature article,

Exclusive: ‘Catfish’s’ Angela Wesselman Speaks Out

By THOMAS BERMAN, GAIL DEUTSCH and LAUREN SHER

Oct. 8, 2010

When the documentary-thriller “Catfish” opened in New York City to enthusiastic crowds, the movie’s star was at home in Ishpeming, Mich., probably doing laundry.

Angela Wesselman, whose real identity is not revealed until the end of the movie, was a troubled housewife who spent the bulk of her days caring for two severely handicapped stepsons and building an elaborate web of online deception until it all spun out of control.

In an exclusive interview with ABC News’ “20/20,” Wesselman admitted that she’s a mastermind of deception.

“A manipulator is what my husband calls me,” she said. “But yeah, I manipulate and it’s not right. … I never thought I’d become so entangled in it.”

Spoiler alert! All the twists and turns of the movie “Catfish” are revealed in this article.

Wesselman posed as an 8-year-old budding artist named Abby and a 19-year-old teenager named Megan, and lured Nev Schulman, a trusting 24-year-old New York City photographer, into a romantic relationship online.

In the film, Schulman’s world comes crashing down when he learns that Megan, the girl of his dreams with whom he’s shared the most intimate fantasies, does not exist. Megan and Abby are both characters created by Wesselman’s imagination and brought to virtual life on Facebook.

“This woman is exceptional,” said Schulman. “I’m totally fine admitting she just outsmarted me.”

How Elaborate Cyber-Charade Began

Wesselman said her problems began when she looked for feedback on her artwork online, and was met with snide and stinging critiques. However, when she posed as an 8-year-old artist named Abby, people online — namely 24-year-old photographer Nev Schulman — were kind and accepting.

An online correspondence began and the charade escalated when Wesselman created the character of Abby’s older sister.

“I really created [Megan] to make it more of an age appropriate conversation for [Schulman],” she said.

Megan became Schulman’s obsession and the core of Wesselman’s growing cast of characters. She created online profiles for at least 21 relatives and friends to round out Megan’s social circle.

“It’s not normal for just one person to be on Facebook … with just one friend,” she said of her logic. “You have to have other friends.”

Wesselman Says She Was Diagnosed as Schizophrenic

To bring these personas to life, Angela assumed all of their identities. She posted messages on Facebook in the voice of Abby, Megan, their brother and friends, switching minute by minute.

“In my mind there were days where I actually believed that Megan existed,” she said. “I immersed myself into thinking that somewhere she’s there.”

She claimed she had no problem navigating such a complex fantasy world.

“I have been diagnosed as schizophrenic,” she said. “But … I don’t think I have multiple personalities in normal life, really. I just think I have the ability to create a lot of illusions for people.”

Who Are the Real Victims?

Moviegoers and critics alike have questioned “Catfish’s” legitimacy. The New York Times’ A.O. Scott scolded the filmmakers for exploiting Wesselman for their documentary — an accusation which they and Wesselman, deny.

If anyone was led down the primrose path, it was Schulman, Wesselman said.

“When I first started interacting with them on Facebook … even though I knew it was all a lie … and all these people were fake … I was like, ‘This would make a great film. … I hope they’re filming it,’” she told “20/20.”

But her involvement in the documentary has come at a high personal price. Wesselman must live with the movie’s stigma and, perhaps worse, explain it to her family. One day, she will have to apologize to her daughter Abby for looping her into her twisted fantasy world.

“She has a hard time with it. … She gets angry about it at times,” Wesselman said. “Someday, she’s going to know how this really came down. I do worry about how it’s going to affect her for the rest of her life.”

Then, there’s Wesselman’s estranged 21-year-old daughter Megan, who served as the inspiration for the character.

“I haven’t seen her recently,” Wesselman said. “I’ve spoken to her just briefly … to let her know what was going on … and she’s not happy.”

The Real Megan: The Real Victim?

Another person with a bone to pick with Wesselman is Aimee Gonzalez, a 30-year-old photographer at Bella Divine Photography, a model and a mother of two, whose image was hijacked by Wesselman. She was floored to discover her photos had been used in Megan’s Facebook profile.

The filmmakers brought Gonzalez and her husband Andrew to New York under the guise of doing a documentary about photography, and revealed that her identity, her husband’s and even her little sister’s were stolen as part of Wesselman’s charade.

“I couldn’t believe that somebody would do that,” Gonzalez said. “[Wesselman] sent me an apology letter … and I never responded to it.”

But Wesselman said Gonzalez should be grateful for her moment in the spotlight.

“It sounds weird to say, but it’s given her an opportunity she wouldn’t have had before,” Wesselman said. “She’s doing the things that I wanted to do, the things I can’t do. I can’t go to New York, I couldn’t go to Sundance. … I can’t be that person … and she is … so I guess it’s sort of that jealousy and it’s not her fault.”

After Catfish: Putting Her Life Back Together

After the cameras stopped rolling and the truth came out, Wesselman said she continued to send Schulman e-mails attached to fake identities.

“I just couldn’t let it go,” she said, adding that she attempted suicide as a way out.

“It took months of counseling afterwards to really point out how far I had immersed myself into that … and that I couldn’t get out of it on my own,” she said. “And I had to get help to stop it.”

Now, her husband and friends monitor all of her e-mails and time online. She insists that she’s not engaged in any fake online relationships.

“It would literally kill me to do this again,” she said.

Wesselman said she’s replaced her virtual relationships with the real ones that don’t dissolve in the Ethernet.

“I’m more stable because of the boys coming and bringing light to the problems,” she said. “I’ve been able to focus more on our family … on our relationship … on making things right in the home … and to me that’s a benefit.”

I have formed a theory, one that comes from my own experiences, much reading and meditations on the nature of the psychopath.  In this article I will attempt explanation of  it.

I have found it interesting that there are many groups to be found online in which people say that they are themselves a “psychopath”, and there appears some pride to be found among these self-declarations. It’s of an attitude of “this is me, I accept this is me, now you can accept it.” And, in this presumed “acceptance” of their self-proclamations of having ‘no conscience’, no natural empathy to other human beings, and naturally leading onto this, amazing excuse for all their ensuing bad behaviour, I have imagined that within that attitude  (especially by acknowledging together in an online group)  they have found a way to pardon themselves somehow. But, no matter how they might find others of  like-mind, they are ultimately alone: the very nature of the psychopath is that of the lone, the feral. For that individual is alone in their own world of their supreme self – how it could be that there could be another that they could possibly acknowledge as having the same self-styled ‘supremecy’ as themselves? You see, they are the lone creature…

Hare discusses at length in his book about whether the psychopath knows right from wrong. “In my opinion, psychopaths certainly know enough about what they are doing to be held accountable for their actions” (Page 143  Guildford Pub. 1998 ed) – basically they are ‘sane’, while presenting a form of “moral insanity” (Ibid).  I agree with his view, that indeed they do know right from wrong. So why do they choose to do wrong? And, I think, here’s the question by which a theory, or theories, can be formed.

It does appear more than likely that nature is involved, that there’s genetic disposition towards someone manifesting as a psychopath: signs can be seen from childhood. There are those that go onto to do violent crimes, while some are like the “white collar criminal”. There are also those that are psychopath, but have found some sort of a niche in life, like a ‘minor’ snake, a hole or burrow to dwell most of the time out of which to continue their acts. So, they are not the ‘serial killer’ or violent rapist etc., but they are a psychopath nonetheless, fitting the checklist of traits.

