Female Psychopathy

[obyvatel]

More data points for the histrionic portrait in context of female psychopathy

From T. Millon

[quote author=Personality Disorders in Modern Life]

THE DISINGENUOUS HISTRIONIC

The disingenuous subtype synthesizes histrionic and antisocial features. A somewhat different picture is created, depending on the relative influence of histrionic and antisocial traits. In the beginning, they make a good first impression and seem sociable and sincere, exhibiting such spontaneity and charm that others quickly lower their defenses. The combination of histrionic and antisocial features, however, makes the disingenuous subtype more manipulative than the basic histrionic pattern and for ends other than simple attention and approval. For some, their histrionic traits serve simply as a convenient method of making contacts and opening doors but overlay and temporarily conceal characteristics fundamental to the antisocial, including a willingness to violate social conventions, break promises and shatter loyalties, behave irresponsibly, and sometimes erupt with anger and physical confrontation. For some, the antisocial influence stops here with traits attributable to simple delinquency.

Others, however, combine histrionic and more psychopathic characteristics. These individuals synergize the histrionic’s more adaptive social skills, charm, and ability to read the motives and desires of others with a rather calculated malevolence.. Obviously, this variant is more egocentric, more willingly insincere, and probably more conscious of their manipulations than is the basic histrionic pattern. They often seem to enjoy conflict, gaining a degree of gratification or amusement from the excitement and tension thereby produced. Because antisocials usually interpret kindness as weakness, their friendly histrionic traits sometimes make them afraid that others will come to view them in exactly that same way. If they sense this is true, they may avenge this wrong impression by becoming particularly predatory.
[/quote]

From personality psychopathology page in the University of Louisiana
_http://www.ulm.edu/~palmer/AntisocialandHistrionicPersonalityDisorders.htm

Harpending and Sobus (1987) have argued that histrionic females are employing a cheating strategy that is equivalent to that of sociopathic males. Because the reproductive strategies of males and females differ, the cheating strategies of males and females must differ accordingly. A male sociopath should be adept at seducing females and deceiving them about his degree of commitment. A histrionic female should be adept at exaggerating her need for the male and her vulnerability in order to induce him to lavish love and attention upon her. The histrionic female should also show a readiness to abandon her offspring opportunistically (former mating partners or their close kin typically take care of the abandoned offspring).

 

[Laura]

I wonder if we can find some case studies that are misdiagnosed because the writer or analyst is not fully aware of the patterns of behavior of the female psychopath?

One case that comes to mind is Barbara Oakley's bool about Carole Alden entitled "Cold-Blooded Kindness."
http://www.amazon.com/Cold-Blooded-Kindness-Neuroquirks-Codependent-Reflections/dp/161614419X/ref=la_B000AP9ZR4_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1390125749&sr=1-4

The amazon description says:

Are some people predisposed to kindness to the point of being destructive to themselves and others? How much of our help is fulfilling our own needs—including those of our hidden passions? This is the true story of Carole Alden, a brilliant, yet eccentric mother of five, who evinced a deep and abiding need to help society’s outcasts. At her rural homestead an adopted pony mingled with llamas, goats, emus, and dozens of other creatures, familiar and exotic. But Carole’s expressed desire to help others extended beyond the animals she took in. It extended beyond her meager resources, even beyond the children she insisted she loved, yet sometimes left neglected in a surreal world of danger. Finally, in the remote reaches of Utah’s Great Basin, Carole Alden shot and killed her husband. Dragging his heavy body from the house, she headed for a makeshift grave. Was the murder self-defense? Premeditated? Or was something else altogether at hand? In this searing exploration of deadly codependency, the author takes the reader on a spellbinding voyage of discovery that examines the questions: Are some people naturally too caring? Is caring sometimes a mask for darker motives? Can science help us understand how our concerns for others can hurt everything we hold dear? This gripping story brings extraordinary insight to our deepest questions. Is kindness always the right answer? Is kindness always what it seems?

