BY, FOR, AND OF PSYKOPATHS

highmystica said:
I have read somewhere maybe here or elsewhere about the possibility of the psychopathy gene being caried in the x chromosome. Which though that gene is carried by ladies, if it is a recessive gene then it is more likely to be expressed by men, the y chromo is tiny ...I would question this articals truth because of his random tangent regarding women - ya know women have taught me more than my fellow men, and it is because they see both from the point of view of children as well as adults - he paints it as being childish, but I see it as more complete or holistic ... The recissive gene thing would also describe why women psychopaths are so much more subtle then male psychos.
Could be. There's a few genetic abnormalities that are carried on the X chromosome and not the Y. This means that men end up suffering from these because they only have the one X chromosome to 'work off', and women have two (X's), and usually the other one isn't faulty - so they end up just carriers, not sufferers. This is a sex-linked recessive abnormality.

Therefore, when a man suffering from this procreates, he has a 100% chance of passing the defect on to a daughter (as a carrier) and a 0% chance of passing it on to his son (as a sufferer). The son gets the Y, or unaffected chromosome, rather than the X.

If a female carrier of the faulty chromosome has children, she has a 50% chance of passing it on to her offspring. If the child born is one of the unlucky 50%, and a boy, they will suffer from the disease. If they are a girl, they will be a carrier but not a sufferer.

So, will this 'work' with psychopathy? If it is true, and psychopathy is carried on the X chromosome, then male psychopaths should be unable to have sons who are also psychopaths.

What about the Y chromosome? I read somewhere that many, many individuals with two Y chromosomes end up in jail. I guess you could say they may have the personality disorder called 'antisocial'. They are sometimes refered to (by psychologists and psychiatrists) as 'more bad than mad'. There's no psychosis there; neither are they thought disordered, just lacking in any form of empathy, insight and are completely self centered and self-serving. But, not all of these characters go to jail, its probably just the ones with lower IQs. I once spoke to a ex-cop who said he couldn't believe how stupid most criminals were. I think he just got bored of arresting them all the time... Time and time again.

Anyway, what about the Nephilim? Don't they have 2Y chromosomes? Ah, here we go: 960224
Q: (L) Would these Nephilim genetics be passed down in the natural way, or would they be the result of genetic
manipulation by genetically altering a fetus and then putting it back?
A: No to latter. One clue: double Y chromosomes.
Q: (W) That's male...
A: Nephalim were.
Q: (L) They, were male. Women are a double X, men are XY.
A: Prisons are filled with double Y's with monstrous personality disorders, almost always Caucasian and over- sized.
Also, "bikers" often carry the gene. We suggest you not share this in a general way on the net!!!
Q: (L) On tv they interviewed a serial killer. He was HUGE! He described killing. The shrink who was analyzing said he
did it because he wanted to get caught. I did NOT get that feeling. I think he did it just because it was what he did.
Bikers often carry the gene... and this is why they form 'gangs.' Nephalim. Bikers. Big. Caucasian. My, my, my. Is there
any other clue you can give?
A: Nephalim are not currently on your world, just trace residuals.
Q: (L) Trace residuals in people. And there are supposed to be 36 million of them coming...
A: With the wave.
And I was thinking how much easier it would be for a female psychopath to 'hide' behind the 'mask of sanity'. There's so much conditioning out there (especially for males) that females (who tend to be more subtle anyway) would be so much better equiped, to not only wear 'the mask of sanity', but to use all that conditioning to 'hide' their true natures...

Just some thoughts.
 
The racist and "patriot militia" aspects of the writing left me wondering if it was perhaps a piece of COINTELPRO, although the author made many good observations and drew some interesting connections. Still, there was a fiery energy to the piece which reminds me of Manuel Valenzuela or John Kaminski, two authors that I think are genuine in their intentions to help others see the Terror of the Situation.

I think he misdiagnoses a few cases - Bush is probably a psychopath, as well as OJ Simpson, and I'd be surprised if Seymour Hersh was one. Couldn't help but vigorously agree though, when he mentioned Jerry Springer. That show (and its unfortunate popularity) has always sickened me.