I have read, and it’s in Hare’s book as well, that  some psychopaths will appear to curtail their toxic, destructive-to-others behaviour in middle age. What might that be saying? A thought of mine on that particular matter is that, by middle age, much of the sexual appetite has reached a peak, and middle age bringing about the tolls of life experience and all weariness (it could be said) by merely living and surviving the rigors of life. By middle age, much of the earlier spark of exploration and experimentation that was enjoyed in earlier years has now been experienced. And so, even the psychopath can settle down into a place where physical expenditure can find its own level. They will remain the psychopath, but their forays of toxic behaviour, is now tempered by a lack of former youthful sexual energy and sexual-identity energy.

The sexual nature of the human is tied into the processes of the body – for instance, a young woman might appear to ‘unconsciously’ fall pregnant because her hormones, the ones that demand the mammalian animal reproduce, have won over her will to actively plan to have or not have a child. I feel that much of the psychopath’s energies come from this baser place in the mammalian nature. Indeed, somehow there could exist an intrinsic link to the higher parts of the brain (those that are tied to the moral will for eg) from the baser ‘animal’ parts of the brain. There’s some wiring there that is not so active  in the person that has a normal societal empathy. The brain wiring for the empathetic more greatly wired for social conscience thinking decision-making and behaving. (I will note here that wiring would require constant/continual ‘use’ (ie., learned behaviour) for that neural connection to be and remain strong).

Is it any wonder you might read that the psychopath might be referred to as a serpent-kind?

Yes, there is nature and there is nurture. Hare says in his book Without Conscience (and I will loosely describe here)  that psychopaths may chose a life of violent crime if their family background has been a particularly dysfunctional one. They may, however, become a white-collar criminal if their family background has been one of good nurturing. And that’s the thing,  psychopaths can come from nurturing parents and a good family homes.

Back to ‘nature’  then…

Regardless of whether we come into this world a twin, a triplet or a quadruplet, we are in this world alone – and each individual is their own world of self.  All the infant knows is the infant’s needs from the beginning: hunger, need for attention etc; the infant will react to the stimulous of its immediate needs. Later comes the wants and the first formings of the developing sense of  the self- in-process.

There may be some children in which the very soul, the very personality, is as an unknown within one family group. Each family group (including single parent or larger family group – any immediate familiar group) has its own appreciation of how things should be. Each has their own mores, own belief systems, own expectations on all the individuals within that familiar sphere.

But lo and behold, there’s this stranger appearing, forming within their midst – someone they try desperately to mould into their own image of sorts. But it does not work! for this small person seems hell-bent on trying it on, harming other children/animals, making life hard and working havoc. No matter what these loving, supporting parents do, the child impulsively will crave the sensations that appeal to a forming self, those sensations that are somehow stimulated from the more primeval parts of the brain, appealing to the instant gratifications of the psyche.

The parents/family would not be expecting that their child be a stranger within their midst. They are expecting, rather, that the immediate demands of the infant pass away as that child grows. But not so with this child! His mind works in a way unknown to them. His sense of self is a very fragile thing, yes, his demands are strong – but I think that what he wants and demands does not directly attribute his sense of self , they are merely his immediate demands. However, the family begins to attribute his behaviour to his selfhood. And it is through that constant input from those who grow to their wits end in coping and managing with the psychopath child, that the child learns to attribute the feedback on his behaviour to his sense of self. And the more his behaviour is rejected, the more he sees he is rejected. And rejection behaviour can be self-feeding, seeking via behavioural acts to test how loved/accepted the person doing the behaviour can be.

Like ADHD and other conditions that manifest strongly in behaviour, could it be possible that the time will come when the psychiatric community is more aware and can test for psychopathy in young children? If that could be possible, then maybe the brain wiring that causes the behaviour of the child to be extremely self-gratuitious, could be acknowledged in a behavioural training/conditioning whereas the child would grow not associating the negative feedback for his behaviour to his selfhood?

I will note here that the psychopath has the same kind of brain as anyone, the capacity for normal society empathic functioning not used/employed like others. The trouble, I believe, arises when the negative feedback for bad behaviour becomes directly attributed by the psychopathic personality to his own selfhood.

From then on it’s a matter of him/her-against-the-world. A world that rejects him, basically put, because it cannot tolerate his/her completely self-gratuitous behaviour.

Thus, I feel, that the psychopath knows rejection like no other! His way of dealing with rejection is to master those who he knows will reject him – the rest of the world. He will not, I believe, realise this at all consciously, it will just happen as a consequence of the nature and nurture factors. His desperate need for self-esteemed selfhood will cause the imbalance and he will develop the narcissism required to con, conquer, control, use others.

As a psychopath does not experience normal feeling as their empathetic counterparts, they can imitate feeling, ‘act’ it out, but when they do acts that gratify them – and those acts can be destructive to the uttermost – that place of sensation – a place that has replaced empathetic – a place of  feeling somewhere within their psyches – is excited. So the psychopath learns to enjoy the causes and the effects of their behaviour. It is therefore, their way of experiencing feeling as they can only know it. At those times they are experiencing something, and are out of the feeling-flatlining for a while. Ask yourself why psychopaths are repeat offenders…

Recently in a doctor’s waiting room, I read an article in the New Scientist magazine. Unfortunately I cannot cite this article at this present time but I will try to get the issue so I can amend this article with a citation. The article is about how a society flourishes if more individuals within a societal group have more consideration and care towards the other members of the societal group.

So it is of great concern in our times of ‘stuff’ replacing quality human relationship times, gadgetries and games replacing quality in interaction, material wealth and hedonism replacing societal stability through good values, sexual gratifications and other instant ‘fixes’ replacing work-for-reward, that the incidence of individuals with psychopathy and its traits could steadily be on the rise. And as there appears to be more tolerance and less judicious punishment for criminal offences, then there appears greater likelihood that individuals with those traits towards selfishness/hedonism will be reproducing – nature at work. Society, growing towards more ‘tolerance’ will become more immune to the valueing of those mores that help individuals discriminate as to who they share their genetic material with. This leads to a veritable and ripe breeding ground where the psychopath becomes a greater presence within human population. (Read the chapter in Hare’s book “The Roots of the Problem” – it will give you chills).

In our contemporary society where materialism and commercialism is promoted as desireable then wealth, and the ‘stuff’ one has, replaces  the ‘rock’ of social grounding through values. Indeed, it appears that values is something more abitrary these days as lack of societal cohesion, especially through greatly polarised views on all manner of human issues, becomes more and more fragmented.

Ultimately the psychopath is an individual apart, and could now potentially become a ‘breed apart’ as less compassion, care and consideration is shown by individuals in a society towards other individuals in that society. It is a frightening thought. While some might consider such a thing could be a de-evolution, it is far more an implication to mankind than just nature, for human mores exist, and values – that a society needs to remain a society in any sort of flourishing – will need to remain in situ without all excuses that ‘nature’ might condone.

It is my theory that the psychopath, as I have mentioned in other articles in this series, is a person who is, in all reality, a person of miniscule sense of ‘good self’ (if it exists in any real sentiency at all). The real ‘self’ – a person lost for want of personal definition, of personal inner truth, of any healthy and right self esteem- is still in an infantile state. What the world sees is a replacement self in the psychopath – and ‘alter ego’ – a personality that is assumed to make up for what is lacking, what remains underneath all the gradiosity in that infantile state. It is my belief that the essence-reality of the individual is hidden underneath the complete egocentricity of the psychopath personality. And that real-self does not really know who they are, for that sense of self, and the need for the sense of self, has never, somehow, been met. And so they assume a compensatory personality.

