Exposing Online Predators & Cyberpaths

[Guardian]

Re: Exposing Online Predators & Cyberpaths

Mary accused me of posting that blog ( I hear from her several times a day). Went so far as to tell me she called Blogger on the phone and the traced the IP back to me.

That's what made me take a second look...and it's still there. Either she's totally delusional, or this is one of those cases where the 'path just keeps lying even when the evidence to the contrary is sitting right in front of them?

It's weird 'cause it really does make you question what you're looking at sometimes. Did I really see that? Yeah, I know I did, I'm sure I did...but I'm gonna look again, just to be positive, again.

I kick myself whenever I waste time doing it, but I still do it.

She's been posting new material to her _www.sandrabrownnolicense blog, and has a picture of herself taken about twenty years ago up, captioned as "investigative journalist". I thought I was gonna die laughing.

Yeah, I noticed you'd been added to the Melissa/Sandra/Betsy/Laura defamo blogs. I figure that pretty soon she'll just have a "Everyone's a psychopath but me" blog. That's how she thinks...the whole world is wrong, and she's right. Doesn't matter how much evidence you show her, she'll just twist it around to mean what she wants it to mean. Barbara is the MUCH more skilled 'path and has done an excellent job of getting Mary to spread her lies for her.

Not to be an "I told you so" but I think this goes a long way towards proving that the "Barbara and Mary are fighting" thing was just another scam. You can tell by who she's focused her attention on. Barbara is still pulling the strings, and Mary is just her puppet.

 

[Bresias]

Re: Exposing Online Predators & Cyberpaths

Sorry about the link needing to be removed, I thought I wrote it out incompletely :/ . Guardian, I had a few other 'paths in my life, and their disregard for "fact" in their arguments used to crash my hard drive!

I had a very close female friend for 16 years, before one day I'd had enough and cut off communication with her. It was a huge loss, we raised our babies together, went to college on welfare and food stamps together. She became a therapist and I became an RN. Anyway, I learned early on to completely avoid challenging her, for any reason, no matter how insignificant, because we'd descend into this horrible place. She would defend her position (in the most memorable case, when her daughter slapped my son across the face while we were confronting them about fighting) in spite of fact. It just shut me down! I had nowhere to go.

I doubt my ex-friend is a full-blown 'path, maybe there is a continuum . . . at least I hope so, as she has been a therapist for about 20 years.

How a 'path can continue to argue or justify, disregarding the OBVIOUS, gives us insight into the fun-house mirror quality of their internal perceptions. I conclude (personally) that they lack the capacity to recognize "fact", or consensual reality, as a power greater than themselves.

The transposition of "self" above fact/consensual reality is a classic symptom of a pathological person. It is the reason they can stoop as low as they do, or make proclamations as outrageous (to the other 94% of the normal population) as they make.

Regard, or DISREGARD, for fact and/or consensual reality is a quality indicator, that's for sure :D

 

[Guardian]

Re: Exposing Online Predators & Cyberpaths

Sorry about the link needing to be removed, I thought I wrote it out incompletely :/ . Guardian, I had a few other 'paths in my life, and their disregard for "fact" in their arguments used to crash my hard drive!

What I've never been able to grok is how they make any decision at all without facts? What process do they use? Does Mary have a Magic 8 Ball?

"Has the blog about me been deleted?"

"All signs point to yes"

 

[Bresias]

Re: Exposing Online Predators & Cyberpaths

Sorry about the link needing to be removed, I thought I wrote it out incompletely :/ . Guardian, I had a few other 'paths in my life, and their disregard for "fact" in their arguments used to crash my hard drive!

What I've never been able to grok is how they make any decision at all without facts? What process do they use? Does Mary have a Magic 8 Ball?

"Has the blog about me been deleted?"

"All signs point to yes"

LOL :)

My guess is that psychopaths have a different "home screen" than do non-psychopathic folks.

A small child is developmentally unable to not self-reference each and every time they unpack an experience. Small children are developmentally self centered. This is, in the mid 20th century psychological theorist's conclusions, a function of a poorly developed ego, or "pre-rational" thinking. Piaget and Erikson described these developmental stages in different ways, but their theories seem very complimentary to me. It's normal for a young child to self-reference their experiences back to having a "cause" coming from their own self. A young child has not yet reached the developmental stage where they can conceive of, or recognize an abstraction. This is how young children blame themselves for parental fighting, or divorces. They simply cannot conceive of a reality beyond one that is directly influenced by their own wishes and fears.

"Reality" and "fact" are abstract concepts. And a person needs certain building blocks of development in order to achieve a respect for facts that exist, on their own, by their own merit; outside the influence of the "self".

IMO, psychopaths never made the leap into true abstract thinking. At least when it comes to their own "self in the world".

Therefore, where you and I put our own wishes and fears aside to examine a fact, the psychopathic person operates at the level of a young child, and sees "themselves" as the primary reference point to navigate the outer world.