It looks like he did a fair bit of homework on this article - there are many side cases and references which would make interesting research in topics of their own. He also seems to nail pretty much every "conspiracy" topic in his analysis, without falling into many of the counterintelligence traps out there. The reference to Barbara Olsen read almost like a "hint" of intelligence connections of his own - another reason I wondered about possible COINTELPRO.

It certainly sounds like he might have read Lobaczewski's work, and his remark about his reputation and livelihood depending on being able to recognise psychopaths - as well as the references to police and pathologists - left me wondering if he might be a forensic investigator or criminal profiler of some kind?

All in all, a very interesting article, even if quite a few aspects of it were ineptly - and even a touch hysterically - handled IMO. But if the guy started putting the pieces together all on his own, without any network or esoteric work to balance the self, then I sure could empathise with why he might start ranting a bit!
 
Example...

Source: http://tinyurl.com/d86wp
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/4124244.stm


'It was every schoolboy's fantasy'

Power-mad conman Robert Hendy-Freegard forced the many victims who fell prey to his devious charm to endure squalid lives of degradation and suffering, according to the judge due to sentence him for two counts of kidnap, 10 of theft and eight of deception.

_40659580_hendy203.jpg


BBC News examines how some were sucked into the former barman's heinous world of make-believe espionage and derring-do.


THE JEWELLER

Hendy-Freegard befriended Simon Young after popping into his Sheffield shop.

Having won his trust during several social outings, Hendy-Freegard persuaded the watchmaker to provide temporary accommodation for another of his victims, agriculture student Sarah Smith, before switching to his favourite subject - his "hush, hush" espionage work.

"He tried to enrol me into an organisation and offered me a job as well as certain training.

"Yes, I was interested in doing government work like this.

He sent me on the training - numerous different tasks
Simon Young
"Of course I was.

"It was every schoolboy's fantasy.

"Later he sent me on the training - numerous different tasks."

One involved going to Manchester to buy a £1.25 can opener from a particular shop.

Mr Young was given detailed instructions about which buses and trains to catch, the doors and escalators to be used, and warned he would be under constant surveillance.

Next he was ordered to buy a copy of the Gay Times and read it openly on the train to London.

Sheffield coach station had sold out of the magazine - but Mr Young headed for the capital anyway - armed with the can opener.

Following his orders to the letter, he went to a West End pub and asked the barman for a particular person.

Suspicions aroused

Told there was no one of that name there, but thinking it was all part his MI5 evaluation, Mr Young handed the surprised barman the can opener and said: "Well, when you see him, give him this."

His suspicions were only aroused when Hendy-Freegard failed to hide his amusement on hearing Mr Young's account of his mission.

The jeweller demanded to see Hendy-Freegard's bosses.

A meeting was arranged - but Mr Young was the only one there.

"By that time I disbelieved everything he said," he added.


THE EXPECTANT MOTHER

Polish company director Renata Kister was seven months pregnant and had just separated from her partner when she became another casualty of the conman's "car showroom" charm.

He was so funny
Renata Kister
"He was extremely well-mannered, a true gentleman," she recalled.

"And he was so funny."



He told Miss Kister his MI5 bosses had ordered him to "watch someone" in the Sheffield Volkswagen dealership where he was working, persuaded her to buy a better car, but kept the £10,000 he made on her old one, then convinced her to take out a £15,000 loan for him.

Whenever she asked him for the money, he said he had not yet been paid for his secret assignment.

Once again Hendy-Freegard requested temporary accommodation for Miss Smith, saying she was on a witness protection scheme having fled her violent husband.

He told Miss Kister that Miss Smith was Spanish and could speak no English, while telling Miss Smith, whom he had convinced she was being hunted by the IRA, to pretend she could not understand anything said to her for security reasons.

As a result they never exchanged a word in three months.

And when police on the trail of the conman finally caught up with Miss Kister, she initially refused to cooperate with officers, whom she suspected of staging an MI5 "loyalty test".


THE CIVIL SERVANT

Leslie Gardner gave Hendy-Freegard more than £16,000 during the six years after meeting him in a Newcastle nightclub, at the age of 28.

