Women Who Love Psychopaths


FOTCM Member
Women Who Love Psychopaths: Sandra L. Brown, MA and Dr. Liane Leedom, MD, authors in the field of
psychopathy are writing a book on women who love psychopaths and are seeking women willing to
anonymously tell their stories, answer a survey of questions about the relationship dynamics, and be
willing to take a temperament assessment.

If you have been in a relationship (preferably with a diagnosed anti-social, sociopath, psychopath or one with psychopathic tendencies) please contact us at: HowToSpot(at)yahoo.com.

Materials will be sent to you. Thank you.
Laura said:
Women Who Love Psychopaths: Sandra L. Brown, MA and Dr. Liane Leedom, MD, authors in the field of
psychopathy are writing a book on women who love psychopaths and are seeking women willing to
anonymously tell their stories, answer a survey of questions about the relationship dynamics, and be
willing to take a temperament assessment.

If you have been in a relationship (preferably with a diagnosed anti-social, sociopath, psychopath or one with psychopathic tendencies) please contact us at: HowToSpot(at)yahoo.com.

Materials will be sent to you. Thank you.
Sounds interesting and therapeutic.. I messaged them
Sandra Brown is a very interesting lady. See her website here:

She does workshops, see here:

...which says in part:

The Dangerous Man workshops has been all over the country for years now bringing the eye-opening and butt-kicking message of dangerous relationships to women everywhere.

This power-packed reality-jolting two hours will make any woman sit up and take notice! Over a thousand women have now heard The Dangerous Man Workshop.

What’s In The Workshop?

In Sandy’s butt-kicking but light hearted way she is able to come in the backdoor of women’s psyche and make them hear the hard truths about their choices.

An information-crammed two hours, Sandy is able to teach them:

* 8 categories of dangerous men

* Help them understand WHY her red flags are important

* Insight into why she has stopped listening to her red flags

* Information on how to develop her own DO NOT DATE LIST of characteristics take from her own personal dating history

* Knowledge about signs and symptoms of dangerousness

* Which men CAN’T change and why
She also has a website for her first book: How to Spot a Dangerous Man:

The whole reason I wrote ‘How to Spot a Dangerous Man Before You Get Involved’ is because 80% of women DON’T know what they are looking at, what the signs and symptoms of permanently pathological men are, and how to break up safely.
She explained to me part of what she tells women in her workshops:

I do think the problem is the lack of public psychopathy education everywhere. That has been the goal of my institute since I wrote my book and started the website.

Additionally, because we are so poorly trained in the general public about any kind of chronic mental illness, it stands to reason we know even less about the permanent disorders. Everytime I do my workshops I say, "We believe in medical medicine that there are some disorders that are permanent... we don't expect a mentally retarded person to someday not be retarded or for someone with cystic fibrosis to be cured of it. But by God, we don't believe it in psychology. Everything to us is fixable, give a pill, put them in therapy. Those of us who work with the incurables will tell you, that's not so! And I'm here to teach you about all the different disorders that are not curable and practically untreatable."

I teach more than just about the psychopath, although he is a large focus, but I explain what Axis II diagnosis mean because so many of the women are with these kinds of Axis II guys waiting for them to change-- where by the nature of what is wrong with them, they can change very little. I spend a lot of time discussing 'hard-wiring' in Axis II.

The psychopath and other Axis II remain hidden because we don't believe in permanent mental disorders.
What ever he is doing is a 'mood' or a 'current unhappiness.' We can't spot what we don't even know.

So we try to explain away every behavior and of course the psychopath lives in dichotomies--so one day he is
loving and the next he is hateful -- it keeps the head swimming to where one is not even thinking about his inconsistency or his dichotomies - they are trying to emotionally survive and figure out if this is her problem and not his (as he suggests). He is smoke and mirrors---deflecting all pathology onto her and hiding behind the smoke.

We spend too much time studying the criminal psychopath who makes up such a small overall portion of the psychopath community. Hare's book 'Snakes In Suits' was a great insight into the corporate psychopath. Just the title reminds the world that it's not just the Ted Bundy's of the world we have to look out for.

Serial killers are so small in number compared to the numbers of socialized psychopaths who are doing the same
thing on an emotional, financial, and spiritual level to women. Physical rape is not the only defining experience of having experienced the raping power of psychopath -- to the psyche, the soul, and the pocketbook!

Here in the states men are taking workshops on the weekends to learn how to use subtle hypnosis and neuro linguistic programming to get the women to sleep with them in one night. It's a challenge amongst themselves. While they have to go 'learn' the hypnotic inductions, the anchoring hand movements, the deepening techniques, the psychopath by his very nature, already knows how to do it. Some said to me, "I don't know how I know this stuff. I've been working women over since I was a child. I just know how to do it. I can't really explain it."

Women who have abuse histories are naturally 'trance-y' anyway due to PTSD and light dissociation. I think
it's pretty easy to draw them in to a light trance and then work his magic linguistically.

One of the criteria I use when determing a personality disorder is 'do they take responsibility for their actions.' If they don't, this is ALWAYS an indicator of pathology in some form.

For the Christian types, I tell my clients, prayer is not going to change his personality structure. He will TELL you it will, but it will not. Pray for him, if you want to, while in another healthier relationship!
So, there it is: Incurable and untreatable; what we have been saying all along.

Elsewhere she writes:

‘what makes a man truly psychopathic and dangerous are things that actually can’t be treated or cured. What can make a woman safe is to know how to spot those traits early and how to detach and de-tangle if she is already in one.�

CONTRARY TO POPULAR BELIEFS—psychopaths are not that uncommon. They aren’t necessarily low-life criminals—although they can be that too.

So many of them are successful business men—they can be anyone actually. And another myth is that psychopaths are only the rapists and serial killers. Actually, those are a very small percentage of the psychopaths.