To a psychopath, facts and fantasy carry equal weight. To you and I and the rest of us who've accomplished the developmental leap, facts carry more weight than do our fantasies, hopes and dreams. We acquiesce to an objective reality. The psychopathic person is blind to an objective reality, because their development is stuck way back in young childhood. Their bodies and intellects grow, but their ability to process information does not.

This is why they must learn to superficially mimic "appropriate" adult behavior, to hide their lack of comprehension. They have been hiding their true, emotionally retarded selves from sight from a very early age, and get pretty good at it. Imagine practicing a behavior for thirty something years . . . you'd be a virtuosi :)

To prevent me from going on and on :D I'll finish up by saying the operating system of a psychopath revolves around pure subjectivity, with profound blindness to objectivity, while nonpsychopathic individuals revolve around a more objective point of view.

'Paths are locked in a bubble made of one way mirrors. They look "out", and only see themselves looking back. They see themselves only, but don't know this. They see themselves and believe they are seeing the entirely of Reality. Which is why they can make their erroneous declarations and actually BELIEVE them, whole heartedly.

If there was some way to understand 'paths in terms of their developmental arrest, and relate to them as three year olds with adult bodies and intellects, I'd like to know more about it. I'm working on it (for some reason, feel driven to), and continuing my "relationship" with Mary McGrannahan is doing something along those lines.

 

[Laura]

Re: Exposing Online Predators & Cyberpaths

That's a great summary, Briseis. We are thinking alike on this. Have a look at an article I wrote back in 2008 that pretty much goes in the same direction... well, almost exactly!
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/154258-A-Structural-Theory-of-Narcissism-and-Psychopathy

 

[Guardian]

Re: Exposing Online Predators & Cyberpaths

If there was some way to understand 'paths in terms of their developmental arrest, and relate to them as three year olds with adult bodies and intellects, I'd like to know more about it. I'm working on it (for some reason, feel driven to), and continuing my "relationship" with Mary McGrannahan is doing something along those lines.

Well she certainly is a good case study, and it's VERY interesting to watch how a more well developed 'path like Barbara uses her to do her dirty work.

Mary is pretty much like every other disordered 'path I've encountered of the "Cut off her own nose to spite her face" variety. She's totally ruined her own life, and seeks to do the same to others. That's fairly common. It's Barbara who fascinates me, the way she dominates and manipulates people is much more unique.

While her use of Mary is easy to explain, her relationship with Andrew is much more puzzling. She been openly insulting him, degrading him, etc. for years, yet he continues to support her and serve her every need?

I've only seen this pattern once before, and it was in a BDSM relationship. The "Dominatrix" controls every aspect of the "Submissive's" life...and the "Sub" likes it that way. They actually accept and ENJOY abuse and being considered "Slaves" to the point that they even have "Collars" that prove their ownership.

Their physical types also match this pattern to a tee. The "Slave" is usually the wage earner, very physically fit, attractive, and constantly concerned about his appearance, while the "Mistress" is a lazy blob.

I've yet to come up with any other explanation for Andrew Ness' continued support of Barbara Camwell Ness? "Exposing Online Predators and Cyberpaths" "The Sanctuary for the Abused" and the various other websites Barbara uses to stalk and harass anyone who's told her "No" only exist because Andrew pays the bills and provides the means for Barbara to sit at the computer all day posting lies and defaming everyone who's ever disagreed with her.

Andrew continues to support her, after Barbara has publicly called him a "wife beater" "hacker" etc., ...knowing full well that his position at Moody's Investment Corp will eventually come under scrutiny due the the various "hacking" claims? She rants on and on about the Cybersex affair she had with "YidwithLid" like it was something more than two grown, MARRIED adults playing on the sticky keyboard forums. Yet Barbara and Andrew Ness are still chatting it up all lovey dovey on Facebook

This just doesn't make any logical sense, UNLESS Barbara actually "Owns" Andrew..and he likes it that way?

"Your husband’s been hacking your computer and passively aggressively emails you & YWL. What does YWL do? Disappeared for 5 weeks leaving you to take beatings, verbally & physically, from your husband."

"Really – what tension would THAT be YWL? The fact that my ex-husband found out so it was no longer convenient? Or that you didn’t want to help me even though I was getting beat up on a daily basis because of you?"

 

[sandrabrownma]

Re: Exposing Online Predators & Cyberpaths

Well in that case maybe Andy isn't the only one Barbara has that kind of relationship with--someone who either funds or helps her online goals might also be a partner in something or other....

 

[Guardian]

Re: Exposing Online Predators & Cyberpaths

Well in that case maybe Andy isn't the only one Barbara has that kind of relationship with--someone who either funds or helps her online goals might also be a partner in something or other....

I was picturing that possibility, and I threw up a little bit in my mouth.

 

[Bresias]

Re: Exposing Online Predators & Cyberpaths

Umm . . . I think I just understood something that I could have lived without understanding.