She even sold her car because he needed cash to "buy off some killers", whom he said were bombers released under the Good Friday agreement.

Hendy-Freegard also told the civil servant he had to pay off IRA blackmailers and buy himself out of the police, and needed money to start a new life as a taxi driver and help his gravely-ill mother.

Three months after he gave her a Volkswagen Golf, Miss Gardner found out she owed a finance company three monthly payments of £260 each.

Hendy-Freegard had pocketed his salesman's commission.

And Miss Gardner is still paying for the car.


THE UNFAITHFUL WIFE

Elizabeth Bartholemew, a personal assistant and sales administrator at a Vauxhall dealership in Sheffield, was 22, and her marriage just six-months-old when she met Hendy-Freegard.

A regular customer, she would look after his children while he test drove a string of top-of-the range cars.

He bought her expensive perfume, gave her the attention and affection she did not receive at home and "was very good in bed".

But the "horrifying eight-year nightmare" that followed cost her marriage, health, self-respect and £14,500.

"When he was in a good mood he was charming and couldn't do enough for you," she recalled.

"But everything had to be precise with him.

"If his shirt was even slightly creased he would take it off and throw a temper tantrum.

He kept saying I had failed the tests and until I passed we couldn't even have a sexual relationship again
Elizabeth Richardson
"It was like he had a trigger switch.

"He was like Jekyll and Hyde, a freak of nature.

"It got to the stage where his anger would make me so scared."


Then Hendy-Freegard revealed his "other life as a secret service spy".

He told her she was in danger from IRA terrorists and ordered her to sever contact with family and friends, change her name to Richardson and tell the deed poll officer it was because she had been molested as a child.

Hendy-Freegard also took photographs of her naked and warned if she ever disobeyed him he would show them to her husband.

She loved him desperately, but was told she would have to endure "loyalty tests" to satisfy MI5 they could marry.

They included becoming a blonde, going without make-up and sanitary towels, sleeping in Heathrow airport for several nights at a time, and living on park benches in Peterborough for weeks during winter.

"Sometimes I could not sleep so I would just walk around to keep out of danger."

Pus-oozing sores

Hendy-Freegard confiscated her jacket, leaving her shivering in just a T-shirt and jeans and made her survive on just a cheap loaf of bread or Mars bar a week.

Emaciated and covered with eczema, her feet covered in bleeding, pus-oozing sores, Miss Richardson spent most days in libraries to keep warm.

"I never talked to anyone about my plight.

"I was told people would be watching my every movement."

I was just waiting for him to say his bosses had given the word for us to live together
Elizabeth Richardson
Other tests included pretending to be a Jehovah's Witness and walking through London in a full Indian wedding sari, complete with bangles and a bindi.

"Everyone was gawping at me," she recalled.

Miss Richardson was also told MI5 had given them a choice of three towns to live in and she had to tour them, visiting shops, pubs, doctors' surgeries, and hospitals and then write an extensive report.

After Hendy-Freegard told her a sniper was targeting her home she crawled from room to room and spent every evening in the dark.

On his orders she took out two loans for him, for £6,500 and £8,000.

Each time he pocketed the cash, said his "MI5 superiors" wanted to see him urgently, and drove off.

"I was just waiting for him to say his bosses had given the word for us to live together," Miss Richardson recalled

"But he kept saying I had failed the tests and until I passed we couldn't even have a sexual relationship again."

Loyalty test

"This has all been so traumatically painful for me for so long now I can't even remember what normal life is actually like.

"I find the fact that I used to be a PA very hard to believe, that I could carry out that role, because there is no way I could do it now.

"He has totally ruined me, broken me.

"My confidence is nil.

"I still have nightmares.

"I keep seeing his face every time I fall asleep."

Miss Richardson also initially refused to cooperate with police officers investigating Hendy-Freegard, suspecting another MI5 "loyalty test".


THE SOLICITOR

Successful lawyer Caroline Cowper met Hendy-Freegard at the age of 34 when she traded in her £16,000 Mercedes and bought a £20,000 Volkswagen Golf from her local dealership, Normands, in Chiswick High Road, west London.

Unaware he had several other "fiancées", she soon fell in love with the good-looking salesman, rating his performance "in bed" with an "11 out of 10".