Look at this image of the see saw. A healthily-orientated individual (the ‘sun’ image in the picture) can find a balance with their own needs and wants in a necessarily selfish way and for also others in society (the ‘earth’ image). Each individual is a creature of the ‘self’ afterall, so I think the image of a sun representing the individual’s sense of selfhood is a suitable illustration here.

But in the psychopath, there is the imbalance. The person that they are capable of being, normally empathetic like others in society is still within them, but it is not ‘present’ as such. No, it is hidden within an alter-ego -a calculating, predating feeder who seeks his/her own lust fulfillment. Often considering themselves ‘superior’ their true – but lost -self has, I think, the real and true self esteem of a gnat. In the desperate need to compensate for that incredible lost self-esteem/self-worth, they have assumed this character in compensaton that they, from the beginning of life, have found too hard to assume, to be or become. And so, a nurturing family can produce, within their midst, this little ‘stranger’- a personality that is different from others.

And so, they are arrogant, yes! Arrogancy is a human trait which treats others with disdain. Does elevated self-love make up for the truth, which could actually be a self-loathing? And if the real self has a gnat’s worth of good ‘real self’ self worth/esteem, then the psychopath could be the ultimate at psychological projection.

And so, is there a possibility for treatment? I don’t know whether the world has enough love and patience to be able to reach past that compensatory ego manifest as I have described in my theory to get to that infantile, underdeveloped, fearful, lack of self-worth underneath.

A quote a psychopath from page 203 of Without Conscience:

“Everybody swears psychopaths can’t be treated. That’s a lot of hogwash,” said Joseph Fredricks, a homosexual pedophile whose long history of violence included the murder of an eleven-year old boy. “Psychopaths are as human as anyone. They’re psychopaths because they are more sensitive than anyone…They can’t stand pain of any sort, that’s why they let it roll off their backs,” he said. [Canadian Press, September 22, 1992]

If my personal theory on the nature of the psychopath has some merit, that they assume an alter-ego that is more directly linked to the ‘reptilian’ part of the brain, as compensatory for a lost (or undeveloped) sense of real self, then there’s naturally a lot more to be considered in terms of how society ‘deals’ with what appears to be a rising occurance of this personality type.

Thank you for reading. Note that this article has been amended since it was first published. I felt I needed to refine the explanation.

This has been part 8 of Series Psychopath

But the thing is, for everyone who thinks that their intelligence, and even experience, will leave them immune, well, they just could be wrong. For it is my long-considered opinion that regardless of who you are, there will be someone who has the uncanny ability to ‘psyche you out’ and fool you. Naturally there are great lessons learned from any association with a psychopath – the greatest lesson is looking at your own self in a greater self-awareness – in the assessing of your own weak points and the renewing or reviving of your self-esteem – in fact your overall sense of good self.

What you first need to do is stop all self-recriminations. So you had the experience with the psychopath in your life and you got burned and it was a seriously life-altering experience! But you cannot dwell on your own failings and how seriously you betrayed yourself by succumbing to the wily cons of this perpetrator.

In the book Without Conscience: The Disturbing World of the Psychopaths Among Us, Robert D. Hare PhD writes:

“Some people are simply too trusting and gullible for their own good – ready targets or any smooth talker who comes along. But what about the rest of us? The sad fact is that we are all vulnerable. Few people are such sophisticated and perceptive judges of human nature that they cannot be taken in by the machinations of a skilled and determined psychopath. Even those who study them are not immune…” P.124 (Guilford Press 1999 ed.).

So, no rear-vision mirrors. And you can have hope that your experience can result in ways of redemption. The thing is now you can GET BACK YOUR LIFE from this predator that has so messed with you.

For those who are still actively involved with a psychopath, I can recommend that you secure a knowledge base. Do your reading: books like the one by Hare, Martha Stout’s The Sociopath Next Door. And there is so much online from which to learn. If you are still living with this person in some way, then you might have to practice some cunning of your own by learning on your own time. For there is no point, once you have come to the conclusion that the person who has made your life a living hell is

1. going to be helped by you or

2. going to be changed by your revealing to them that you have diagnosed them psychopath [narcissist or sociopath]. In fact, if you do this – ‘out them’ – then you are probably going to make it for yourself because you’d be effectively redefining the battle lines. Remember the psychopath likes the game and doesn’t like to lose. So keep your business to yourself. You don’t even need to ‘out’ them – at least not to them. But what you’ll need to do is discuss them with others who are capable of listening.

VALIDATION
This is the one thing, above all others for a while, that you’ll be craving. You could look back over your experiences with him/her and shake your head: how could it have become all so crazy? How could I have not seen? How could I have stopped this (ie., in the situation of say, an offspring that is clearly displaying the traits of the psychopath)?. Yes, you could consider this, but you may well struggle getting that self-validation.

I suggest that the past be dealt with via therapy with a trained counselor is a step in the right direction. I also highly recommend writing down the account of all that took place, even some main points (ie. where the toxic one’s inconsistencies manifested in some living proofs).

I suggest writing and getting accounts down in black and white, for the psychopath can so confuse and addle as to make his/her victim doubt their own sanity and actions. What is more, they can even make out that is is YOU that is the ‘crazy’ one. Never underestimate the cunning of this reptilian! For if the relationship dynamic has changed, they will seek to regroup. Some might even attempt to turn the situation around and make out they are the victim and you are the liar! Some will attempt to defile your reputation, making people to doubt what you say. But, because the psychopath has had so much control and influence for so long, their inflated egos (compensatory for their incredibly lost and in all truth miniscule self-esteem) won’t let you get away without some sort of a fight.

So
1. don’t redefine battle lines
2. don’t leave yourself in any position where the fight can continue – the fight including all further mind-games and having other people drawn into your situation. You will need to extricate yourself in a resolute manner that is as unmessy as possible.

Don’t even consider going to therapy sessions like couple-counseling. You’d be trying to fix what cannot be fixed, for the psychopath is corrupt at the core. A counseling session in which he/she is involved is merely anther ‘game’ they must win.

One incidence I can cite is where a woman was struggling with her malignantly no-conscience narcissist husband. She acted on a suggestion to couple’s therapy. While she struggled to put across her husband’s lies and all his other neglectful and abusive ways, he sat there looking like he’d never done a wrong thing in his life, with a very angelic and highly ‘believable’ demeanor. This made her look like she was the only one with the ‘issues’.

So what to do?

You get out.

You have NO CONTACT

If there was any rule that applied to getting free of the psychopath in your life it is this: No Contact.

They will try anything to get back the power they had. Guilt you, shame you, extort, threaten and yes, be ultra nice, try to romance (regardless of what kind of relationship, they know how to turn on fake ‘love’), flatter and say things like “Things will be better from now on, I’ll never lie to you again.”

Don’t you believe it. They would get you back in their control because of purely selfish reasons, and nothing to do with you or what you need from the relationship. Once you leave that relationship, you stay gone. As I said – no rear-vision mirrors. You need to get your life back. Your leaving affects their egos very badly, especially in the case of the malignant narcissist. In this particular situation, upon leaving and making the decision for “no contact”, you’ll have to imagine your ears are now shut to their lies, the things you might well imagine that they will say to other people about you. You will have to be careful not to entertain wrong self impressions, no wrong self-determinisms. Remember that you have been dealing with a person who does not have a warm beating heart as anyone does with any normal human empathy. You have been dealing with a cold-blooded predator, whose intent was to get all they wanted. You owe them nothing. But you owe yourself, and those who might have been affected along with you, everything.