 

[Bresias]

Re: Exposing Online Predators & Cyberpaths

Any moment now, Mary McGrannahan is going to shift her expose' of me to B&D or S&M participation where I'm a psychopathic "top" and have body parts in my freezer. So far, it's been conning money from the DV community (something we busted her for, and ruined), stealing drugs from the hospital to give to my criminal son to sell, physically abusing patients, stealing narcotics from cancer patients and BRAGGING about it, and how I'll never be caught; being a methamphetamine user AND cook; being a raging alcoholic, using my grandson for food stamps and welfare, placing ads on sex sites advertising myself as a "fatty" who enjoys having painful sex, and finally for pretending to be a DV survivor when it was really me who was abusing my ex-husband, having him arrested and thrown in prison THREE times (at last count).

She recently asked for my home address. I did invite Mary up to visit me so we could speak face to face about her "concerns", but I doubt having my address will result in anything more than spewing it along with her hate blogs all over the internet, or trying very hard to give it to my ex-husband from whom I wish no contact from.

What's tough in "dealing" with Mary is that she is smart enough to understand psychopathic behavior and accuse others (Sandra, me and Betsy to name a few) of being psychopathic. She's NOT smart enough to see how her obsessive ranting and raving online make her psychopathy clearer and clearer with each new "idea" she gets to go after someone with.

The real scary ones are Barb Camwell, because they are quiet. Barb is just superior to McGrannahan in every way, and the most obvious evidence of this is Mary's ignorance of being Barb's tool. I'd feel sorry for her if she weren't so committed to "destroy" the people she envies.

Laura's article she posted above gives an excellent description of how the psychopath processes and behaves when receiving a narcissistic injury. "Paths like Mary and Barb don't recognize the autonomy of fellow humans, and react to being shamed, or exposed with the goal of absolute extermination. This all encompassing rage is, according to the author quoted in Laura's SOTT article (sorry, can't remember his name, Webb?) rooted in a severe developmental delay, where "bad" objects are not autonomous, but are "included within" the psyche of the infant, and the rage goes on outside of time and space.

I don't expect either Barb Camwell or Mary McGrannahan to stop until they lose their fingers in a blender accident. There's just too much lovely "gain" to be had, too many targets (and thus food) to feed their infantile aggression. Sorry to come across as so Freudian, but his protege's had some interesting points . . . .

 

[sandrabrownma]

Re: Exposing Online Predators & Cyberpaths

There are no Cluster b's older than about 14 yrs old emotionally, and I'm being generous at that age. So you can see the cat/mouse games, in Mary's case, much younger--the mirroring developmental stage. So Betsy says something about Barbara and S/M and then the tiny McGrannahan mirrors it back in whatever she develops. Mirroring is even younger than creativity. I don't read any of their blogs but Briesis I suspect you are right--everyone will be gay, everyone will be S/M, everyone will be whatever was last portrayed.

In our material, we discuss this as mimicking and parroting which in intimate relationships have a different function in trying to create the sensation of attachment. But in tiny Mary's case, although negative attention is better than no attention so thus is somewhat of an attachment issue, her mirroring is much younger developmentally. It's like holding a baby in the mirror while you make faces and they seeing your reflection begin to make the faces as well while looking in the mirror.

You don't always see the pathology this young as you do in these cases. Watching this unfold and taking notes on the developmental aspects for my next book gives unique insights into the variations that are not always present in all Cluster Bs. I think this has been an informative interaction at least research-wise and clinically. This type of mirroring is exactly the kind of developmental aspect that is not always present thus will be a good case review for psychological journals that focus on skewed schemeas of developmental interruptions. See, good things come out of even what others try to do for harm!

Where else would we have gotten such a great case study?

 

[sandrabrownma]

Re: Exposing Online Predators & Cyberpaths

I still don't have editing abilities yet on here but I meant young Mary, not tiny Mary.

 

[Guardian]

Re: Exposing Online Predators & Cyberpaths

Where else would we have gotten such a great case study?

Very true. I've actually been considering writing a book about them myself....maybe an e-book? "CyberCrazies"

 

[Gimpy]

Re: Exposing Online Predators & Cyberpaths

Where else would we have gotten such a great case study?

Very true. I've actually been considering writing a book about them myself....maybe an e-book? "CyberCrazies"

Hubby sent me this article yesterday concerning authors wanted for ebooks here: http://news.slashdot.org/story/11/12/09/0411249/amazon-is-recruiting-authors-for-its-ebook-library

Who knows? More good can always come from bad experiences, if we look creatively....I think sandrabrownma is onto something there.

 

[Guardian]

Re: Exposing Online Predators & Cyberpaths

Who knows? More good can always come from bad experiences, if we look creatively....I think sandrabrownma is onto something there.

Yup. What makes Barbara Camwell so interesting to me is how she's gone from group to group and forum to forum doing EXACTLY the same thing. Same exact pattern, over and over and over again. Mary would provide the comedic angle. Together they're like the Pinky and the Brain of the on-line recovery community.