And when she discovered he had pocketed £8,000 of her trade-in money, he promised to pay her back once he had received a six-figure salary cheque from his MI5 bosses.

Hendy-Freegard soon borrowed another £1,500 and instead of paying her back took the money off the price of a desk he was selling her - after forging a receipt to inflate its price by £1,700.

He also persuaded her to give him cash for a car for a leasing business he said they would run together.

When the vehicle did not appear, Hendy-Freegard said it was being used by the "Polish mafia".

Miss Cowper treated them to holidays in penthouses around the world - and he stole almost £14,000 from her building society account.


THE PSYCHOLOGIST

American child psychologist and author Kimberley Adams also met Hendy-Freegard at Normands, at the age of 31.

"He said he was working undercover, infiltrating a very dangerous criminal network," she recalled.

"I had no doubt he was telling the truth.

"He said he needed to be violent on the job and boasted about murdering a man who had discovered he was working undercover and had threatened to expose him.

"So he shot him in the head.

"He said he was also present at a kneecapping, and when others held another person down and drilled into his skull."

Just weeks into the 14-month relationship, Hendy-Freegard proposed marriage but told Dr Adams she, too, would have to be a spy, resign from her job in Reading and be forbidden post and contact with her family.

He told her they would live in a Hebridean lighthouse for 25 years, monitoring Russian submarines in the North Sea, but she would first have to undergo various "tests" and have a new identity.

He also told her MI5 and Scotland Yard would examine and evaluate everything she had ever done and she must tell him about all her sexual encounters in detail.

He said he was going to kill Paul [Heffner] and that I would have to cut off his balls
Kimberley Adams
When she confessed she had kissed her landlord's friend after meeting Hendy-Freegard, he lost his temper.

"He was really furious.

"He said he was going to kill Paul [Heffner] and that I would have to cut off his balls.

"He also said I was such an awful woman it would be much better for my son to die than for me to be a mother," said Dr Adams.

"He said if I refused to kill my son he would have to bury him alive."

Hendy-Freegard also said he had taken out a contract on her and her son, who attended school in America.

He told her she had "sacrificed my son's life with my lies, and that by the end of the night I would be glad to be dead".

"I was completely terrified, physically shaking," Dr Adams, who still has nightmares about her ordeal, recalled.

There were, she said, many death threats.

Hendy-Freegard said Dr Adams needed to be "taught some humility because of [her] behaviour with other men".

He flushed her anti-depressant pills down the toilet and sent her to live with her "very humble" mother for three months at her then home in Worksop, Nottinghamshire.

When Dr Adams told Hendy-Freegard she did not want to spend 25 years in a lighthouse, he told her they would have to repay the state £80,000 as all the arrangements had been made.

She phoned her father, film producer John Adams, in Omaha, Nebraska, and asked for £20,000 to pay for "spy school".

He turned to his ex-wife Anne Hodgins, and his daughter's stepfather, who had recently won more than £11m on the lottery in Phoenix, Arizona.

Spy school

And the money funded a luxury 12-week European tour for Hendy-Freegard and his fifth "fiancée".

Dr Adams later phoned again saying Hendy-Freegard had told her she had failed spy school and needed another £10,000 to re-sit exams.

Dr Adams and her parents also initially refused to cooperate with police officers investigating Hendy-Freegard.

He had warned them such contacts would be either double agents, or MI5 agents testing their reliability.

Met Family Liaison Officer Pc Cathy Harrison said Dr Adams "was immensely traumatised and found it very difficult to accept her relationship with Hendy-Freegard had been based on a complete fraud".


Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/england/4124244.stm

Published: 2005/06/23 20:09:53 GMT

© BBC MMVI
 
Just for reference, here are a few of the photographs I think "J" is talking about here:

John Anderson
Some people describe some paths as being hollow or shallow eyed. But what does that mean objectively? Almost nothing, two people could use the same terms very differently (though if you see CIA presidential spoiler candidate John Anderson's picture you might see what they mean).
john-anderson-1-sized.jpg


Cover his mouth with your hand and just look at the eyes. They do not smile.