And so, to recap:

No Contact. When you leave that relationship you stay gone. You do not continue even dialogue with them if you can avoid it ie. using legal channels or a non-combatant third party.

Get Validation. Talk to the right people about what happened. Go see a therapist. If that counselor is not familiar or will not provide apt validation, then you are not seeing the right therapist. Also, talk to as many people about what happened, as are mature and able enough to hear you. The more you ‘out’ the perpetrator to others, the more you get validation for yourself. But don’t harp, don’t be a train wreck. For in the time you are escaping and have entered into recovery, you are going to have to be smart even though you may be emotionally shattered. You are going to have to remain strong.

Read. The more you learn about this personality disorder, the more you are going to be settled into a knowledge base. If knowledge is power then knowledge of psychopathy: narcissism/sociopathy is going to empower you.

Get Yourself Back. There is much good in this. In fact, take a minute to think about it. You escape the psychopath’s clutches, you have made the firm decision for no-contact. Now it’s time to rediscover you. It can be a very good time and ultimately liberating. You will need to be pro-active about it. Think of all the physical ways you can change your life, a home make-over within your budget? New linen and towels for sure if the psychopath has been a partner (yes, even this will help you ‘clean house’). Maybe you could look at how you used to be before the toxic one took such a hold? How were you then and could you be that person again? One victim I knew said, “the narcissist made me fade to grey. But when I got my own place, I put the key in the door for the first time and in that moment, I felt hope returning to get the real me back…” So, what you do is going to help greatly.

Make Every Practical Provision. Look to securing your finances, assets and everything else that you will have to consolidate to yourself. Remember, do not threaten the psychopath with the “I’m going to[s]…”. Make your decision to leave the relationship permenately and do what you need to do. Entering into any dialogue in your distress will only make your grounds (unfortunately) weaker to the psychopath who vultures on weakness. Even if you need to bluff strength for the while you get yourself free, for a show of strength on your behalf will set them back apace. Do not whatever you do give into fear, as in ‘fear of being alone’ – this is one of the cards they could potentially pull out of their decks in order to trump you, to make you doubt yourself. Listen to their words and assess every one of them as a strategy to repossess you again. Suffer not to be flattered also by any sweet-talking: the psychopath will often resort to this, one of their original strategic ruses. Do not react either, for any volitile emotional reaction on your behalf may uncork their capacity for rage. Get yourself, in every way, efficiently to a secure and safe place.

Of course there is much more I could write, for the psychopath, their influence, the type of relationship and the number of given people involved, including children, will make for variables considerably. But, I hope in the above article, I have given you some definite clues to get back on track again.

You could even look at it this way. The relationship put you in a prison. Now you are out and you are “not guilty”, you were sentenced to a term of punishment for a crime you didn’t commit. No, someone else committed that crime and you have No Right to take any guilt upon yourself. It’s up to you what you do with your life from hence forth.

Be strong. You can survive the psychopath. You can not only go on to know your authentic self again – outside of all the toxic one’s possession of you and his/her manipulations – and you can go on to thrive by the re-creation of your life.

You only have one life to live. You’ve escaped. Now, go be free. Eyes only ahead.

“You don’t really know how strong you are until being strong is the only choice you have” Anonymous

This has been part 7 in Series Psychopath

And if you have other risk factors ie., an extreme neediness that can lead to not being too fussy about a romantic partner or friend/confidante, or have an intrenched sense of indebtedness/obligation (ie., the psychopath is a family member), if you live alone and especially if you have your own financial security AND if there’s in any way that there’s something about you that is ego enhancing to this predator (if in someway you are a ‘trophy’ person), then you are in a greater risk category.You can read more concerning potential ‘victim’ material in Part Four.

To briefly define:  the empath has the naturally inclinded capacity to put themselves in the place of another, to experience the soul-life of another, to link up with another in a desired communion.

If you look at human personality types, the empath (highly sensitive social conscience) is on one end of the scale – and the psychopath (no social – ‘anti’ – social, conscience) is on the other.  For the psychopath, relationships with other human beings is a game, and to self-gratify they need a victim, someone to toy with, someone to amuse themselves with – someone to admire them. In this way their victim is devalued as a unique personality and is objectified.

In both the sociopath and the narcissist is the need to be adored, even worshipped. Some may have a such an elevated view of themselves that they have delusions of grandeur, so any and all adoration – and indeed all attention – is a form of self-gratification. And while you, the empathetic one of the relationship, might consider that you are caring for this conscienceless individual, you are merely a supply of something that the psychopath (narcissist/sociopath) wants for self-gratification. They will take what they want from you. And if they like what you’re able to feed them, they’ll continue to stroke you in that direction for as long as you are useful.

So, do you want to be a victim of such a humiliating life experience as to have anything to do with such a individual? I tell you, that if you do, or are self-deceived enough to consider that you might be able to change them, or that that individual needs you, or continue to want to champion them because somehow you pity their weakness (yes, there are those that even ignore loud warning bells because their empathy is so strong), then you have set yourself up to have your soul scrambled. For…

The psychopath likes nothing better than to mess with your head.

It is a game and they have a need to win it.

I have an idea for a new tv reality program: Psychopath wars. Kind of like Big Brother meets Gladiators, the production team could put a number of them in a closed house and see who comes out untimately ruling the roost! But no…That’s not what a psychopath’s about. They really don’t want to go to a lot of effort, and they don’t need to fight if they have a world full of potential victims. And they could be anybody, a college chum, the woman who lives down the street, the co-worker, anybody. And yes, they will be the parasite in disguise, fitting in and hard to spot.

This is the tricky part, because we have such a need in us to form relationships that are life-enhancing and make us feel good, then we can suffer to be easily flattered by our great new pseudo-friend. So this is your first warning bell:

The psychopath will:

. Form fast attachment.

. Find out as much as they can about their potential victim fast. This is to discover any weakpoints – any other other tidbit they can use. Proceed to undermine your self-confidence, partly for the effect of deceiving you into believing that you need them. Partly for their own need for  superiority over you.

. Will draw a potential victim into intimacy quickly. For instance, they might offer a little intimate secret about themselves and expect it be  reciprocated. And they know their victim will do so, being an empathetic soul.  They are very good at people-reading. I would add a dire warning with this one because if the relationship falls out and they get upset with their victim later about this, they can – and will if they want to – use that information against them.

. Try to make a victim feel good about themselves, even good with the  cheer  ups when the other is down. In fact they are such good actors and imitators, they can act being an empath themselves.  Remember they can only act emotion, they don’t feel them. It may be, for an empathetic soul, impossible to understand this, but that’s part of the empathetic one’s trouble as a potential victim – their need to understand people. And if the psychopath thinks you could be getting away, they’ll try to turn back on the charm to get you back in their control.

Before  continuing,  I would like to say to not  get me wrong here for the world needs the empathetic. And because empathetic and greatly caring individuals are needed, they need to learn how to look after themselves. It’s just that they are rich in what they have, but in that richness they can present as a tasty dish for the voracious feeder.  And feed on their victims of choice they will.

And that’s the thing. The potential victim has to let them. The weaponry is going to be work  if these weapons are lacking – yes, there may well be need for applied effort in these areas:

. A healthy self-esteem

. A balanced assessment of other human beings and a willingness to judge others, even if the judgement falls in the negative. It is no good to be naive and easily trusting. Remember trust is an earned value. The pychopath wants to gain your trust EARLY. But trust is really only gained with time. Be not impatient with  relationships, heed those warning bells, check your self-esteem and personal need-meter.

. And if one’s intuitution is bothering one then there’s the option to run. In fact this strategy is recommended. The empath will have the tendency to take on people as causes, but the psychopath is not a cause to be championed at all. They can look after themselves, it’s just that it’s more advantangeous to them to have someone of their objectified interest to enhance their own personal life experience.

. Learn to trust your intuitive voice more. People tend to forsake that in favour of rationalising. Read the book The Gift of Fear by Gavin de Becker. Keep learning about human nature: don’t stay in a place of naivety about it.

. Ask questions yourself. The psychopath has no difficulty doing this, but the empathetic one can by much reticent to intrude on another person’s privacy. By eliciting personal informtion about you, they are seeking to set the potential victim in a place of vunerability to them. Guard your life and your secrets more cautiously.

If you catch your new  friend out in a lie, you might forgive them and maybe you might overlook it a second time (the spectrum of lying can include exaggerations/tall stories/boasts). Never give a liar a third chance. You do not need a liar/actor in your life. There are good people out there to form friendships with, and a good frienship can take time to build. Remember the psychopath likes more instant gratification. If it’s something good and lasting, it will take time. Time is something that the psychopath doesn’t give a lot of thought to.  They are the ‘faithless’ amongst us.

Never forget that they are cold inside; their hearts cold stone.

But the heart of the empathetic one is not. The heart is warm and beating.  Think of the vampire of fiction- fresh blood!

And so, one’s intiution is smarting  and those warning bells are going off. One might be tempted to use ‘higher’ thinking and rationalise, or be so empathetic that there is discounting that there are those those don’t feel. But with head’s-up, there is awareness. Self awareness, and awareness of what’s out there is what’s going to save a psychopath’s potential victim.

So, what to do? Can a psychopath be outsmarted? Yes, it is possible, but the one trying this will need to stop feeling for a bit and start thinking with a cool head – to put that beating heart on hold for a while and use some wits. Nerves of  steel might be required for the duration but the exercise will only do good.

Recall that the psychopath is an information gatherer. One can try to feed them some false information to see what they do with it. In that sense their own game needs to be played for the duration of the exercise. The sensitive conscience need not be bothered by this. For this is about not becoming a victim – and all that that entails to recover from the influence of the psychopath.

The above is a means by which to better equip to swim in an ocean which contains some very strange fish. There are many potential predators out there; better to be forewarned and forearmed.

But what can you do if you’re already a victim? In the next article we’ll be looking at this.

This has been part seven on Series: Psychopath. Part Eight next:

Psychopathy is the main heading under which are forms thereof, branching into two kinds of personality disorder manifests: that of  Sociopathy and that of Narcissism. The latter two terms  I will draw distinction between.

I feel it is important to draw distinction between the two types. This is for the sake of understanding thus to better recognise pattern behaviour in individuals that could be described as psychopath – that is – those that have this particular disordered behaviour entrenched within their personalities.

The psychopath – whether narcissist or sociopath – will have the same effect upon the lives of their victims, and that victimisation can have devastating effects and consquences.  But while the toxic results may be similar in outcome in the victim in either type of psychopathic disorder, the manifests (in terms of pattern behaviour) will be different. However there may be shared traits, cross-overs between the two.

Basically, it is my belief that the psychopath will lean more towards one type of personality disorder or the other. There may be confusion in them that stop to consider to themselves, past all the masking behaviour of the psychopath, just what is going on with that toxic personality?  In my opinion, it is easier to spot a narcissist than it is a sociopath. The narcissist is a bit more reckless in their needing, or rather, wanting, to mask a selfish, using agenda -but the sociopath has a need to conceal so they can continue, with greater cunning, to drain through ‘feeding’ upon their victims.

Also, the narcissist is a person who appears bouyed by their own self-love, which is indicative of some form of emotional experience they are having, some self feeling. And while both forms of malignant personality are without normal human conscience and empathy towards other human beings, it is the sociopath who lacks genuine/spontaneous expressions of emotion, but through cunning ways of  counterfeit (as explained in a previous article in this series) can imitate emotion for the effect of deceiving victims.

Being a reader who is interested in this subject in psychology, you may have read through either or both of these trait lists before. But for the sake of this article, we will have another look.

Traits Pertaining to Narcissism:

. Elevated sense of self-worth and entitlement.

. Pathological lying, twisting the impressions of others to agree to his/her views, sometimes with a bullying(that can be of a subliminal/less obvious sort) attitude.To get others to conform to their views is enhancing of their self-feeding and self-grandiosity.

. A superficial charm and an entertaining form of charisma. This behaviour is the attraction to the narcissist personality from the onset.

. Cunning/manipulative and will seek to control and ‘overlord’ a relationship. The narcissist will, more often than not, consider themselves to be superior in the ‘brains trust’ and, even though this may well not be actually true (for many of them can have a slightly above average intelligence – one of the reasons for their success over victims), they still nonetheless consider themselves mentally superior over others. In the meantime, they will be unaware of being self-deceived over their actual powers of mental prowess. They will simply believe that they are. (It could be said that you are, or become, what you believe, so this power of belief might work very well for them…)

. Lack of remorse or guilt. They will objectify other individuals, rather than treat others like individuals with their own souls (or personalities with feelings and thoughts that are to be respected). The narcissist has no real concept of respect for others’ thoughts and feelings.

. Emotionally shallow. In fact superficiality is their most obvious detectable traits in this writer’s opinion. Their ability to be offhand and seemingly careless, where others with normal human empathy will be more careful in their doings. Of course this pertains to responsibility, and responsibilty requires careful application in all situations. Thus on to…

...Failure to accept responsibility for own actions. It may not be ‘failure’ per se, but avoidance to accept responsibility. Also they may seek a scapegoat upon which to place blame instead of themselves. For example the narcissist spouse will blame the other for their own failures. For the narcissist, nothing but nothing must come between them and their self-loving ways and thus the continuation of an elevated ego-sense. If the figure is pointed at them for failing to assume responsibility, they will dodge the issue or seek to place the blame elsewhere. One narcissist I knew personally, would, instead of either tactic, make light of the whole affair like it was a trifle. If she could convince you the matter was a trifle, then she had you hoodwinked and hey presto! the blame for lack of responsibility was quickly able to dissipate for her.

. Callous, judgmental/hyper-critical of others they regard as ‘beneath them’ [hypocritical].

Of course there are other traits that could be listed here and some of those listed here could have even more definition applied to them. The same could be said of the following descriptive traits of the sociopath.
Traits Pertaining to  Sociopathy:

. Need for stimulation/proneness to boredom. If you have had any dealings with a sociopath, you may have noticed in a rare unguarded moment, a twinkle of mischief in the eye of one, indicative of a mind working, whereas he/she will be wearing ‘poker face’. If you are drawn into their game, you’re the mouse. Guess who the cat is?

. Parasitic lifestyle. You are the object – and objectified. You’ve got something they want, whether for financial gain or emotional energy. You’re what they want to feed on.

. Poor behavioural control. Given to impulsive behaviour. This could be in word or deed. One sociopath I knew was impulsive in speech; they liked to shock  with things they said, enjoying the reaction of their listeners. For some reason or other, this gives  some sort of satisfaction – a self-congratulation for outsmarting their victim. Poor behavioural control can come in the way of other impulsive behaviour ie., impulsive buying; racking up a credit card bill, without thought to paying  later.

. Promiscuous sexual behavior. This could be a way of seeking to fill the need for that place inside that’s void of emotions. But sex in itself changes body chemistry, so for the duration of the sex act/experience, the sociopath is sensing ‘something’, drawing a sensation ‘high’. This could also be said about any need for self-gratification through violent means ie., the signs could be there of sociopathic personality disorder if a child is prone to animal cruelty or harm upon other children. The highs promised, through body chemistry of extreme/reckless acts infuses something that makes them feel, albeit only while the act lasts. Thus can they be serial offenders to keep this effect on their nervous systems happening.