The reality is, our culture is very psychopathic and if a woman dates, she needs to know what they look like because her chances of encountering one are fairly decent odds. Even though he may not kill you, you will NEVER be the same from having encountered a psychopath that dismantles YOUR psyche.
I think every woman should get a copy of Sandy's book asap.
Thanks so much for this information Laura.....what a great resource for women, and a great example of how knowledge protects.
I think that all women need this information and they need to share it with their friends and relatives. See my post on another thread here:
Hi Laura,

Having just managed to break free from the worse episode of my life being married to what I now understand to be a psychopath, I would be more than happy to share my story to try and allow people the benefit of this situation. Especially the manner in which I now realised that I found out everything that is labelled as such without having any prior medical experience or knowledge of the terminology used on these websites before. I did forward you a personal e-mail on your website when I first found the site a couple of days ago however forgot to mention that after all this, I then find my husband had been on schizophrenia drugs the whole time too whilst telling me they were for something else!
I hope this is not off topic, but if it is, please forgive me but this
brought me some curious questions I have to ask since this topic
is about helping women to 'spot the dangerous man' and I wondered
if there is ever help needed for a man to 'spot the dangerous woman'?

I mean personally, I would be totally ignorant if I was ever to cross
paths with a 'dangerous woman' and maybe it is because we (as men)
are programmed to think that women are "domiciled" and it rarely if ever
happens that they are 'dangerous' to men? Men may be programmed to
believe that they can easily defend themselves (at least, physically) against
(almost) anyone (as if invincible) but then again we are not talking about the
cunning mind of the psychopath (which is gender neutral) and this may be
the Achilles Heel for men (as well as woman)?

I look around me and I fail to see any 'dangerous women' and I
often see that it is men who are the most prevalent abusers and
or psychopaths at least on the public face.

Am I then to assume that psychopaths mostly of the male gender?
Dant, I think men do need help to spot the dangerous woman too. You are right that men are programmed to think themselves as superior and thus let their guards down before women. About the causes for the lack of help for men in this area (compared to that available for women), I have some speculations as follows. The first reason, I think, is exactly the above programming. That is, men are seen (by themselves and others) as stronger and are expected to be able to defend themselves so no help is needed. The second reason might be that the abuse that men suffer from psychopathic women is generally less noticeable by others. It is mostly psychological abuse rather than physical one. Finally, and this is not my speculation, psychopathy is indeed more prevalent in men than women, according to Robert Hare.
There's a very good book that can help give a good background for what to look for in a "dangerous woman."
Unholy Hungers by Barbara Hort.

Most often, men get caught in the "feminine vampire" trap - the "black widow."

Are there female psychopaths? Yes, apparently so, but fewer of them than male psychopaths. I think this is discussed in a thread here - the genetics of it and why a woman with one psychopathy gene can escape the manifestation of the condition.
I have long intended to start a thread to discuss Sandra Brown's book "Women Who Love Psychopaths" but up to now, haven't had the time. I actually don't have it now, but I'm making it because of a post in another thread that brought the topic into rather clear focus. Here is a quote of the post that got me going:
Okay, didn't see anything about this yet, so I decided that I would post it. This is the link to the video (audio rather) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRctKSeyQ-s, while below is a transcript. Video was posted Jan 15th of 2009, so I would assume that it is fairly recent.

Rick Warren asks 30,000 Saddleback Church members to be as dedicated as the young followers of Adolf Hitler.

Minute 33:00 of speech. Warren describes the global plan.

[Minute ~33:00]

"What is the vision for the next 25 years? I'll tell you what it is.

It is the global expansion of the kingdom of God.

It is the mobilization of this church.

And the third part is the dream of the radical devotion of every believer.

Now, I choose that word 'radical' intentionally, because only radicals change the world.

Everything done in this world is done by passionate people.

Moderate people get moderately nothing done.

And moderation will never slay the global giants..."

[minute 48:45]

"In 1939, in a stadium much like this, in Munich Germany...

...they packed it out with young men and women in brown shirts...

...for a fanatical man standing behind a podium named Adolf Hitler, the personification of evil.

And in that stadium, those in brown shirts formed with their bodies a sign that said...

...in the whole stadium, "Hitler, we are yours."

And they nearly took the world.

Lenin once said, "give me 100 committed, totally committed men...

...and I'll change the world." And, he nearly did.

A few years ago, they took the sayings of Chairman Mao, in China, put them in a little red book...

...and a group of young people commited them to memory and put it in their minds...

...and they took that nation, the largest nation in the world by storm...

...because they committed to memory the sayings of the Chairman Mao.

When I hear those kinds of stories, I think 'what would happen if American Christian, if world Christians...

...if just the Christians in this stadium, followers of Christ would say 'Jesus, we are yours'?

What kind of spiritual awakening would we have?

[minute 51:50]

Jesus said, 'I want you to do this publicly.' So what I want you to do is take the card...

...and in just a minute, and if you say 'Rick, I am willing to serve God's purposes in my generation.'

I want you to open up to the sign that says 'Whatever it takes.'

Whatever it takes.

And I want you to just say, 'This is my commitment before God and in front of everybody else, I'm in.

And I would invite you to just stand quietly and hold up 'Whatever it takes'...

I'm looking at a stadium full of people who are saying 'whatever it takes'."

*A picture of people holding a sign saying 'Whatever it takes'*

And here is my reply.

This is interesting timing. On Saturday, I wrote a post to QFS as follows:

I am constantly reminded while reading the news, that the pathological types
are so easily able to garner support and "workers" for manipulative and
nefarious ends. That is, of course, because they use spell-binding (black
magic, according to Gurdjieff) and prey on the ignorance and gullibility
(and pathological conditioning) of the walking wounded. As a result, they
charge their followers up with some cockamamy "mission to save" this or that
and induce their belief in some false-front ideology.

Here, on the other hand, we work entirely differently. We don't use
manipulation or spellbinding and we seek in all contexts to assist the
individual in becoming free of pathological conditioning so that they can,
ultimately, act as "first cause" agents as described in Kant's definition of
free will (see Chapter 28 of The Wave) . We try to
help people overcome gullibility and ignorance. And we don't want anyone
doing anything for the sake of some "reward" as defined in any mission or
ideology. No blind faith required.

