field notes from working with a sociopath

alwyn

Padawan Learner
Well, thought I'd report in on my current research, as the subjects of sociopaths was what brought me to this site, and I have endeavored to use what I've read here in 'working' with them (knowing there is no working WITH them, there is only containing the damage, so to speak.)

For a quick update, I have encountered a sociopath who married my ex, and is now seeking custody of my child, and otherwise making my life a living hell. (At least as far as I let her...I know all the maxims about controlling my own emotional reactions, but this is my kid here...)

What I've noticed is that a sociopath (unless you are aware of what you are looking at, or listening to) will always 'win' in a one on one confrontation if you get into verbal interplay with them. The one I've dealt with seems to have a natural ability to mesmerize her victims, who all come away thinking they're dealing with the sweetest person in the whole world. Those who are subjected to this mesmerized state will look at someone who is NOT under the sway or 'spell' as the deviant. (This backs up what my old Gurdjieffian teacher said, about the world being 'upside down and backwards'...meaning the switch from subjective to objective reality.) The sociopath only seems to be 'outed' as it were, when she is thwarted in some way, at which point blatant manipulations or rage surface. She has managed to bamboozle most of the men who are associated with this custody case—talk about glib and superficial charm!—from lawyers, advocates and evaluators, all are completely convinced of her sterling qualities...the evaluator even went so far as to say "I don't believe what other people have said about————".

I started thinking about these qualities of interaction in terms of what I know about basic electronics, and the behavior of particals...admitedly from a layperson's perspective. Given that a sociopath has plenty of charm and attraction...if you deal one on one, you are subject to this huge gravitational field which is now polarized...kind of like the matter and antimatter battles of a famed star trek episode...the one where two brothers from opposite polarity universes got stuck in a battle. So, like two poles of a magnet, there you are, stuck together, as long as the polarity occupies your attention. Given that a sociopaths' charm is ever so much bigger than anything mere humans could put out (I know I"m speaking in generalities here, but bear with me) any casual observer looking in from the outside will only see the big bright shiny sociopath...being set upon by the rabid human.

So, if we cannot confront head on, how can we deal with the sociopath? I'm a pacifist, so blowing them away is out of the question (although ever so tempting). ;-) In my case, I networked with the people that she was talking to, in this case my son's teacher, other parents at the school, and neighbors. This is key, you must not become isolated, because the sociopath counts on your isolation to work their dark magic. (Please, magic is a metaphor here.) I found it ever so enlightening when I got off the farm to talk to my neighbors. They had heard terrible tales. I found it stimulating to talk to the teacher, same thing. The problem is to link all these people together, and to get them on the same page, talking to each other. Next, I located the people this sociopath had slipped off the charming mask for, and got them talking to me and to each other.

This brings me to my operating theory. I think it takes at least a triangulation of people, three or (preferably) better, all looking at the work of the sociopath, in order to bring it into the light of day. One on one does NOT work—at least in terms of 'outing' the SP. It will take a group, all communicating to each other and to society at large.
This is a very tricky proposition. I mean, where do we draw the line? It's a thin line between social justice and witch hunts, and we must be careful not to become the thing we fight (take a look at the history of Israel after the second world war for an illustration of this one).

Whatever you do, don't lose your cool. The legal world, and much of the rest of it, tends to judge people on how well they quell their emotions (a case of sociopathic transference to society if ever there was one)...especially since it is ever so hard to keep your emotions in check after being zapped by a SP. (I laughed when I read Laura's article quoting a study about the 'look' of furrowed brow and puzzlement seen on victims of SP's —sorry I don't have the link—it sure described me these past few months.

Anyway, my battle is not over yet, but the tactics described seem to be working, I'll let you know how it goes.
Good luck with yours!
 
I don't think you are dealing with a sociopath but rather a psychopath, if what you are describing is accurate. You might want to do some research so that you can keep the definitions and categories as clear as possible in a very muddy field!
 
The psychopath seems in my perspective, to also have money ready, from family or even friends, to fight any battle. Only of course from my personal experience. Which I've encountered my entire life. Many, including my parents, my adoptive parents and even my real brother. My experiences of these types of people is that they have a hidden life, that has an air of kindness, but they are ruthless and terrible 'at home.'
 
Laura said:
I don't think you are dealing with a sociopath but rather a psychopath, if what you are describing is accurate. You might want to do some research so that you can keep the definitions and categories as clear as possible in a very muddy field!
Well, I'm open to research, 'fer sure', and I can certainly agree with the need to be as clear as possible with our technical terms. I believe I have read most of what is posted here on this subject as well as the popular literature recomended here, and I have done further studies elsewhere, over the years, on similiar issues. Let me state what I understood from it, and if you see a way I can clarify the term further, by all means, let's! The reason I use the term sociopath is because this person is 'passing for normal' and has been convicted of no felonious crimes ( or misdemeanors, either, she's very slick.). The 'crimes' commited by this person have been more those of emotional abuse, and marauding the heart (which in many cases is ever so much worse, come to think of it).

From my understanding, a psychopath tends to be more phsysically violent. For instance, if they are of the Charles Manson-cultish variety, others will act out their requests, or if they are not inclined to groups, will be the loner 'slasher' type. I thought I understood that psychopaths usually indulge in some sort of physically gross 'power over', i.e., rape, torture, murder or other mayhem. Sociopaths have seemed to me, from what I understand both here and elsewhere, to be more the petty tyrant variety..I hear you when you say psychopath, though. I'm awfully tempted to call her that myself. On the other hand, why upgrade a petty tyrant in power if you don't have to.