I think that the missing clue is that it isn't people that are "disposed to kindness to the point of being destructive," but rather that they FAKE being kind when really it is all about gaining power over others. I would say that the question "Is caring sometimes a mask for darker motives?" is getting closer to the truth: it is a MASK and is not real.

Thus, Oakley's premise that "our concerns for others can hurt everything we hold dear" probably has nothing to do with the subject of this case, Alden, though certainly it is true that projecting our inner caring landscape onto others and assuming they are like us can be a real problem.

A female psychopath might very easily use this mask to get a lot of things and to do a lot of damage and know perfectly well what she is doing and why. She could pretend to be an animal lover, an activist working on behalf of the down-trodden, etc, and all the while, it is about attention, creating discord and destroying the work of others, getting other people to "rescue" her when she has worn out her welcome or has been exposed in one place, etc.

 

[SMM]

These descriptions fit my mother to a T. I showed my sister the list and she agreed. I have considered her behaviour psychopathic with previous evidence but it is quite hard to detect precisely where the emotional-vacuum effect comes from, making it harder to detach. My father is also aware of her behaviour and has decided it is better for him to travel and return to see his children when appropriate than live with her.

It also significantly explains her inability to connect and understand normal human emotions and how being emotionally close to her opens the door to psychological deterioration while she maintains a mask of victim, which results in no outsider believing you. You really begin to question your sanity.

So, it seems to me that one of the reasons that is harder to recognize a female psychopath, is because she can act in hysteric behaviors (unlike men) who mimic behaviors exhibited by neurotic people. In witnessing that, the neurotic person will empathize with the psychopath and become willing to offer their sympathy and help, becoming her victims.

A very good point. Thanks for all the information on this topic - I think it is a huge factor missing from official diagnosis criteria of psychopathy and pathologicals.

 

[Chu]

Thus, Oakley's premise that "our concerns for others can hurt everything we hold dear" probably has nothing to do with the subject of this case, Alden, though certainly it is true that projecting our inner caring landscape onto others and assuming they are like us can be a real problem.

I agree. I thought that Oakley had missed the point when it came to Alden. Geez, that woman was capable of doing anything to elicit pity, to harm others. The only "kindness" she showed was when it made her look well. Her children were important when she could get money from somebody by using them as a hook. She was into weird sexual "habits", but blamed her husband of forcing her to do it. The police then found out that she was the one who was into all that. She murdered her husband, and very likely another man (unsolved death). From the look of her, she was a fragile hippie-looking, emotional and messed up woman. But if you stick to the facts and findings, the picture they depict is really creepy.

I wonder if we can find some case studies that are misdiagnosed because the writer or analyst is not fully aware of the patterns of behavior of the female psychopath?

Could this be one? Jane Toppan. Adrian Raine talks about her in The Anatomy of Evil. She murdered at least 31 people, was a"caring" nurse (or so did people believe at the time), but at the trial, she was found not guilty by reason of insanity. It might be too extreme, since she was obviously not the "garden variety" psychopath in the street, and it happened so long ago that it would be hard to tell. However, her story is shocking.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Toppan

Jane Toppan (1857–1938), born Honora Kelley, was an American serial killer. She confessed to 31 murders in 1901. She is quoted as saying that her ambition was "to have killed more people — helpless people — than any other man or woman who ever lived...".

Early life

Though scant records survive of Toppan's early years, it is known that her parents were Irish immigrants, and her mother, Bridget Kelley, died of tuberculosis when she was very young. Her father, Paul Kelley, was well known as an alcoholic and eccentric, nicknamed by those who knew him "Kelley the Crack" (crack as in "crackpot"). In later years Kelley would become the source of many local rumors concerning his supposed insanity, the most popular of which being that his madness finally drove him to sew his own eyelids closed while working as a tailor. The story's authenticity is dubious,[citation needed] but it accurately reflects the prevailing opinion of Paul Kelley as an extremely unbalanced person.

In 1863, only a few years after his wife's death, Kelley brought his two youngest children, the eight-year-old Delia Josephine and six-year-old Honora, to the Boston Female Asylum, an orphanage for indigent female children founded in 1799 by Mrs. Hannah Stillman. Kelley surrendered the two young girls, never to see them again. Documents from the asylum note that the two girls were "rescued from a very miserable home".

No records of Delia and Honora's experiences during their time in the asylum exist, but in less than two years, in November 1864, Honora Kelley was placed as an indentured servant in the home of Mrs. Ann C. Toppan of Lowell, Massachusetts. Though never formally adopted by the Toppans, Honora took on the surname of her benefactors and eventually became known as Jane.
Murders

In 1885, Toppan began training to be a nurse at Cambridge Hospital. During her residency, she used her patients as guinea pigs in experiments with morphine and atropine; she would alter their prescribed dosages to see what it did to their nervous systems. However, she would spend a lot of time alone with those patients, making up fake charts and medicating them to drift in and out of consciousness and even get into bed with them. It is not known whether any sexual activity went on when her victims were in this state but when Jane Toppan was asked after her arrest, she answered that she derived a sexual thrill from patients being near death, coming back to life and then dying again.[1] Toppan would administer a drug mixture to patients she chose as her victims, lie in bed with them and hold them close to her as they died.[1] This is quite rare for female serial killers, who usually murder for material gain and not sexual satisfaction.[2][3][4][5] She was recommended for the prestigious Massachusetts General Hospital in 1889; there, she claimed several more victims before being fired the following year. She briefly returned to Cambridge, but was soon dismissed for prescribing opiates recklessly. She then began a career as a private nurse, which flourished despite complaints of petty theft.

She began her poisoning spree in earnest in 1895 by killing her landlords. In 1899, she killed her foster sister Elizabeth with a dose of strychnine.

In 1901, Toppan moved in with the elderly Alden Davis and his family in Cataumet to take care of him after the death of his wife (whom Toppan herself had murdered). Within weeks, she killed Davis and two of his daughters. She then moved back to her hometown and began courting her late foster sister's husband, killing his sister and poisoning him so she could prove herself by nursing him back to health. She even poisoned herself to evoke his sympathy. The ruse did not work, however, and he cast her out of his house.

The surviving members of the Davis family ordered a toxicology exam on Alden Davis' youngest daughter. The report found that she had been poisoned, and local authorities put a police detail on Toppan. On October 29, 1901, she was arrested for murder.

By 1902, she had confessed to 31 murders. On June 23, in the Barnstable County Courthouse, she was found not guilty by reason of insanity and committed for life in the Taunton Insane Hospital.

Soon after the trial, one of William Randolph Hearst's newspapers, the New York Journal, printed what was purported to be Toppan's confession to her lawyer that she had killed more than 31 people, and that she wanted the jury to find her insane so she could eventually have a chance at being released. Whether or not that was truly Toppan's intention is unknown. She remained at Taunton for the rest of her life.

 

[Laura]

I thought that Oakley had missed the point when it came to Alden. Geez, that woman was capable of doing anything to elicit pity, to harm others. The only "kindness" she showed was when it made her look well. Her children were important when she could get money from somebody by using them as a hook. She was into weird sexual "habits", but blamed her husband of forcing her to do it. The police then found out that she was the one who was into all that. She murdered her husband, and very likely another man (unsolved death). From the look of her, she was a fragile hippie-looking, emotional and messed up woman. But if you stick to the facts and findings, the picture they depict is really creepy.

This description highlighted above is quite interesting and should be borne in mind, I think. Very often when a person presents themselves as fragile, abused, overly-emotional and "messed-up", and you compare it with their actions over time, a very different picture might emerge.

 

[Hildegarda]

One more true crime book portraying a female psychopath comes to mind: A Heart Full of Lies by Ann Rule.

_http://www.amazon.com/Heart-Full-Lies-Story-Desire-ebook/dp/B000FC0PLC

In perhaps the most profound character portrait she has ever drawn, America's bestselling true-crime writer, Ann Rule, asks, Can the female really be deadlier than the male? In Heart Full of Lies, she answers that question in one of her most intriguing tales ever -- a riveting story of seduction, betrayal, and murder.

Liysa and Chris Northon seemed the epitome of idyllic lovers when they married on a moonlit beach in Hawaii. Their friends admired the romantic couple: Chris -- tall, athletic, handsome with a thatch of blond hair, a pilot for Hawaiian Airlines -- and Liysa -- attractive, charismatic, seductive, an acclaimed surf photographer, with a tanned, perfect body. Their son, Bjorn, looked just like his dad, and they were raising Liysa's son by a previous marriage. They had beautiful homes on the mainland and in Hawaii.

But it wasn't long before Chris saw a side of Liysa that he hadn't glimpsed before. Nothing was quite enough for her -- she wanted more money, more property, and a future that included fame as a Hollywood screenwriter. She complained to her closest friends that her husband was a heavy drinker who beat her. The marriage seemed to be unraveling, but Chris struggled to hold it together, afraid he'd be separated from Bjorn and from Liysa's son, Papako. And then the worst happened.

On a sunny morning in October 2000, Chris Northon lay dead in a sleeping bag at a campsite beside a pristine river, while his wife drove four hours to a friend's house, sobbing inconsolably. She appeared to have been beaten, and had a black eye and bruises on her knee. Was Chris's death a tragic accident or a deliberate homicide? Was Liysa involved? Questions arose that made Oregon State detectives suspicious, yet her family and friends stood staunchly by her, incredulous that anybody would ask such questions.

Ann Rule became involved with the mystery of Chris's death when one of his fellow pilots at Hawaiian Airlines contacted her, and only later did she learn that the ranking Oregon State Police investigator had thought of her to tell this bizarre story. A book that leads the reader from Hawaii to the Northwest to Hollywood, Heart Full of Lies is an extraordinary character study as well as a brilliant investigative report that will keep you enthralled to the very last page.

It's a gripping narrative that gives a very good feel for the kind of people Liysa and Chris were.

I noted one similarity between Liysa and Carol Alden: they both were exceedingly messy people. Carol Alden's animals were poorly cared for, and her house was a slum. Liysa has built more wealth through husband-hopping and real estate investment, but Ann Rule notes that she never ever cleaned up after herself or others, and her personal space would get completely trashed within a very short time.

Both of them were also very creative (Carol was an artist, and Liysa a photographer), so there is a temptation to say that they were simply free spirits who were above mundane tasks and needed to have no constraints with using their personal belongings in order to achieve creative freedom. But someone I knew had compiled a list of images from the studios of famous artists, and it turned out that, even though they would be a lot of objects piled up there, the space would be actually, as a rule, well ordered and organized.

IMO extreme disorder in personal space and belongings reflects the chaos in the person's mind. Especially if the person isn't obviously depressed or mentally ill and has grown up in a well-adjusted environment and with childhood habits, that could be a signal that a personality disorder is present.

 

[Voyageur]

I was looking for a deceit video on this condition and have yet only come across this one (which does not knit some aspects discussed) _http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=y_oAGv_tXHc called 'Female Psychopaths in the Community & Intimate Relationships'. The narrator seems to touch on many of the examples above, and near the end, discusses the "treat-ability" of either a primary or secondary psychopathic disorder, which is not seen by others as being treatable. I'll keep my eyes open for a more comprehensive video discussion.

My SO was telling me last night of a female who played a professional role in our community and eventually snapped. Our experience with her prior was to see first hand her lies and manipulations. Furthermore, the spin put on to extricate herself from what she had done was equally bizarre. Furthermore, she has a way of eliciting pity - feeling sorry for her because of the tails she weaves (a woman told my SO that she is trying to help her, yet she knows she is toxic/negative and she does not know how to end their friendship). In her case, her partner (same profession) is cut from the same cloth; lies, cheats on her and is violent. Three years ago she caught him at his indiscretions (having drinks in a public place with another woman) and threatened him with something sharp and jagged in the same public place - they went to court against each other two years ago, with her getting a slap on the wrist and he moving away. Another year later he came begging with tales of love and being soooo sorry, and she took him back only to now cycle back through the violence again.