But somehow, "they" seem to be far more effective... more organized, more
dedicated, even if their dedication is to believing lies.

This is a problem that has exercised me to no end.

In the talk by Rick Warrne, quoted above, he says:

Rick Warren said:
Now, I choose that word 'radical' intentionally, because only radicals change the world.

Everything done in this world is done by passionate people.

Moderate people get moderately nothing done.

Then later, he says:

Rick Warren said:
In 1939, in a stadium much like this, in Munich Germany...

...they packed it out with young men and women in brown shirts...

...for a fanatical man standing behind a podium named Adolf Hitler, the personification of evil.

And in that stadium, those in brown shirts formed with their bodies a sign that said...

...in the whole stadium, "Hitler, we are yours."

And then asks the question:

RickWarren said:
When I hear those kinds of stories, I think 'what would happen if American Christian, if world Christians...

...if just the Christians in this stadium, followers of Christ would say 'Jesus, we are yours'?

What kind of spiritual awakening would we have?

It seems completely lost on this guy that ONLY the "Personification of Evil" could or would do what he is asking!

So, what do we have here?

First, he equates being "radical" with being "passionate." Considering the language, it appears that he is appealing to the sexual energy of his audience to fuel their "radicalism". Hitler did that. He appealed to a society that was as psychologically wounded as any could be, and the bedrock of this wounding was the effect of German Christianity. No surprise there.

There are a number of books about the psychopathology of Adolf Hitler and how he manipulated the sexual frustrations and inhibitions of people - calling forth their hidden desires and suggesting to them that following him would give satisfaction to the ache in their hearts and the unfulfilled needs in their bodies. That is also a fairly standard mode of operation in Christian churches, especially fundamentalist types. I wrote about this in my book, "Amazing Grace," how one fundie woman explained what "getting in the spirit" felt like, that it was "almost a carnal feeling, you know?" That was, of course, what set the bells ringing in my head that there was something seriously wrong with what they were after.

So, here we have another Sexual Predator using some of the techniques that are described in Sandra Brown's book "Women Who Love Psychopaths." The same techniques that have been used for centuries to foment war and rebellion. When people are worked up into a sexual frenzy, they become fanatics and will do "whatever it takes." They become little more than animals, and this is what this Rick Warren is doing here.

It's probably useful to quote Gurdjieff's discussion on the abuse of sex here:

Gurdjieff said:
"Is complete sexual abstinence necessary for transmutation and is sexual abstinence, in general, useful for work on oneself?" we asked him.

"Here there is not one but a number of questions," said G. "In the first place sexual abstinence is necessary for transmutation only in certain cases, that is, for certain types of people. For others it is not at all necessary. And with yet others it comes by itself when transmutation begins. I will explain this more clearly.

"For certain types a long and complete sexual abstinence is necessary for transmutation to begin; this means in other words that without a long and complete sexual abstinence transmutation will not begin. But once it has begun abstinence is no longer necessary. In other cases, that is, with other types, transmutation can begin in a normal sexual life — and on the contrary, can begin sooner and proceed better with a very great outward expenditure of sex energy. In the third case the beginning of transmutation does not require abstinence, but, having begun, transmutation takes the whole of sexual energy and puts an end to normal sexual life or the outward expenditure of sex energy.

"Then the other question—'Is sexual abstinence useful for the work or not?'

"It is useful if there is abstinence in all centers. If there is abstinence in one center and full liberty of imagination in the others, then there could be nothing worse. And still more, abstinence can be useful if a man knows what to do with the energy which he saves in this way. If he does not know what to do with it, nothing whatever can be gained by abstinence."

"Speaking in general, what is the most correct form of life in this connection from the point of view of the work?"

"It is impossible to say. I repeat that while a man does not know it is better for him not to attempt anything. Until he has new and exact knowledge it will be quite enough if his life is guided by the usual rules and principles. If a man begins to theorize and invent in this sphere, it will lead to nothing except psychopathy. {Gurdjieff did not mean psychopathy as we use the term, but rather as a "sickness of the soul".}

"But it must again be remembered that only a person who is completely normal as regards sex has any chance in the work. Any kind of 'originality,' strange tastes, strange desires, or, on the other hand, fears, constantly working 'buffers,' must be destroyed from the very beginning. Modem education and modem life create an enormous number of sexual psychopaths. They have no chance at all in the' work.

"Speaking in general, there are only two correct ways of expending sexual energy— normal sexual life and transmutation. All inventions in this sphere are very dangerous.

"People have tried abstinence from times beyond memory. Sometimes, very rarely, it has led to something but in most cases what is called abstinence is simply exchanging normal sensations for abnormal, because the abnormal are more easily hidden.

"But it is not about this that I wish to speak. You must understand where lies the chief evil and what makes for slavery. It is not in sex itself but in the abuse of sex.

"But what the abuse of sex means is again misunderstood. People usually take this to be either excess or perversion. But these are comparatively innocent forms of abuse of sex. And it is necessary to know the human machine very well in order to grasp what abuse of sex in the real meaning of these words is. It means the wrong work of centers in relation to sex, that is, the action of the sex center through other centers, and the action of other centers through the sex center; or, to be still more precise, the functioning of the sex center with energy borrowed from other centers and the functioning of other centers with energy borrowed from the sex center."

"Can sex be regarded as an independent center?" asked one of those present.

"It can," said G. "At the same time if all the lower story is taken as one whole, then sex can be regarded as the neutralizing part of the moving center."

"In the first place it must be noted that normally in the sex center as well as in the higher emotional and the higher thinking centers, there is no negative side. In all the other centers except the higher ones, in the thinking, in the emotional, in the moving, in the instinctive, in all of them there are, so to speak, two halves—the positive and the negative; affirmation and negation, or 'yes' and 'no,' in the thinking center, pleasant and unpleasant sensations in the moving and instinctive centers. There is no such division in the sex center. There are no positive and negative sides in it. There are no unpleasant sensations or unpleasant feelings in it; there is either a pleasant sensation, a pleasant feeling, or there is nothing, an absence of any sensation, complete indifference.

"But in consequence of the wrong work of centers it often happens that the sex center unites with the negative part of the emotional center or with the negative part of the instinctive center. And then, stimulation of a certain kind of the sex center, or even any stimulation at all of the sex center, calls forth unpleasant feelings and unpleasant sensations. People who experience unpleasant feelings and sensations which have been evoked in them through ideas and imagination connected with sex are inclined to regard them as a great virtue or as something original; in actual fact it is simply disease. Everything connected with sex should be either pleasant or indifferent. Unpleasant feelings and sensations all come from the emotional center or the instinctive center.

"This is the 'abuse of sex.'

"It is necessary, further, to remember that the sex center .... is stronger and quicker than all other centers. Sex, in fact, governs all other centers. The only thing in ordinary circumstances, that is, when man has neither consciousness nor will, that holds the sex center in submission is 'buffers.'

'Buffers' can entirely bring it to nought, that is, they can stop its normal manifestation. But they cannot destroy its energy. The energy remains and passes over to other centers, finding expression for itself through them; in other words, the other centers rob the sex center of the energy which it does not use itself.

"The energy of the sex center in the work of the thinking, emotional, and moving centers can be recognized by a particular 'taste,' by a particular fervor, by a vehemence which the nature of the affair concerned does not call for.

"The thinking center writes books, but in making use of the energy of the sex center it does not simply occupy itself with philosophy, science, or politics — it is always fighting something, disputing, criticizing, creating new subjective theories.

"The emotional center preaches Christianity, abstinence, asceticism, or the fear and horror of sin, hell, the torment of sinners, eternal fire, all this with the energy of the sex center. ... Or on the other hand it works up revolutions, robs, bums, kills, again with the same energy.

"The moving center occupies itself with sport, creates various records, climbs mountains, jumps, fences, wrestles, fights, and so on.

"In all these instances, that is, in the work of the thinking center as well as in the work of the emotional and the moving centers, when they work with the energy of the sex center, there is always one general characteristic and this is a certain particular vehemence and, together with it, the uselessness of the work in question.

"Neither the thinking nor the emotional nor the moving centers can ever create anything useful with the energy of the sex center.

"This is an example of the 'abuse of sex.

"But this is only one aspect of it. Another aspect consists in the fact that, when the energy of the sex center is plundered by the other centers and spent on useless work, it has nothing left for itself and has to steal the energy of other centers which is much lower and coarser than its own. And yet the sex center is very important for the general activity, and particularly for the inner growth of the organism, because, working with 'hydrogen' 12, it can receive a very fine food of impressions, such as none of the ordinary centers can receive. The fine food of impressions is very important for the manufacture of the higher 'hydrogens.' But when the sex center works with energy that is not its own, that is, with the comparatively low 'hydrogens' 48 and 24, its impressions become much coarser and it ceases to play the role in the organism which it could play. At the same time union with, and the use of its energy by, the thinking center creates far too great an imagination on the subject of sex, and in addition a tendency to be satisfied with this imagination. Union with the emotional center creates sentimentality or, on the contrary, jealousy, cruelty. This is again a picture of the 'abuse of sex.'"

But, I want to come back to why this problem exercises me so much.

You see, in reading "Women Who Love Psychopaths," I realized that the things that a psychopath does, the things that WORK in baiting, capturing, bonding women are obviously caricatures of things that ought to be manifested in positive ways. For example: a psychopath may use his eyes and words to entrance and bait a woman to his bed where he "bonds" with her via "super sex." He uses tender, romantic words, gestures, promises, etc etc.

On the other hand, normal guys (and I'll talk about guys here since most psychopaths are male) generally do not feel comfortable gazing into the eyes of their beloved, speaking romantic words, performing wildly romantic gestures and certainly, most men are sexually inhibited or downright juvenile in their sexual behavior. They also do not see sex as it ought to be seen, as one of the best opportunities for GIVING they have in their daily lives.

But a psychopath observes his prey, does all the things that he has learned will capture her, and then he bends her to his evil will.

Why don't normal men observe their intended - not as prey, but as the object of devotion and giving? Why don't they learn everything about her, what she is, what she wants, what she needs, and then give it to her as an act of love?

Well, that's one thing that occurs to me. And the reason I bring it up is, as I said, because the interaction between the psychopath and his prey is a caricature of what seems to be an STO practice of great antiquity that we have completely lost.

How does this relate to Adolf Hitler and Rick Warren?

Well, the first part of it is obvious: they are using the wiles of the psychopath to lure and bait and entrap their prey, only they do it for nefarious reasons. Oh, of course, they believe themselves that what they are doing is "good and proper." It is certain now, from all the studies, that Hitler really believed that what he was doing was "for Germany and the German people." But how objective and how normal can the thinking (and beliefs) of a sexual deviant be? It is also certain that Hitler was an extremely emotionally and sexually deformed human being. Several women who had relations with him shortly afterwards committed suicide, including his niece. Oh, sure, they could have been offed to hide his secrets, but whatever the truth of the matter, they died from having intimate relations with Hitler. There are a number of books that refer to his sexual perversions, so I won't go into them here.

Perhaps we can draw a parallel and ask the question as to whether or not Rick Warren is similarly sexually and emotionally deformed?

Getting back to the caricature problem: As I said, I think that what psychopaths do is a caricature of what normal love between spiritual people might be like, how we evolved to interact with one another emotionally. Why do I think this? Because it seems to be similar to what happens in the process of neurochemical binding. But I am going to start a separate thread to discuss this. Here I will just say that it strikes me that what these psychopathic processes seek to emulate is the activity of a TRUE ESOTERIC GROUP.

Here is such a group described by Gurdjieff:

Gurdjieff said:
"It was pointed out before when we spoke about the history of humanity that the life of humanity to which we belong is governed by forces proceeding from two different sources: first, planetary influences which act entirely mechanically and are received by the human masses as well as by individual people quite involuntarily and unconsciously; and then, influences proceeding from inner circles of humanity whose existence and significance the vast majority of people do not suspect any more than they suspect planetary influences.

"The humanity to which we belong, namely, the whole of historic and prehistoric humanity known to science and civilization, in reality constitutes only the outer circle of humanity, within which there are several other circles.

"So that we can imagine the whole of humanity, known as well as unknown to us, as consisting so to speak of several concentric circles.

"The inner circle is called the 'esoteric'; this circle consists of people who have attained the highest development possible for man, each one of whom possesses individuality in the fullest degree, that is to say, an indivisible 'I,' all forms of consciousness possible for man, full control over these states of consciousness, the whole of knowledge possible for man, and a free and independent will. They cannot perform actions opposed to their understanding or have an understanding which is not expressed by actions. At the same time there can be no discords among them, no differences of understanding. Therefore their activity is entirely co-ordinated and leads to one common aim without any kind of compulsion because it is based upon a common and identical understanding.

"The next circle is called the 'mesoteric,' that is to say, the middle. People who belong to this circle possess all the qualities possessed by the members of the esoteric circle with the sole difference that their knowledge is of a more theoretical character.' This refers, of course, to knowledge of a cosmic character. They know and understand many things which have not yet found expression in their actions. They know more than they do. But their understanding is precisely as exact as, and therefore precisely identical with, the understanding of the people of the esoteric circle. Between them there can be, no discord, there can be no misunderstanding. One understands in the way they all understand, and all understand in the way one understands. But as was said before, this understanding compared with the understanding of the esoteric circle is somewhat more theoretical.

"The third circle is called the 'exoteric,' that is, the outer, because it is the outer circle of the inner part of humanity. The people who belong to this circle possess much of that which belongs to people of the esoteric and mesoteric circles but their cosmic knowledge is of a more philosophical character, that is to say, it is more abstract than the knowledge of the mesoteric circle. A member of the mesoteric circle calculates, a member of the exoteric circle contemplates. Their understanding may not be expressed in actions. But there cannot be differences in understanding between them. What one understands all the others understand.

"In literature which acknowledges the existence of esotericism humanity is usually divided into two circles only and the 'exoteric circle' as opposed to the 'esoteric,' is called ordinary life. In reality, as we see, the 'exoteric circle' is something very far from us and very high. For ordinary man this is already 'esotericism.'

"The outer circle' is the circle of mechanical humanity to which we belong and which alone we know. The first sign of this circle is that among people who belong to it there is not and there cannot be a common understanding. Everybody understands in his own way and all differently. This circle is sometimes called the circle of the 'confusion of tongues,' that is, the circle in which each one speaks in his own particular language, where no one understands another and takes no trouble to be understood. In this circle mutual understanding between people is impossible excepting in rare exceptional moments or in matters having no great significance, and which are confined to the limits of the given being. If people belonging to this circle become conscious of this general lack of understanding and acquire a desire to understand and to be understood, then it means they have an unconscious tendency towards the inner circle because mutual understanding begins only in the exoteric circle and is possible only there. But the consciousness of the lack of understanding usually comes to people in an altogether different form.

"So that the possibility for people to understand depends on the possibility of penetrating into the exoteric circle where understanding begins.

Now, obviously, there are many people who do FEEL acutely this lack of understanding, who long for Unity of purpose and to "belong" to their "own kind," so to say. This deep impulse is what the Black Magicians such as Adolf Hitler and Rick Warren and psychopaths play upon to achieve their own entropic goals. This longing for Union with another soul that understands and accepts one and loves unconditionally and who gives all and to whom one can give all is what is at the core of women who love psychopaths. And it is at the core of many people who become followers of religions and ideologies, and whose "passion" is abused so that they become fanatics and "radicals" as Rick Warren describes above.

In Secret History, I talked about the drugs and neurochemicals and binding and so on. Actually, I wrote about this rather extensively in The Wave back in 2000 and what was in Secret History was just an updated version. It bears repeating here because it is a metaphor for the difference between true love between individuals and the caricature of love that is manufactured by the psychopath.

Secret History said:
Back in the early days of the 20th century, it was realized that a drug must work in the body because it can “attach” itself to something in the body. They decided to call this place of attachment a “receptor.” Nobody really knew how this “attaching” worked, or why it led to a whole cascade of changes in the body, but there it was. You take a drug, and all kinds of things happened in the brain and/or other areas of the body.

It is now known, after long years of research, that the receptor is actually a single molecule! Not only that, but it is singularly complicated. Keep in mind that a molecule, by definition, is the smallest possible piece of something that can still be identified as that specific substance.

A molecule is composed of atoms. Atoms seem to form bonds with one another in accordance with certain rules. These rules have to do with the number of electrons in the highest energy “shell” of the particular atom. An atom is what is IS by virtue of how many electrons it has, and these electrons are arranged in “shells” like the orbits of planets around the sun. The only thing is, they can’t be thought of as round planetary bodies, but as a sort of “cloud” of energy. Full “shells” are particularly stable so that atoms seem to “like” to arrange themselves so that they can get their outer shells filled. Electrons also come in two “flavors,” which are referred to as “up” and “down,” and an “up” electron likes to pair with a “down” electron. This refers to the “spin” state of the atom. And, depending upon the number of electrons in the outer shell of the atom, and how many electrons it would “like” to have in its outer shell, it can bond to one or more other atoms.

The essential thing to know here is this: the resulting molecules that are brought together in these chemical bonding processes have a particular SHAPE. The carbon bonds have plenty of flexibility, allowing bending, and there can be tangling and doubling back and forth to form very complex and very specific shapes. This bending and tangling brings different atoms of one side group into contact with others providing all kinds of opportunities for complex bonding.

Getting back to the single molecule receptors on cells, we can understand from the bonding principles that these receptors have very particular shapes — as well as “shells wanting to be filled” that define precisely what other molecule will be attracted to them for bonding. We can understand that there are atomic forces which cause one molecule to be attracted to another. Receptor molecules on the cell respond to these energies by “wiggling, shimmying, vibrating and even humming as they shift back and forth from one favored shape to another.” Receptors are attached to a cell, “floating” on its surface, like a lotus flower on the surface of a pond, with roots extending into the interior of the cell.

Now, what do these receptors do? Well, we already know that they “attract” other molecules and respond to the atomic/chemical forces of various kinds of bonds, but what is important is that receptors function as sensing molecules — scanners — just as our eyes, ears, nose, tongue, fingers, and skin act as bodily sense organs, the receptors do this on a cellular level. They cover the membranes of your cells waiting to pick up and convey information from their environment that consists of a reality flooded with other vibrating amino acids, which come cruising along, diffusing through the fluids surrounding each cell. Researchers describe receptors as “keyholes,” although these keyholes are constantly moving and dancing in a rhythmic, vibratory way. The keyholes are waiting for the right chemical keys, ligands, to swim up to them through the extra-cellular fluid and to mount them by fitting into their keyholes, a process known as binding.

When the ligand, the chemical key, binds to the receptor, entering it like a key in a keyhole, it creates a response that causes a rearrangement, a changing of shape, until INFORMATION enters the cell.

In a certain sense, a ligand is the cellular equivalent of a phallus! Ligand comes from the Latin “ligare,” or that which binds. The same word is also the root of “religion.” Curious, yes?

A more dynamic description of this very miniscule process would be that relating to “frequency.” The ligand and the receptor combine their identical frequencies — striking the same note, so to say — which produces a sufficiently strong vibration that more or less “rings the doorbell” to cause the doorway of the cell to open and there is some sort of exchange of atomic potentials that constitute the “information” that is “sent into the cell.” What happens next is quite amazing. The receptor, having received a message, transmits it from the surface of the cell deep into the cell’s interior, where the message can change the state of the cell dramatically. A chain reaction of biochemical events is initiated as tiny cellular machines go into action and, depending on the message of the ligand, begin any number of activities — manufacturing new proteins, making decisions about cell division, opening or closing ion channels, adding or subtracting energetic chemical groups like the phosphates — to name just a few. In short, whatever a given cell is up to at any moment, is determined by which receptors are on its surface, and whether those receptors are occupied by ligands or not. On a larger scale, these tiny physiological phenomena at the cell level can translate to major changes in behavior, physical activity, even mood — and ABILITY.

So, to review: as the ligands drift by in the stream of fluid surrounding every cell, only those ligands that have molecules in exactly the right shape can bind to a particular kind of receptor. The process of binding is very selective and specific!

Researchers in the field say that “binding occurs as a result of receptor specificity, meaning the receptor ignores all but the particular ligand that’s made to fit it.” In other words, the cell is the engine that drives all life, and the receptors are the buttons on the control panel of that engine. The ligands or other neurotransmitters, known as peptides, are the fingers that push the buttons. The “musical hum of the receptors as they bind to their many ligands, often in the far-flung parts of the organism, creates an integration of structure and function that allows the organism to run smoothly and in “alignment” with the function of the specific ligands that are binding.

Referring to receptors and ligands, let’s apply our “as above, so below” principle to these ideas. The information that we receive into our organism as a whole — our interaction with our environment — seems to operate on exactly the same principle.

Information that “enters” the “cell” of our mental-body acts on us in the same way as a ligand acts on the cell when it binds to the receptor. The mind, our spirit receptor, having received information, transmits it deep into the interior of our consciousness, where the message can change the state of awareness dramatically. A chain reaction of psycho-spiritual events is initiated as the consciousness realigns itself based on the information received. This realignment then affects the entire self, the reality, and all support systems of the consciousness involved. In short, your BEing is determined by your state of awareness which is a function of your knowledge which depends on what “ligands” — or information units — are “bound” to your spirit, so to say. And just as ligands can produce cascades of cellular events with far reaching effects, so can your state of Being change because increased awareness can initiate major changes in your reality — the larger “body” in which you “live” as a “cell” of All that is.

Remember what we started with here: chemists came up with the idea that drugs worked in the body by attaching themselves to something in the body. Now we know about receptors and that they are receptive to chemicals manufactured by the body itself. Ligands, peptides, neurotransmitters, hormones, etc, are produced in the body and BY the body in certain “steps” that involve very complex processes.

And here is where we come to the DANGER part.

You see, there are chemicals, both natural and synthetic, that are sufficiently similar to the body’s own ligands to bind with the receptors without producing all of the same results that are produced when the body secretes its own ligands in the natural steps. The opiate receptor, for instance, can “receive” not only the body’s endorphins, but can also bind to morphine, or heroin. The Valium receptor can attach not only to Valium-like peptides produced in the body, but also to Valium.

Remember, “no drug can act unless fixed.” This means that if a drug works, it is because there is a receptor for it in the body. This, then, suggests that the receptor is there because it binds to a ligand produced by the body itself, which suggests that the body can produce its own drugs, stimulating its own healing, under the proper circumstances.

Looking in another direction, when we consider drugs that change “behavior,” such as heroin, marijuana, Librium, “angel dust,” or PCP, and so on, which precipitate radical changes in emotional states, these must also be able to bind because there are receptors for similar substances produced by the body. LSD and other hallucinogens, which produce changes in cognition, must also do so because there are receptors specific to them; suggesting again that such chemicals may, under proper circumstances, be produced by the body itself. This suggests to us that there may be natural steps to, or processes served by, such chemicals. And here we approach a very significant problem where, again, we may take the “as above, so below” approach to understanding our own natures.

Alcohol is everywhere. Tens of millions of human beings experience the consequences of alcohol addiction, from decreased job performance to liver damaged by spouse and child abuse, to total breakdown of social concepts and constraints ending in the proverbial “skid-row bum” looking every day for his MD 20-20 - or even a can of Sterno.

That is just alcohol. We aren’t even going to list the details for other drugs as it would be tedious and pointless. You have the idea.

Alcohol and other drugs have the ability to do what they do in our systems because they are “fixed;” they are synthetic ligands; they bind to our receptors and, in various ways, produce their effects.

In order to get an idea of how these fake ligands actually work, let’s take a look at caffeine. As our neurons process information, they produce cellular waste including a buildup of molecules of adenosine. Adenosine is a ligand that binds with the adenosine receptor sending a message deep into the cell that it is time to sleep. You could say that adenosine is a sort of “warning system” that helps keep the body balanced. As the production of adenosine continues throughout the day, as a byproduct of cerebral activity, more and more adenosine is produced, binding with more and more receptors, sending more and more sleep messages into more cells. Little by little our brain cells become more and more sluggish until we just simply must go to sleep. We literally can’t remain conscious. We yawn; our eyes water and try to close, and we just want to curl up and let the lights go out.
Or, we have a cup of espresso.

The caffeine molecule just happens to be the right “shape” for the adenosine receptor. It hops on and binds. But, instead of doing what the adenosine does, it sends a different message or, at the very least, blocks the sleep message from being sent by the real adenosine. In short, it interrupts the natural sleep signal, allowing a lot more cellular waste to accumulate, putting the individual in a state of toxicity, which can eventually lead to a breakdown of health.

In general, this seems to be the worst thing that caffeine does - it simply blocks the action of the ligand adenosine which sends sleep messages. Many people have been scared by incomplete research suggesting that caffeine does other deadly things, but additional studies have suggested that any consequences result merely from the disruption of the sleep cycle and a consequent break-down in the serotonin-melatonin cycle.

The important thing about this is, however, the comparison to information that is or is not accepted by the seeker which we will address more directly at the end of this volume. What we see in the example of caffeine as an “imitator” of adenosine is that the natural ligand seems to have some very subtle property that is conveyed deep into the cell, and the caffeine either blocks this message by occupying the receptor, or perhaps sends a contradictory message. Because of the exactitude of the molecule, adenosine apparently does more than the “almost ligand,” caffeine.

Now, if we think of information as ligands, we can see that accepting as true something that is not, may not only block our ability to receive the proper messages of what IS true, it may even send contradictory messages. Spiritual experiences that are “induced” ritually, chemically or technically from “down here” in order to change the spiritual state “up there,” operate in exactly this way. It seems that what we accept as true or not affects our spirit and state of awareness, not to mention our potentials for soul ascension. We could even compare certain “all is love and light” beliefs to the action of caffeine: they prevent the natural warning system from operating which tells the spirit when it needs to withdraw from certain things and allow a period of “cleansing” to take place. Over time, this can result in serious breakdown of the spirit, even - it seems - ultimate subsumation into Non-being. There is, however, a more serious problem we have to deal with: addiction.

Probably everyone has heard about some experiments that were done on rats where they were implanted with electrodes for self-stimulation of the “pleasure center” of the brain. What was discovered was that the rats would push the button until they were exhausted. Further experiments demonstrated that if the electric reward is doled out only when the rats learn a new trick - such as navigating a maze - the little critters will go to work like crazy to get the job done so that they can get their “buzz.” As long as the rewards keep coming, the rats will keep working - even mastering incredibly complex and seemingly impossible mazes that humans would find nearly impossible!

But, it’s not the learning they love.

The initial studies showed that, given the opportunity, the rats would forget everything - food, mates, and friends, whatever - to push that damn button until they collapse in mindless ecstasy!

In the human being, as in other creatures, the sensation that is experienced as orgasm is the same release of chemicals that stimulate the same part of the brain that makes the rats so happy. Some scientists refer to this in “technical jargon” as the “do-it-again” center. When this center is stimulated, whatever activity is associated with it will be sought again and again.
As we now know, drugs “short circuit” these centers because they “fix” to receptors. We also know that when we take certain drugs, our brain acts to a certain extent as if the “natural” neurotransmitter were flooding the system. In the case of the pleasure center, the chemistry is so similar to what the brain would produce naturally if we had done something really great such as finding food or warmth or making love with a soul mate, that even if the person is hunkered down in a filthy flophouse reeking of vomit and excreta, with a hypodermic of heroin in his or her arm, the pleasure centers know only that they are bathed in chemical bliss.

Here is an important thing to consider. Even if the first time a person is induced to “try” such a drug, they are disgusted or repelled by the setting, the process, all the external elements, once they have received that reward, their whole perception begins to shift. Because the physical body loves that feeling so much, because it is so overwhelmingly compelling, the mind begins to rationalize that the nasty setting, the whole process that is clearly damaging to the self, is not merely “okay,” but is actually “desirable.” After all, how could it be bad if it feels so good? If part of the self argues that it can’t be good, another part of the self becomes literally frantic to achieve the state again. After all, what is going on in real life only produces “stress” and “bad feelings” which add the argument: you have suffered, now you deserve a reward!

The only problem with both drug addiction and spiritual addiction is that it is nearly always presented in a setting of pleasure and refinement. It is promoted as a “tool” to “enhance awareness.”

When cocaine is snorted up the nose, it heads straight for the dopamine re-uptake sites and blocks them. In this case, the “feel good sensation” is not from the drug, but from the fact that your own natural dopamine is flooding your cells, binding with the dopamine receptors like crazy, unable to be reabsorbed. The brain only knows one thing: this feels GREAT! Crack cocaine reportedly produces a more intense sensation of pleasure than any natural act, including orgasm! And, take note that it is from the body’s own chemical that this pleasure is experienced by virtue of the blocking of the re-uptake site. Again, we note that this prevents the body’s own specific ligand from binding with the re-uptake sites which is very likely also blocking a message intended to go deep into the cell. As it happens, this produces dreadful consequences, as we will soon see.