I'm also currently wondering, given your statement that this person IS a psychopath, if perhaps the psychopath is just the peak of the sociopathic wave, so to speak. And I'm also wondering if the corollary of 'triangulation' ,as it were, will provide enough interference in the process to nip the cycle short of it's murderous apogee of completion. So, here is the 'terror of the situation and the horror of the play' as my old teacher used to put it. Indeed, sociopathy and ponerology is the critical situation in the world today, and I believe it necessitates all who can do so to work on this problem and to create and effect solutions. It's not enough to simply state the problem, we must DO, in the strict Gurdjieffian sense of the term. ...



Anyway, that's my current hypothesis. I'll let you know how it works out in practical application, and I will be happy to look at any research you could point to to clarify our terms. Thanks for your consideration.
 
Actually, the diagnostic controversy has it the other way around: the sociopath is one who is "anti-social," that is, they exhibit clear anti-social tendencies from violence to petty crimes. That's what "sociopath" means "socially sick."

It is the psychopath that is the "snake in a suit," the person who can appear as a nice person all the while stabbing you in the back.

If you go here: http://www.cassiopaea.com/cassiopaea/psychopath.htm ... you will notice links on the left of the page. One of them is "Psychopathy vs. Antisocial Personality Disorder and Sociopathy: A Discussion by Robert Hare" which is here: http://www.cassiopaea.com/cassiopaea/psychopathy_aspd_sociopathy.htm

Maybe this will help clear things up a bit.
 
alwyn said:
From my understanding, a psychopath tends to be more phsysically violent. For instance, if they are of the Charles Manson-cultish variety, others will act out their requests, or if they are not inclined to groups, will be the loner 'slasher' type. I thought I understood that psychopaths usually indulge in some sort of physically gross 'power over', i.e., rape, torture, murder or other mayhem. Sociopaths have seemed to me, from what I understand both here and elsewhere, to be more the petty tyrant variety..I hear you when you say psychopath, though. I'm awfully tempted to call her that myself. On the other hand, why upgrade a petty tyrant in power if you don't have to.
I think this is one of the major misconceptions of psychopathy. Most of the articles and books I have read from recommendations here have actually changed my thinking on this dramatically. There is a big nomenclature / classification issue in the field and there has been for decades. From what I gather it is part of the problem that prevents us from seeing that there is just this other type of human being out there and basically the ones with the violence tendency are the one's unable to operate in the normal world. The majority of psychopaths are functional, business people, doctors, lawyers, politicians, teachers, policemen, ...you name it.

If you read 'The Mask Of Sanity ~An Attempt to Clarify Some Issues About the
So-Called Psychopathic Personality', by Hervey Cleckley, I think you might get an idea by example of some severe manifestations without this idea of 'a psychopath tends to be violent'. At least it opened my eyes.

Here are some of the Contents examples:

5 Max. 29
6 Roberta, 46
7 Arnold, 55
8 Tom, 64
9 George, 70
10 Pierre, 77
11 Frank, 93
12 Anna, 102
13 Jack, 121
14 Chester, 127
15 Walter, 136
16 Joe, 146
17 Milt, 159
18 Gregory, 167
19 Stanley, 174
PART II -- Incomplete manifestations or suggestions of the disorder
20 Degrees of disguise in essential pathology, 188
21 The psychopath as businessman, 193
22 The psychopath as man of the world, 196
23 The psychopath as gentleman, 199
24 The psychopath as scientist, 203
25 The psychopath as physician, 205
26 The psychopath as psychiatrist, 208

You can download it as a PDF still from QFG.

http://www.quantumfuture.net/store/downloads.php
http://www.quantumfuture.net/store/sanity_1.PdF

Another real good place that was an eye opener for me was the QFG research page:

http://cassiopaea.com/cassiopaea/psychopath.htm

And the recommended books:

http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=4718.msg31032#msg31032

I guess I am almost at a 180 from the thinking where I once was which was also the 'annoying sociopath' and psychopaths are just the bad one's, killers, criminals etc., the violent bent. I think the entire mess of disorders are all influenced top down by psychopathy and it acts like an invisible net planet wide holding us all captive.
 
Laura said:
Actually, the diagnostic controversy has it the other way around: the sociopath is one who is "anti-social," that is, they exhibit clear anti-social tendencies from violence to petty crimes. That's what "sociopath" means "socially sick."

It is the psychopath that is the "snake in a suit," the person who can appear as a nice person all the while stabbing you in the back.

If you go here: http://www.cassiopaea.com/cassiopaea/psychopath.htm ... you will notice links on the left of the page. One of them is "Psychopathy vs. Antisocial Personality Disorder and Sociopathy: A Discussion by Robert Hare" which is here: http://www.cassiopaea.com/cassiopaea/psychopathy_aspd_sociopathy.htm

Maybe this will help clear things up a bit.
Thanks, I reread the posts, and I can see where the confusion crept in, because many lay-people (as well as some diagnosticians, it seems) still use the terms interchangeably. I will stick to the term psychopath for the 'snake in a suit'. BTW, I appreciate your diligence in this matter.
 

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom