|
aromanholiday -> RE: Required reading for noobs (and us old farts too) (4/27/2011 5:48:52 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam
http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html
I saw this on the other side and asked the OP if I could repeat it here.
It is someting we should all be aware of with the number of psychos and sociopaths that call themselves D types.
This article is potentially confusing because it mixes up a lot of traits that are truly psychopathic and harmful to others with ordinary traits of dominants or masters with still other traits that apply to a wide variety of people, not just sociopaths. You can tell the person who wrote it had no coherent knowledge of dominance and submission whatsoever, and very little clues about genuine psychopaths as well. Truly, this list reminds me of the alleged list of traits that distinguish a vampire from normal people that used to be passed around in the days people believed in such creatures (quails at garlic, is burned by holy water, can't stand the sight of a cross, cannot go out or even be awake in daylight, etc.)
And some of the descriptions aren't even true. Take #11 from the "Other Related Qualities" section:
Ultimate goal is the creation of a willing victim
No sociopath that I have known (yes, I've known a few), wants a willing victim--that is far more of a dominance/control thing. Most sociopaths get their deepest thrills and fascination from watching others' extreme pain and terror. A totally unwilling victim is the only drug strong enough to provide that fix.
Let me see if I can separate out a few more of the dominant traits from the psychopath traits from the "so many share these its worthless to mention them" traits:
Glibness and Superficial Charm
Shared by lots of people, dominant, submissive, psychopathic, and entirely normal. It doesn't belong here, particularly at the top of the list. Normally when providing a profile, the strongest, most distinguishing characteristics are listed at the top, with the lesser ones at the bottom. This was clearly not done here. The list seems thrown together with no sense of an organizing principle. Even individual items in the list mix so many different traits together as supposedly one characteristic, that the author seems to just be trying for the horror movie effect: write a scarily thrilling piece of claptrap and people will read it, get some cheap thrills, then nod sagely, and believe themselves when they say, "Yes, now I know how to recognize a psychopath. I am immune and I need not worry about being their victim."
Manipulative and Conning
They never recognize the rights of others and see their self-serving behaviors as permissible. They appear to be charming, yet are covertly hostile and domineering, seeing their victim as merely an instrument to be used. They may dominate and humiliate their victims.
The last sentence is what many dominants do and most people in bdsm don't bat an eyelash at it or refer to their partners as "victims." And, although many masters tend to see their slaves as instruments to be used (why wouldn't they? they are human property), the word "merely" is seldom paired with that regard. What's left of this definition sounds like classic sociopathic behavior.
Grandiose Sense of Self
Feels entitled to certain things as "their right."
Again, this trait is shared by so many other types of people that it's almost worthless to list as a description of a psychopath unless you add a disclaimer (which the author did not) that this trait is only indicative of a sociopath if other more significant traits (although the author doesn't tell us which of these characteristics are significant) are present.
Pathological Lying
Has no problem lying coolly and easily and it is almost impossible for them to be truthful on a consistent basis. Can create, and get caught up in, a complex belief about their own powers and abilities. Extremely convincing and even able to pass lie detector tests.
Not a core trait, because again, many disturbed individuals who are not even close to sociopathy share this behavior.
Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt
A deep seated rage, which is split off and repressed, is at their core. Does not see others around them as people, but only as targets and opportunities. Instead of friends, they have victims and accomplices who end up as victims. The end always justifies the means and they let nothing stand in their way.
This is, for the most part, a strong characteristic/good indicator of a psychopath, although most people, I would wager, don't get close enough to such an individual to understand that he or she feels this way until it is far too late. So it's fairly worthless as an identifier that will keep you safe. The "deep seated rage" part is new to me. I wonder what studies (if any) that alleged cause of the lack of remorse comes from. I tend to think such a person's lack of remorse comes from something more mechanical: something electrochemical isn't firing the way it normally does in most people's brains. But I could be wrong.
Shallow Emotions
When they show what seems to be warmth, joy, love and compassion it is more feigned than experienced and serves an ulterior motive. Outraged by insignificant matters, yet remaining unmoved and cold by what would upset a normal person. Since they are not genuine, neither are their promises.
Even the halfway intelligent ones know they "give themselves away" with this behavior and so keep it well under wraps when trying to influence or impress somebody. Again, this is next to worthless for spotting a psychopath: you won't see he has this behavior until you're in a position where you can't do anything about it, so it offers no safety. A strongly intelligent psychopath will know what are commonly considered the psychological markers of his/her disorder and will be quite careful, at all times, not to display them.
Incapacity for Love
(a) Shared by many other types of people who are not psychopaths. (b) The opposite can be easily faked. (c) Some psychopaths do feel forms of love. If you believe that they do not ever feel love, then using this trait to ID them could lead you sadly astray.
Need for Stimulation
Living on the edge. Verbal outbursts and physical punishments are normal. Promiscuity and gambling are common.
These are also the traits of someone with very low impulse control or high impatience. I have known plenty of non-sociopathic submissive women who act like this, including the physical punishments (of their children or even of the "dominants" they find who let them get away with it) although verbal outbursts are more common.
Callousness/Lack of Empathy
Unable to empathize with the pain of their victims, having only contempt for others' feelings of distress and readily taking advantage of them.
A good descriptor. But again, its use in keeping one safe from such a type is questionable, as it is easy to fake the opposite. This is also a trait sometimes ascribed to other disorders, such as autism.
Poor Behavioral Controls/Impulsive Nature
Rage and abuse, alternating with small expressions of love and approval produce an addictive cycle for abuser and abused, as well as creating hopelessness in the victim. Believe they are all-powerful, all-knowing, entitled to every wish, no sense of personal boundaries, no concern for their impact on others.
Wow. This one mixes a lot of very different things together. Let's start with the brainwashing methodology. Alternating "abuse" with small expressions of positive emotions is a common technique consciously employed by those who wish to brainwash someone or otherwise bring them under their thrall. Some masters I have known use this technique, not because they are raging maniacs whose emotions veer wildly between one extreme and another, but because it produces a certain result in their slaves that they want. It wouldn't surprise me if psychopaths have figured out the use of this technique as well in "breaking down" a victim, as it is a well-documented technique, but few psychopaths would have the patience or the luxury of time to employ it. It does take some time, if it's to work as intended. With a master, the "addictive cycle" is set up only in the slave, he is not influenced by the tool he is using to achieve an end. Yes, it does create hopelessness in the submissive (or in a brainwashing victim). Again, depending upon the context, this could be a positive consequence, not a negative one. As far as believing they are all powerful, entitled to every wish (or every order being obeyed), and with no sense of personal boundaries in regards to their slaves, that all sounds like standard attitudes and behavior for a master or a very dominant person toward his partner. The context of their relationship and other traits such people have, such as a strong sense of responsibility, are what make something like this good, not bad. The last statement, about "no concern for their impact on others" is not shared by any decent dominant I know. The fact that parts of this description are standard brainwashing techniques, parts are things dominants naturally feel, and other parts are negative characteristics or behaviors that could be shared by many others who are not sociopaths (rage, for instance; foolishly believing one is all-knowing is another), makes this a totally useless muddle of a descriptor for psychopathic individuals. It simple excites all the old fears, fantasies, and hopelessly outdated stereotypes about such individuals.
I'm getting bored and will spare you all the extensive deconstruction of the rest of the points. My own point is that this is a very confusing and ill-thought-out list.
I did not read the half of the page that quoted the DSM. Perhaps it was a bit more coherent and useful? One can hope!
|
|
|
|