Is seems that these two would either be labeled as psychopathic/sociopaths and came together in union, perhaps one being a primary and one being secondary, along with the pathological nuance traits associated in perspective of the male/female mental pathologies directing their actions.

 

[SMM]

I was looking for a deceit video on this condition and have yet only come across this one (which does not knit some aspects discussed) _http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=y_oAGv_tXHc called 'Female Psychopaths in the Community & Intimate Relationships'. The narrator seems to touch on many of the examples above, and near the end, discusses the "treat-ability" of either a primary or secondary psychopathic disorder, which is not seen by others as being treatable. I'll keep my eyes open for a more comprehensive video discussion.

My SO was telling me last night of a female who played a professional role in our community and eventually snapped. Our experience with her prior was to see first hand her lies and manipulations. Furthermore, the spin put on to extricate herself from what she had done was equally bizarre. Furthermore, she has a way of eliciting pity - feeling sorry for her because of the tails she weaves (a woman told my SO that she is trying to help her, yet she knows she is toxic/negative and she does not know how to end their friendship). In her case, her partner (same profession) is cut from the same cloth; lies, cheats on her and is violent. Three years ago she caught him at his indiscretions (having drinks in a public place with another woman) and threatened him with something sharp and jagged in the same public place - they went to court against each other two years ago, with her getting a slap on the wrist and he moving away. Another year later he came begging with tales of love and being soooo sorry, and she took him back only to now cycle back through the violence again.

Is seems that these two would either be labeled as psychopathic/sociopaths and came together in union, perhaps one being a primary and one being secondary, along with the pathological nuance traits associated in perspective of the male/female mental pathologies directing their actions.

Thanks for the video voyageur, very informative!

The story you recounted sounds like those two are playing a game with each other to see who will come out on top. I guess the man begging to have her back made her feel she had the upper hand only for the situation to return to its previous modus operandi. The relationship cycle/dynamics sound very toxic. How much impact did she have on the community in her professional role?

It is easier in our society for female psychopaths to elicit pity, which they attempt to use to their advantage.

 

[stellar]

It seems plausible that a histrionic personality style with overlap into borderline areas especially under stress characterizes the female psychopath while a narcissistic personality style with antisocial character traits often characterize a male psychopath.

Trying to understand the various emotional displays that a female psychopath might manifest, the following came to my attention. Even though there is no distinction on gender, it is still useful:

Indeed, and I want to emphasize what we SEE up front with these types:

……
Geez, describes my mother TO A TEE!

 

[l apprenti de forgeron]

I thought that Oakley had missed the point when it came to Alden. Geez, that woman was capable of doing anything to elicit pity, to harm others. The only "kindness" she showed was when it made her look well. Her children were important when she could get money from somebody by using them as a hook. She was into weird sexual "habits", but blamed her husband of forcing her to do it. The police then found out that she was the one who was into all that. She murdered her husband, and very likely another man (unsolved death). From the look of her, she was a fragile hippie-looking, emotional and messed up woman. But if you stick to the facts and findings, the picture they depict is really creepy.

This description highlighted above is quite interesting and should be borne in mind, I think. Very often when a person presents themselves as fragile, abused, overly-emotional and "messed-up", and you compare it with their actions over time, a very different picture might emerge.

It's like psychopathic women really have nothing real female. Only to generate the appearance of being more in touch with their emotions, mimicking normal women.
I wonder if feminism and the struggle for women's rights, a noble and justified struggle, at some point there have been infiltrated and run by psychopathic women. Since "the Win" for women to compete in the labor market ruled by psychopaths, really seems to have affected for worse in the overall health of normal women.
With this I mean that obviously a woman locked in a house hardly feel made. But decades of propaganda "realization through labor market" seems a trap. Since there is no public education to deal with psychopaths, normal women were affected with a degree of tremendous stress. As the sexist joke saying that women live (or lived) more for not working (actually, they working very much, but at home!.) So women could deal with the system from the margins thereof, and not to be so affected. Obviously that women need to work. But this way only managed to attack a high percentage of the population that was healthier. And many can now feel freer with what have given to them, when they are more slaves.
Any way, propaganda did effect among normal women. Only pathological and psychopaths can adapt to this sick labor system.

It's a gripping narrative that gives a very good feel for the kind of people Liysa and Chris were.

I noted one similarity between Liysa and Carol Alden: they both were exceedingly messy people. Carol Alden's animals were poorly cared for, and her house was a slum. Liysa has built more wealth through husband-hopping and real estate investment, but Ann Rule notes that she never ever cleaned up after herself or others, and her personal space would get completely trashed within a very short time.

Both of them were also very creative (Carol was an artist, and Liysa a photographer), so there is a temptation to say that they were simply free spirits who were above mundane tasks and needed to have no constraints with using their personal belongings in order to achieve creative freedom. But someone I knew had compiled a list of images from the studios of famous artists, and it turned out that, even though they would be a lot of objects piled up there, the space would be actually, as a rule, well ordered and organized.

IMO extreme disorder in personal space and belongings reflects the chaos in the person's mind. Especially if the person isn't obviously depressed or mentally ill and has grown up in a well-adjusted environment and with childhood habits, that could be a signal that a personality disorder is present.

Very good points!
Is a great thread, thank you all.

 

[Weller]

It's like psychopathic women really have nothing real female. Only to generate the appearance of being more in touch with their emotions, mimicking normal women.

I had been thinking along this line, that psychopathic females are faking typically ‘female’ emotional concerns, and exploiting the manipulative benefits that come from the culture’s biases and fears of ‘female problems’ (in both senses, physical and mental). I also had the thought that women’s lib functioned to legitimize male psychopathic traits for women to climb the corporate ladder; nurturing abilities in a corporate setting are considered passive and weak.

It might be interesting to throw the concept of 'mothering' in the mix with female psychopathy. I wouldn't think a female psychopath can actually mother or nurture in an authentic way, but by cultural dictates she must at least put on a good show to legitimize her ostensibly feminine role to gain pity or to manipulate others.

The culture accepts as a given that most women want to have a child, or at least have the desire to nurture something, even if it’s a couple cats or backyard tomatoes. In the case of my own possibly psychopathic female relatives, I do wonder if the inability of a female psychopath to mother (she neglects the children she does have, or she leaves them in the care of another, or remains childless and avoids nurturing of any kind--even plants, animals, maybe even housekeeping) is a big signal. I wonder if the psychopathic female’s inability to nurture unconditionally is a handicap that she must work diligently to keep secret--by pity ploys, exaggerated illness/trauma, etc.--or it will give her away.

 

[H-KQGE]

It's like psychopathic women really have nothing real female. Only to generate the appearance of being more in touch with their emotions, mimicking normal women.

I had been thinking along this line, that psychopathic females are faking typically ‘female’ emotional concerns, and exploiting the manipulative benefits that come from the culture’s biases and fears of ‘female problems’ (in both senses, physical and mental). I also had the thought that women’s lib functioned to legitimize male psychopathic traits for women to climb the corporate ladder; nurturing abilities in a corporate setting are considered passive and weak.

It might be interesting to throw the concept of 'mothering' in the mix with female psychopathy. I wouldn't think a female psychopath can actually mother or nurture in an authentic way, but by cultural dictates she must at least put on a good show to legitimize her ostensibly feminine role to gain pity or to manipulate others.

The culture accepts as a given that most women want to have a child, or at least have the desire to nurture something, even if it’s a couple cats or backyard tomatoes. In the case of my own possibly psychopathic female relatives, I do wonder if the inability of a female psychopath to mother (she neglects the children she does have, or she leaves them in the care of another, or remains childless and avoids nurturing of any kind--even plants, animals, maybe even housekeeping) is a big signal. I wonder if the psychopathic female’s inability to nurture unconditionally is a handicap that she must work diligently to keep secret--by pity ploys, exaggerated illness/trauma, etc.--or it will give her away.

I have thought this for a long time now. With various type of psychopaths roaming all over I think that there maybe less of a variety of female psychopaths. The "masks" being on as tight as some women "tightly" wear their make-up, it would seem that that this might not be the case but, society has a huge bias where women or girls are concerned. A child, young woman or an elderly woman, there lies a "cloudy lens" that makes the huge blind spot of the existence of psychopaths even more dangerous.

Because of the societal biases, the psychopaths of the day in different eras would get a kind of "slackness" in their behavioural routines or so I think, & anyway they are not truly creative so the mimicking of femaleness I imagine would have a certain look or feel to it that one who experienced them over time would start to perceive. Of course lacking the knowledge & power of naming the problem leaves a vulnerable state, but depending on the individual, they would try to steer clear of the woman in whatever way possible.

This manipulation from the psychopath would be less obvious where the males are concerned as it is prevalent throughout our culture, females however, have (somewhat) normally functioning female minds, ponerized minds, & the same or similar types in the male populace. Then there's the less critical minds on both sides, each spouting the social mores manipulated into existence by the most ruthless & dominating psychopaths (& characteropaths) feeding at the apex of the hierarchy. In my mind, they would ease-up in the way they "feed" & stick to tactics that we are all accustomed to. With each generation of these predators, the mothering being so bad & society "evolving" (homosexuality, women "allowed" to do this & that), from what I can tell, they've pretty much stuck to the script, as it were. This literally means that there will be vast amounts of them that will read as carbon copy case studies, & if a person pursues the trail of investigating them & finds accurate sources, then it would be blatantly obvious WHO is, the WHY, etc.

In my family there's just an abundance of these predators that all read like case studies, half of them are contained in P.P. & others in other works. At this point, I think that some will be conscious of their lack of mothering skills (not that they actually know what it is but that it doesn't match-up to others) & seek to fix it somehow, whilst others are convinced in their magnificence & hold on dear to their grandiosity & supposed generosity, their "spirituality" (religion) & will have a persecutory complex, well, if there a characteropath anyway.

 

[Voyageur]

How much impact did she have on the community in her professional role?

Realtor - a very devious one.

 

[Chu]

It's like psychopathic women really have nothing real female. Only to generate the appearance of being more in touch with their emotions, mimicking normal women.

Yeah. Like male psychopaths have nothing really "male". That is, if we speak about healthy traits. The problem is that they can fake so well!

I wonder if feminism and the struggle for women's rights, a noble and justified struggle, at some point there have been infiltrated and run by psychopathic women. Since "the Win" for women to compete in the labor market ruled by psychopaths, really seems to have affected for worse in the overall health of normal women.

Very likely. What a better ground for feeding than a movement where they can be the "victims fighting for their rights"? It reminds me of how Lobaczewski described when psychopaths join movements like this and start ponerizing them. They do feel different and mistreated by society. But not like normal people do. They just want to dominate, infiltrate, and rule.

In case some of you haven't watched it, one of the best portrayals of the female psychopath I've ever seen is in Mildred Pierce, with Joan Crawford. I don't want to spoil it, but just look at her daughter's behavior!

Synopsis: Whatever Veda wants, her mother, Mildred Pierce provides. Even if Mildred must end her marriage, climb atop the male-dominated business world and marry a wealthy man she doesn't love.

 

[SeekinTruth]

Yeah, it's very likely that the Feminist/Women's Lib movement was infiltrated and ponerized like everything else. Some have suggested that it was a preemptive move by the elites/PTB so a real, authentic movement doesn't grow without their control. Rockefeller was supposed to have told Aaron Russo that the whole thing was created by them (elites). John Taylor Gatto and others also have mentioned that the state wanted to take "possession" fully of raising children for their own purposes, and mandatory formal education was one of the methods among many.

All that seems to have been achieved by the feminist/women's lib movement is to be able to get way more women out of the house and into the pathological and highly stressful workforce environment; and make them part of the tax base. While their children were even more open to be programmed and controlled. To this day women are paid less than men for doing the same job generally. I mean, if even equal pay wasn't achieved, one has to ask: what was it all about?