. Lack of realistic, long-term goals. The future implies  responsibility. But while they have, or can find, a victim, so much of that doesn’t really seem all that necessary. Like the narcissist, the sociopath is behaviourally irresponsible, but will have less an need to defend that because of a marked lack of shame.

. Juvenile delinquency. It is my opinion, as I consider more the nature of the psychopath, that there must be a genetic predispondancy to this personality disorder. It’s just that, combined with nurture (or lack thereof), sociopathic traits (enough to fit a whole profile) can heighten. There are degrees and degrees of all psychological disorders afterall. But what exemplifies the psychopath is lack of conscience in pattern behaviour. And thus on to…

...Early behavioral problems, the constantly naughty child (for eg). The child that may look like innocence itself while he/she calmy pulls the wings off butterflies – and progressing to higher-order species.

. Lack of desire to reform, on one main trait list this trait is headed under “revocation of conditional release”. It is my opinion that the sociopath has a choice to do, or not to do, evil acts against another human being. What we do, no matter who we are, and that includes the sociopath, is a matter of choice. I do not believe that someone could ever get off on a clearly “guilty” charge/conviction by merely saying that they have the missing gene that makes them a sociopath. For what the sociopath lacks in emotions and normal human empathy, he/she makes up with in thought-power. In fact, it is my theory that the sociopath can be above average human intelligence because there’s been a compensatatory re-routing of neural connections – connections that would work in a normal way in a non-sociopath for emotional ‘wholeness’, but fail to work in the sociopath, who lacks emotions. In these simplistic terms, the brain energy not used to be a ‘whole’ normally-functioning soul: mind, will AND emotions is now directed towards thinking and the primary way that is used is for self-seeking. It manifests as the use of victims and the methods by which completely selfish use  is obtained.

And so, there are the two branches of the psychopath. Both types can leave incredible harms upon victims. For anyone who may be reading this and has themselves been a victim of one of them, I need not add any more.

Keep in mind that the behaviour of both sorts is pattern, and thus, with knowledge, it is possible for the layperson (that is, someone who isn’t in the psychiatric profession) to observe these behavioural signs in individuals who leave a toxic wake and who appear, even on early meeting, to have their own personality ‘atmosphere’ that may give out even intutive impressions that we may not be dealing with someone we might otherwise be able to relax in a normal sort of human trust with.

To have anything to do with a psychopath for any length of time takes mental will, to of course have one’s wits about one and reserves of emotional strength that is capable of great detachment from the cunning and deranged worlds of these disordered individuals.

(This has been part 6 in Series Psychopath)

Next: Why not to become a victim and what to do if it’s too late.

The person targeted for the sociopath’s wiles will be looked upon by this people-predator as someone who they can manipulate into such a position by which they can best use that person to their own serial-offending, and ultimately selfish, ends.

The sociopath is not capable of having a normal social conscience like others. That is why the term “sociopathy” is also referred to as “antisocial personality disorder”. This is not to say that the sociopath cannot function ‘socially’, it means that in a social situation they are ‘anti – social’: Anti as a prefix can mean “against” but also it means to come along side [counterfeit] as if to replace [the genuine]. So while, superficially, the sociopath can appear very ‘social’, ie be friendly, charming, seemingly generous or helpful, none of what they will do from a motivational standpoint will at any stage be out of altruism or grace. They are predators in society and the two things they will generally be trying to acquire are A. Financial – victim’s usefulness in materialialstic gain, and B. emotional draining. Some writers have referred to this as ‘vampirism’.

If ever there is a cunning personality [type] in society it is the sociopath. As stated in previous article, they know how to work a victim, to bring that person under their influence all the better to take advantage. Acts that the sociopath may do to groom a victim can be showy, overtly generous, and maybe for a little while the victim might be fooled to thinking that they have found a rare human being with which they can form a relationship in the normal trust that comes within a healthy relationship.

The ‘anti’ in antisocial applies when those with this personality disorder can demonstrate, on a superficial level, acts of generosity, helpfulness, friendliness, sympathies (with individuals and the world). And while ordinary folk will be able to do all of these things in a manner, or spirit, of grace (that is – not expecting anything in return for genuine benevolence) – the sociopath instead is busy calculating how such faux-benevolence of their own behalf will work to achieve their goal.

Thus, they are relying upon their victim to be tricked. In colloquial terms, work a con-game.

If the sociopath, upon discovery of their true motivations, that elaborate house of cards they have steadily built up, topples, their behaviour can change in an instant. To them, it’s been a battle of wits – a game -they must win. But when tables turn and they discover they have lost control, the mind of insanity can unravel into expressions of rage.

It’s important to note that the sociopath cannot tolerate rejection. This is the one thing they fear. Why?

I have speculated, and from my reading, that it is possible that there is a genetic predisposition towards lack of a ‘normal’ social conscience (the social conscience needed by individuals in a group for the group to co-inhabit and flow peacefully). That is what is referred to as ‘nature’ and not something I have any insight into as a writer of this article. I consider that their personality disorder (whether nature is involved or no) is,  in its active manifest, due to nurture: upbringing, past history events, abuses by others inc. self abuse through bad life-choices, history of sexual abuse, lack of nurture (lack of emotional input)  from parents.

Due to these historical factors, and the sociopath’s choices which lead to a cause and effect ie., finding out what works and what doesn’t, he/she will continue to pursue a pattern behaviour by which to gain what their personality in its lack so desperately needs.

I have thought long about the psychological history of someone with psychopathy and I must come to a common factor-denominator of early-stage rejection. Rejection forms in a personality [psychic determinism] when the personal need for love,  acceptance, and the personal emotional security that comes from those things, is not met.

A prime example of this is when a father fails to give his daughter a healthy sense of being emotionally nurtured. She, upon a certain age, will transfer her need for his paternal love and acceptance onto her relationships, notably sexual partners. She confuses sex (even very promiscuous behaviour) with love. And she will learn that the use of her sexuality will produce results. Learning what works in her favour to get her way, she will go onto evolving a predatory relationship method. And if the victim she chooses is not male, she nonetheless has still a charisma which comes from that part of her personality that comes from sexuality. (I discuss this in part 2 of this series ‘The Siren Trap’)

The person who is a sociopath is a deeply insecure individual. But instead of learning from mistakes to then go onto mature emotionally and learning normal social functioning, they have taken a path of least resistance, that which is least painful and confronting to their their already warped psyches and seared consciences.

Instead of this growth and learning, they instead bypass this normal social development by developing in its stead wits needed to outsmart victims. Some, who have been victims of the sociopath might even say that their user-predator has been most diabolical in their methods!

Also the sociopath cannot ‘feel’ like their more normal counterparts, so there possibly is transference of the victim’s emotional responses to themselves. In the book, The Sociopath Next Door by Martha Stout Ph.d, the author says that the sociopath does not have a conscience – that is, cannot experience normal emotional empathy.

Indeed, this is what they lack, a normal functioning conscience, the conscience part of the mind that keeps an individual from harming another because of normal human sensitivity of empathy. They have in its stead, developed the wits to imitate. That is why a lot of what they do to pass for normalcy can be showy, effusive. They can only imitate, rather than really feel for themselves, and then go on to attempts to convince that what they are demonstrating is genuine.

Basically their behaviour is that of overcompensation for deep rooted rejection that they have residing in their psyches. For example a ‘bully’ can be exposed as a coward at heart – bullying being the overcompensation for fear and intimidation that they themselves might more really feel – the expression of reactions to their own inadequacies.

Lastly, the behavioural pattern into which the predator has found a place within the world of prey is a pattern-personality that will feel neither guilt nor shame for the unconscionable, self-interested anti-social acts that they do.

This has been Part 5 in ‘Series Psychopath’. In the next article, I’ll be looking at what pertains to, within the heading of Psychopath, the sociopath and the narcissist personality types and what differentiates the two.

It’s an unfortunate person indeed who, amidst the flock of sheep (of all the many good and decent-minded people in the world) that ends up meshing with a sociopath. I’m using this image of the proverbial “wolf in sheep’s clothing” to illustrate.

The sociopath is a predator who at first may appear like any other individual. There may be something about them, however, that may be a little more animated than other people generally – some spark that at first appears attractive/entertaining.

You’ve probably seen, as I have, tv documentaries on how a predator, when hunting for food, will seek to make the hunt less taxing by targeting the aged, the young or the weak/sick of a flock or herd of prey.

And so it is that a sociopath is an opportunistic hunter of them they consider they can subdue for their own use (see previous blog and the story that illustrates), someone who they have worked out is a safe bet.

While the sociopath is cunning, even biding their time in watching their victim to assess weakness in that victim, he/she is that kind of personality that won’t be bothered overtaxing themselves. They want easy prey, someone who they have worked out as being someone they can make the pity-play, or con game, on. For example, the female siren will target the lonely man, the emotional vampire will target someone who they consider they can drain emotionally – and the perfect user may keep watch for, and seek out, someone of perfect use, someone who they can exact, through continued cunning/control, financial and emotional energy.

Some of the criteria the sociopath will be able to intuitively hone into  in a potential victim:

.naivety  – or may like to champion/pity the ‘underdog’ in society

.insecurities ie psychic determinations from past upbringing/past relationships. These are the victim’s own self-impressions – how they see themselves, which could lean towards low self-esteem

. guilt

and/or

.good sense of social responsibility ie., can take on the emotional burden

. neediness. For eg., needfulness of a friend or confidante, needfulness of a romantic relationship

And one more thing that I will add. The ideal victim of a sociopath is that person that is secured financially.

Basically with predator and prey, it’s a one-up-manship game. The sociopath must find victims that fulfill one or all of the above criteria in which to win – to have that brimming confidence by which they can weave a web of deceptive behaviour to then go on and use the victim to their own compulsive ends.

When a completely unsuspecting ‘sheep’ meets and has interaction with one of these predatory ‘wolves’, the lack of suspicion comes from a naivety of belief  that the sociopath has normal human feelings/normal social conscience and empathy that is like their own; out of how they assume other people should also be. The victim may consider themselves of good character and think well of others generally – never imagining that there could be those out there that will not or cannot think on the same social empathetic level.

(This has been part 4 of Series Psychopath)

Through the use of their charm, attentiveness and ‘model citizenry’ – their behaviour somewhat too perfect – they have you convinced in a very short space of time to be drawn into their world. Finally, the naïve may think, I’ve found a person that truly likes me straight away, and gives me assurances to that effect. Indeed this new friend, business associate – whoever – seems strong and vivacious, a ready friendship.

And, in that short space of time, one is drawn into emotional codependency – the very charming manner of this new person  is  refreshing after maybe having to form friendships at other times in a more reserved and paced manner, (which is normal, by the way).

In another little while, however, and after the emotional attachment is formed, that one begins to show what they are really like under the superficial exterior. Inconsistencies begin to show and by the time a pattern of toxic behaviour does emerge, it may be too late – and already you may have been making excuses for that toxic one’s serial behaviour faults.

A story to illustrate:

Sharon and Alison were in the same year at high school. They knew each other but were not really close friends, as Alison used to hang out with the most popular girls –and boys – and Sharon would talk to her occasionally, but thought Alison to be shallow.

Indeed, Sharon thought that back then Alison was an attention seeker, a bit of a opportunist when it came to being in a position of advantage. She noticed on more that one occasion Alison behaving coquettishly with older boys who were attracted by this attention-seeking behaviour, and even at times some male teachers.

Years went by and Sharon met Alison quite by accident at a shopping centre. In conversation, Sharon relates that she’s looking for a flat to rent in a particular area of the city. Alison offers to buy Sharon coffee and they sit and talk. Alison sits listening as Sharon tells her the problems she’s been having with finding suitable accommodation on her budget, but Alison has a suggestion. She lives in a flat that has a spare bedroom and Sharon is welcome to come and live there with her as housemate.

Sharon can’t believe her luck, the area of the city is great and the rent is affordable, so she moves in. Alison is so helpful in every way and quickly helps to organize Sharon and her things into her flat. Sharon attempts to lay the ground rules of what they each pay and what they each do in the flat but Alison laughs and says that they should “relax” and play it more by ear.

At first things go ok between the two, but little by little, Sharon finds that the things Alison says and what she does are two different things.

When Sharon questions Alison on this, her housemate smiles and gives assurances. One day, however, Sharon complains about some housework that is not being shared and Alison gives the excuse that she’s been tired and “so busy lately”. Alison likes to remind Sharon of “what a good friend” she is, and… “what would I do without you?” Sharon begins to feel conned into emotional co-dependency. She realizes that she unconsciously likes being flattered – likes the sensation of ‘instant feel good’ through the flattering words and her housemate’s shows of affection.

Alison is always short of money. She buys luxuries for herself but doesn’t like paying the bills. She comes to lean more and more heavily on Sharon for petty cash and for paying the bills, which would be overdue if it wasn’t for the fact that Sharon needed to pay them before the demand notices came.

After Alison has asked yet again for some  cash one day, Sharon stops to think. She remembers what her housemate was like back in their school days and realizes that Alison has never changed…and all that charm that Alison applied to convince to come and share the flat had the affect of working. But Alison was a user, a charming, smiling user who used flattery to keep Sharon (who now was seeing herself as victimised) in a place where she could use her the most. She sees that Alison uses her charismatic wiles to get what she wants out of people and all the flattery and affection she’s received is Alison’s way of keeping her where she can be used. So when Sharon tells Alison what she now thinks of her housemate, Alison explodes – the mask now off. Sharon leaves the flat and Alison’s company permanently, though hardly unscathed and more the wiser from the experience.

It may only take one experience like the above to wake up that there are some that one may meet in life that lack normal social conscience, and that are behavioural ‘serial offenders’. And, as for their victims, their are some who, through their own need – maybe some insecurity on their own behalf – who will continue to make excuses for the one who demonstrates sociopathic behaviour.

Alison may or may not have had physical attractiveness on her side. But what made her, or people like her – male or female – attractive is the way they make you feel on a personality-evasive level. If they can make you feel good initially then that’s their way of grooming a potential victim – the way they get people hooked. This is the trap – the siren trap. And whereas, initially, Sharon felt ‘loved’ and ‘valued’ on that initial superficial level, in the end she felt like a doormat and devalued.

I’ve used this illustration as an example of how a person with antisocial personality disorder ‘sociopathy’ can work someone who they have figured that they can use to their own selfish ends. They are good at reading what they regard as weakness in others, and they also can read their victim’s behaviour in the way that when they think they are losing control, they can turn back on the charm, flattery, affection to keep their victim stroked so that person will remain in a position of being useful. And they like to hook potential victims quickly; all patience regarding cultivation of a healthy friendship disregarded.

So, have you ever met anyone who seems too good to be true?

If he/she appears to be that way, it’s a good bet that they most likely are.

(This has been Part 3 of Series Psychopath)

(Note: The following is a lay-psychology article on the topic of Sociopathy)

Sex!

Now that got your attention.

It will most times as by its very nature it’s attractive. Sex sells, it seduces, it titillates. But this article isn’t designed  to do that, no, because it isn’t really about sex but selfishness.  So I’ll continue on with the matter of selfishness and if you’re at all confused then I’ll refer you to the previous article, and introduction into this series about “Psychopathy”, which will explain.

This article discusses the behaviour of the Siren.

The above picture is from a season 1 episode of Star Trek The Man Trap. While visiting a planet, Kirk and McCoy are seduced by a scientist’s wife – but Nancy isn’t all she appears. She’s a shape-shifting creature that sucks men dry of their salt’s worth!  She transforms herself into the woman of their dreams to lull victims into an entranced state before the kill.

In all of us is the capacity for sexual allure. Many people that I’ve known have been really hung up about their sexuality, mostly because of lack  maybe of a personal liberty in that area, by that I don’t mean immorality, but a knowledge or a sense of personal expression of sexual attractiveness that they can appreciate about themselves all the time – we are  sexual beings after all and it’s a normal part of human mammalian make-up. And this can carry through the years, unless the interest in sex is lost through ageing, ill health or choice. People’s upbringing can inhibit it as some are raised in guilt about their own sexuality and find it difficult  to dissect from feelings of guilt and humiliation.

There are some  people on the other hand who are too distinctly aware of their sexuality and, if they are of a selfish bent then they will find a way to  use this sexual allure, their personal charisma, to have their way with others. In some people, maybe they are not overtly attractive but they know they can exude that charismatic charm over others. This charisma is sexual in nature, and people  who know how to use it channel their sexual energy through that place in their personality to then manipulate others.

Now for some fiction!

Two smartly dressed young ladies are seated together at a table at the downtown club where they can get a good view of the bar and the single male talent.

“Ooh, he’s a bit of all right!”  Vicky says to her friend while nudging her elbow. “Do you think I should  see if he’ll buy me a drink?” She shifts her skirt to show more leg through the split and catches the eye of the hot guy she’s spotted who’s leaning casually on the bar. He holds her gaze for a moment.

“Mmm”, says Gail with a start of recognition, “No, Vick, not him, look away!”  she hisses suddenly.

“Why, Gail? He’s gorgeous! A man like that doesn’t come along all the time, they’re either married, too beer paunch or gay! A girl’s got to strike while the iron’s hot, and I do mean hot!”

Vicky starts moving in her chair to rise but Gail stays her arm.

“Believe me, this one’s too hot to handle and you will get burned. He’s good looking and he knows it. His name is Lyal and he’s got a reputation for lovin’ and leavin’ ‘em. He’s 100% looks and 100% predator.  The story I heard from a friend of a friend was that he took a girl to a restaurant, said he forgot his wallet, she paid, got laid and  he was gone in the morning and never contacted her again. From what I hear he overwhelms girls with his charms, gets em to pay – you know what I mean, and shoots through. Gone, never to be seen again. Looks aren’t  everything, Vick. It’s up to you but don’t say I didn’t warn you.”

Vicky is flattered by the eye contact she’s made with such a handsome guy but she decides to heed her friend’s advice.

Sometimes there’s no smoke without fire. And with the charismatic you’ll sometimes find that they have a trail of victims in their wake.

Because they’ve found a system that suits them to get what they want out of people.

Too ficticious? Well, maybe not.

Like the narcissist, which some of these folk are, they are a personality to wary of. They do exist though not all of them, like I said earlier, have physical attractiveness on their side. In my next article  I’ll be exploring this.

(This has been Part 2 of  “Series Psychopath”.)

First we have to know what we are dealing with and be proactive in how we have a ‘heads up’ to, deal with – or escape that toxic person.

In having anything to do with someone with a severe personality disorder in which their behaviour has the consequences of harm, we might well pray, “..and lead us not into temptation but deliver us from  evil,…”

Isn’t a rapist or paedophile evil in what they do? Their pure selfish intent in obscene lust leads to the devastation of their victims to the degree that victims can spend the rest of their lives being affected by the memory of the abuse.

My purpose, in this article series of Psychopathy that incorporates Sociopathy and Narcissism, isn’t to blind anyone with psychobabble, but to more practically bring to mind the  potential of the toxic personality to bring harm upon their victims and maybe a possible sense of yes, there is something outside of  what people may merely accept as their lot when dealing with the relationships, particularly close ones – and when faced with the introduction or the ongoing trials of associating with the toxic (sometimes fatally- like a bad marriage) and self-gratifying selfish personality.

Not all selfish behaviour is due to a pathological disorder.  Everyone does the selfish thing at times. The people I’ll be talking about in this series are serial offenders: their psychological makeup.  Some behaviour, like much of that of the narcissist, will be self evident; their behaviour isn’t so subtle. The end result of their behaviour will speak for itself despite the narcissist’s excuses.  Other forms of selfishness aren’t so obvious. This is the stuff really to be careful of. The behaviour can be very subtle indeed but it is consistent so therefore has its equivalent of toxicity.

It’s important in the awareness of the behaviour of people that are constantly causing negative repercussions, to ask, “Is this person merely selfish? Or is this person exhibiting a pattern of behaviours that appear to be enmeshed within their personality?

To launch into this series, the type of personality disorder I want to go into I will call The Siren. I can think of one Hollywood and psychopathic character and that was Catherine Tramell, Sharon Stone’s character in the movie Basic Instinct. I won’t be dealing with the bizarrely insane and murderous here, more subtleties, and the topic of selfishness in common people later on.

An explanation of Psychopathy or Sociopathy. From Wikipedia:

“Emeritus Professor Robert  Hare…describes psychopaths as “intraspecies predators who use  charm, manipulation, intimidation, and violence to control others  and to satisfy their own selfish needs. Lacking in conscience and  in feelings for others, they take what they want and do as they  please, violating social norms and expectations without guilt or  remorse.” “What is missing, in other words, are the very qualities  that allow a human being to live in social harmony.”"

And,

“David  T. Lykken proposes that psychopathy and sociopathy are two distinct  kinds of antisocial behaviour”….”Sociopaths…have relatively  normal temperaments; their personality disorder being more an effect  of negative sociological factors like parental neglect, delinquent  peers, poverty, and extremely low or high intelligence. ….psychopathy  leans towards the heredity whereas sociopathy tends towards the  environmental.”

I’ve read varying views on definitions of Psychopath and Sociopath. But through my reading, I’ve formed my own definition of the two sub-headings inside the major heading.

Thus:

Psychopathy or psychopathic personality disorder is the main heading,

under which is that of Sociopathy and Narcissism, the latter two terms  will I draw distinction between. But both are under the major heading of “Psychopath”.

Thus Psychopath – with a leaning more towards sociopath – or more towards the leaning of narcissist. This is how I’ll be approaching this series.

Self-righteousness is hyprocrisy as all of us are capable of these things; we are people of free choice after all. However, we do have our own inner voice – the conscience to heed or ignore. So my articles here might be helpful to discern people on a more than face value thus to aid of personal self-preservation.

My next article is about The Siren.

In the following I’ll be relating the personality of the sexually charismatic; people that use their sexuality to manipulate and overwhelm with charisma. You may be able to bring to mind someone you know or have known who demonstrates this in their personality.

(This has been part one of “series psychopath”)