Larry King
Find one of his mug shots from his earlier fraud arrest. I see a "stranger in a strange land" in full path confusion, conveying (to me), "I don't get it. I was doing my best lying, cheating and stealing. What was I doing wrong? How do I get by in this normy world."
king.jpg


Overgrown children:

Tom Ridge:
Tom-Ridge.jpg

Paul O'Neill:
oneill-portrait.jpg

Jeff Sessions:
sessions_lores.jpg

Tommy Thompson:
Tommythompson.JPG

Miguel Enstrada:
estrada140b_0228.jpg


When you look at pictures of Marc Racicot, Andrew Card and Michael Swango, M.D (the medical serial killer) do you see anything in common?
Marc Racicot
gov_mark_racicot_r_MT_charges_irregularities.jpg

Andrew Card
524card3.jpg

Michael Swango, M.D (the medical serial killer)
swango72x101.jpg


For me, female paths are a deeper source of mystery. They may be much more different from us than the males. I usually find them much harder to recognize, even when their behavior makes it obvious. Some however are still immediately obvious to me, even in a still photo (though they have to be looking straight into the camera). Look at pictures of Diane Zamora, naval midshipman and murderess, and Kyra Phillips, CNN anchor and CIA propagandress.
Zamora:
dgdz_thumb_03.jpg

Phillips:
kyra_phillips_21.jpg



When I look at the faces of Laura Bush, Condi Rice and Andrea Mitchell I see a strange masklike quality. I have come to believe that this is because there simply is no human soul inside pulling the face muscles, even more so than typical for most paths.
Mitchell:
mitchell.jpg
 
In high school, Laura Bush killed a boyfriend in a car accident, he the pedestrian, she the driver (don't take my word for it, look it up) [Actually they were both in cars]. How interesting.
Did anybody consider that this particular could have actually been written by a psychopath? I'm I the only one who finds this manipulative???
 
No, I didn't find it manipulative because I was under the impression that the man Laura Bush killed was a pedestrian from an article I had read on the subject some years back. It's just bad data.

My question would be: why do you see it as manipulative? Considering the entire article, that is?
 
The ability to entertain other possibilities comes with age or great emotional cost (such as recognizing a marriage to a path, or a psychopathic betrayal by a path parent (such as a parental affair with a child's spouse)). Usually, however, people never recognize a path spouse or parent.
I can relate to the situations listed above from personal experience. I think that the author has legitmate expertise somehow.

Both my livelihood and my professional reputation depend on my knowledge of psychopaths and I get fooled all the time.
This seems to be a significant clue to the author's identity. I can only speculate that the author is an employee of one of the secret government agencies or an "operative" of some sort for the "consortium." This information could essentially be a "leak." The unusual spelling and syntax could well be used to disguise the author's writing style from those that would have the ability to analyze such with computers, etc. Such a person would have written many reports, analysis, etc. I imagine. I think it highly likely that the "consortium" knows plenty more than we have been yet able to discover about Path's and o.p.'s.
 
My question would be: why do you see it as manipulative? Considering the entire article, that is?
My response is that stating first that Laura Bush hit a pedestrian, and then later changing it to an accident involving two cars and maintaining the same tone is misleading. It's a little easier to imagine that the driver is at fault for intentionally hitting a pedestrian, than it is to imagine that someone would choose to kill another person by being involved in a two car accident. Granted, it is one way to knock someone off, but a risky one for someone who isn't practised at it.

Now if somebody did this while speaking that would be a different story, in my opinion. However, writing things down allows one to reread, reflect and make corrections. So, I'm not commenting on whether or not the information is actually true or not because I don't know, but for someone who writes so well, I find it strange.

It was my understanding that because it's so difficult to detect psychopaths, it is necessary to look for subtle clues. I agree with those of you who have identified a lot of valid information in the article. Of course, I hope I'm wrong about the writer. We need more normal people who really understand what's going on.
 
Miss Isness said:
Now if somebody did this while speaking that would be a different story, in my opinion. However, writing things down allows one to reread, reflect and make corrections.
Could be that the contradiction was delibrate so as to point to a clue that shows why the determination of psychopath was made.
 
Well I agree, if somebody is going to say that "she hit a pedestrian" and then add a note that the pedestrian was also in a car, then I'm confused. Did she hit a pedestrian (meaning person on foot) or another car? If car, why call it a pedestrian?

On the other hand, knowing what we do know about Laura Bush, why would somebody be trying to "manipulate" others into seeing a real psychopath as a real psychopath? That also makes no sense - unless a psychopath simply wanted to make another psychopath "go down", but if so, it would make no sense why he'd explicate the nature of psychopathy in general instead of just trying to frame or bad-mouth the other person in some way and leave it at that. Because one goal of psychopaths, as a whole, is to remain their true nature hidden. If they want to attack a person, psychopath or not, wouldn't it make sense that they wouldn't educate the whole crowd about the true nature of psychopathy in the process, and so endanger all psychopaths including himself? UNLESS that education itself was misleading and deceptive as well, which would be consistent with how a psychopath might decide to act.

So I don't know if she really did hit someone or not, and whether he was a pedestrian, but it is confusing that he first calls it a pedestrian and then adds a quick note that he was in a car, without changing the word pedestrian.
 
Miss Isness said:
My response is that stating first that Laura Bush hit a pedestrian, and then later changing it to an accident involving two cars and maintaining the same tone is misleading.
The part in the brackets was added by the editor of the site where the article was posted.
 
The part in the brackets was added by the editor of the site where the article was posted.
You're right. It's such a long article that I forgot about the editor's note indicating that at the beginning.

So, what we have is a lot of valid insights regarding psychopaths on a macrosocial scale that were written at a time when this type of knowledge was not prevalent, by an unkown writer, who is not shy about pointing fingers.

One of the things I found particularly interesting about the article, is that the writer comments that on a psychopath's mask like face there are no facial expressions that show the tuggings of the soul.

In an article about boderline personality disorder I read that people with this disorder tend to be hypersensitive to other people's facial expressions, as they are incapable of reading them correctly and often see other's complex facial expressions as a justification for going on the offensive.

As fate would have it, both my mother and my husband have reacted in this way to my facial expressions and seem to feel justified in treating me badly for my crime of having an expressive face. My mother used to shout at me, 'Wipe that look off your face!' quite frequently, and my husband often says, 'Don't look at me like that!' Now as far as I can recollect, this usually happens when I am aware of the fact that I'm being dominated by someone who doesn't have my best interests at heart. I don't ever recall having felt hatred or anger at that particular point, just a very clear perception of what was taking place.

To the contrary, my English students often compliment my expressiveness. They can self correct by simply watching my face to observe when they have made a mistake, which alleviates the need for me to interrupt them. Sometimes I exaggerate the expressions to get their attention, but when my mother and my husband have confronted me, I'm usually not aware of my face doing anything in particular. As far as the latter is concerned, when I try to imagine somehow stopping my facial expressions, it seems synonymous with turning off my feelings.

Could this be a clue to these two very important relationships in my life? There are a lot of similarities between my husband and my mother, both astrologically and practically speaking. Both have the sun in pisces and venus and sun opposite pluto. Both have mars conjunct saturn in Taurus, and both are charming with strangers and dominating with the people they are close to. They both like spending a great deal of time alone, and often get angry or irritated when a family member comes knocking on the door to the room they habitually escape to.

One thing is for sure, I'm not doing anybody any good by harbouring anger, nor am I helping anyone by letting my compassionate nature be manipulated. It's clear that I must not act against them, but for myself, and I suppose this is true on a larger scale as well, but exactly what type of action does that translate into? At this stage in the game, there is just no way I'm going to be able to avoid psychopathic behaviour altogether considering how prevalent it is in our current power structure. Does it all boil down to reinforcing bonds with people who have the capacity for empathy? There must be more to it than that.....
 
> I have read somewhere maybe here or elsewhere about the possibility of the psychopathy gene
> being caried in the x chromosome. Which though that gene is carried by ladies, if it is a recessive
> gene then it is more likely to be expressed by men.

That's an interesting point. If it is genetic, then it would most likely be a recessive gene carried by the mother's x chromosone and thus most likely to be expresed as dominant in her sons.

Then this would mean that female psychopaths are different If both parents carried the psychopathic gene, then it would be passed on to their daughters from the x chromosone of each parent. The daughters would receive a "double whammy."

If psychopaths control normal people through deceipt and manipulation, then the psychopathic woman would be more dangerous and difficult to detect than men.

Since we live in a patriarchial society, I would think this would give female psychopaths an advantage over males because their expected "gender role" allows them a wider range for manipulation and control.

I am generalizing here, but in patriarchial societies, men are allowed to act out while women are expected to be passive. Aggressive men are easier to spot than passive-aggressive women. Society expects women to show maternal instincts The best way for the pathological woman to maintain that "maternal front" would be for her to cotnrol through subtle passive-aggressive behavior.

However, when psychopathic women (Margaret Thatcher, for instance) really do get an opportunity to exercise power (act out) as men do, they are often criticized as being "worse than men." But what if they were really "worse than men" because psychopathy is more pronounced in them than in their male counterparts?

Patriarchial society usually views these women as "ball busters" or "more macho" than men. In other words women would have a "a double advantage" as psychopaths: they could act out in both an aggressive or a passive-aggressive manner.

Just a thought.
 
Miss Isness said:
One thing is for sure, I'm not doing anybody any good by harbouring anger, nor am I helping anyone by letting my compassionate nature be manipulated. It's clear that I must not act against them, but for myself, and I suppose this is true on a larger scale as well, but exactly what type of action does that translate into? At this stage in the game, there is just no way I'm going to be able to avoid psychopathic behaviour altogether considering how prevalent it is in our current power structure. Does it all boil down to reinforcing bonds with people who have the capacity for empathy? There must be more to it than that.....
Exactly. And you don't know that your mother and husband are psychopaths, narcissists or OPs or anything for that matter. There is a really powerful book entitled "Narcissistic Families" that talks about these problems from the point of view that the family can be narcissistic in its dynamics without necessarily being composed of individual members who are clinically narcissistic. I believe I pasted in some excerpts on one thread but I can't remember which one. You really might find pursuing this line to be fruitful so getting this book might be a start.

Also, the book: "In Sheep's Clothing" by George Simon is another VERY good one, and "Unholy Hungers" by Barbra Hort and "Trapped In the Mirror" by Elan Goulomb. (I think I've spelled all the names right so you can search on amazon for these books.)

I really know what you are talking about. I actually dropped out of nursing school because an instructor raked me over the coals because facial expressions were too "revealing." She told me I would never make a nurse if I couldn't get a grip on my emotions and not "connect" to the patients. I just decided I didn't want to be in a profession where empathy was considered to be a negative thing. And I realistically knew that maybe she was right: it would kill me to have to live through so much suffering with others day after day. That is, it would kill me one way or the other.
 
And you don't know that your mother and husband are psychopaths, narcissists or OPs or anything for that matter.
You are absolutely right about that. To tell you the truth I'm not terribily happy about even having to consider the possibility. It just leaves me with nagging doubts, and a lot of uncertainty.

The excerpt about Narcissistic families is on the 'Musings on the Subconscious Mind' thread. Thanks for the other recommendations. I'd be curious to know if you've ever had a look at 'The Astrology of Family Dynamics', by Erin Sullivan, and if so, what you think of it. I found it a fascinating way to get a deeper look at how characteristics, conflicts, and 'unfinished business' get passed down through generations.

Another book I found extremely interesting is called 'For Your Own Good', unfortunately I loaned my copy out and never got it back and I can't remember the author's name. It gives detailed family backgrounds for various psychopaths including Hitler, as well as excerpts from one of the first, widely distributed books on child rearing, which reads like it should be titled 'How to Create a Psychopath'. The book caught my eye because before giving me a whipping with his belt, my father would always say 'This is for your own good'. Needless to say by reading the book I discovered that a lot of my parents cruel child raising techniques had actually been institutionalized generations earlier. The book also takes a look at things on a larger scale in terms of how the predominately accepted way of child rearing actually created a society susceptible to the domination of a tyrant like Hitler.
 
Back
Top Bottom