Morphine and Heroin work in a slightly different way. They mimic endorphins which trigger the release of the body’s own dopamine. So, instead of the sensation occurring because the natural flow of dopamine is not reabsorbed, it occurs because there is too much dopamine to be reabsorbed! But again, the fake endorphin is undoubtedly not sending the proper signal deep into the cells it is binding, and again, the excess of dopamine has significant consequences.

What are these consequences? With repeated use of cocaine, heroin or morphine unbalancing the body’s own dopamine processes, the body reacts by reducing the number of receptors! With fewer receptors, the effects of the drug - as well as the body’s normal ability to bind dopamine that is naturally present - plummets. Without the normal flow of dopamine into a normal number of receptors, the brain experiences “withdrawal” which is interpreted quite literally as “pain.” It is the agony of a mind that can feel no pleasure at all.

In strictly physical terms, one of the serious consequences of this process comes from the fact that dopamine plays an important role in controlling movement, emotion and cognition. Dopamine dysfunction has been implicated in schizophrenia, mood disorders, attention-deficit disorder, Tourette’s syndrome, substance dependency, tardive dyskinesia, Parkinson’s disease and so on. Of course, the situation is a lot more complex because at least seven types of dopamine receptors have been identified.
Now, the point of this diversion into brain chemistry as an exercise in understanding the principle “as above, so below,” is this: “accepting” what is not Truth is like taking a drug that binds to psychic receptors, so to say. So, this brings us back to the beginning of this section where I said “gathering false knowledge is worse than gathering no knowledge at all.” False knowledge, lies, are spiritual drugs and are not the “natural chemical” of the soul’s own “light,” so to say. The result is that it tends to create a condition of dependence by reducing the “psychic receptors” which then reduces the capacity to “bind truth.” In short, a person may be researching like crazy, but if he or she isn’t really, really utilizing perspicacity — that is, challenging and taking apart what is being studied in a diligent way — his or her acceptance based on “blind faith” amounts to getting your jollies with drugs.
The end result is analogous to the skid row bum in spiritual terms.

What is more, we notice from studying ligands and receptors that the body’s own chemicals have qualities that the imitations — drugs — do not. Those qualities, based on shape and atomic structure, can activate processes that the synthetic ligand cannot. The body’s chemical can even turn on cascades of processes within the cells that are blocked by the “artificial” ligand.
Truth works in the same way. The accumulation of “high probability” information without prejudice amounts to the gathering of all the parts of a very complex neuropeptide. When all the right pieces are finally together, it produces a certain “shape” that “fits” the spiritual receptor like a key in a lock. At that point — when the information block/unit is complete — it’s proximity causes the receptor to “hum” and the ligand/info “hums” back and they sort of “jump together” almost in the same way that describes physical ligands and receptors. AUM.

And so we find that the principle is this: to gather, gather, gather information and observations without any “ingestion,” so to say. This most definitely means to avoid practices which may produce the “do it again” chemicals because it is all too easy to be seduced into doing it again and again which amounts to blind belief.

Here, of course, we come up against a very special problem: the programs of our “machine,” our “intellect.” The formation and training of our intellect is done under circumstances that are the worst possible for developing the ability to think. Now is neither the time nor the place to go into a lengthy examination about what is wrong with childhood education, theories of infant care, and the endless lies propagated by our society and culture. Add to that an endless stream of considerations based on physical appearance, and by the time the ordinary person becomes an adult, he can neither think nor feel according to what is Truth. He has become a “false personality” that thinks it has a soul.

In short, it seems to me that what psychopaths do WORKS because they have observed women and know what to do to lure and capture them. And this works because these women have a certain "something" inside them that is looking for a REAL love and they mistake the caricature for the real because they are ignorant of the facts of psychopathy. They don't realize that they have "spiritual love binding sites" that can be bound by a "drug" (i.e. the psychopath) which does not act in the way the real neurochemical would act (i.e. the true spiritual love from a man who can GIVE and receive true love.)

This idea raises a lot of issues, not the least of which is what genuinely spiritual men need to do to get over their hang-ups and learn to give on all levels: mentally, emotionally, physically and spiritually; and women who need to learn how to distinguish the true from the false.
This topic is immensely important and comes down to discernment, which is the precondition for growth or development. If you cannot know the difference between a lie and the truth, life becomes a guessing game, the product of chance. Nothing can be truly "chosen" because false choices cancel out correct ones. The balance is always zero.

Discernment is the capacity to recognize truth, but truth is a multilevel concept. OPs (i.e. level I/primary integration/no developmental potential) cannot discern truth from a lie, they must be told the difference. You can see this in religion and politics. Enemies are labeled as "evil" and the in-group is assumed to be "good". But obviously this is an arbitrary distinction. There will be good and bad people in both groups. The fact is, true believers cannot even recognize when evil people (and obviously evil people, at that) are members of their own in-group. They lack the ability of discernment. They rely on social cues (2nd factor) for their beliefs. For such individuals, the only solution is a social environment where truth is known, where multilevel individuals create the social cues. It's only natural that a person who sees in colour will lead those who cannot. But in this world, as it is, the blind lead the blind, and multilevel individuals are targeted by psychopathic individuals.

There are the blind, and those who simply have blinders over their eyes. As Laura points out, removing these blinders is DIFFICULT, because the lie takes the form of the truth. And in a world where truth is in short supply, people will cling desperately to the next best thing. It's like all those disaster movies where the sole survivors of some cataclysm have to raid gas stations to get food. The only stuff they can find is junk food, but because they're so hungry, they take it. And who would want to give up something thinking that they've already got it? And knowing that if they give it up, they may never really find it? It's a test of will, for sure.

Psychopaths offer everything we want and need, but do not have the eyes to discern for ourselves. We want strength, safety, security, but we cannot tell the difference between the protection of a hero, and the arrogance of a psychopath. We mistake the self-certainty and lack of self-doubt of the psychopath with the wisdom and right action of the true leader. We mistake the cheap ploys of psychopaths to snare us with easy salvation for true gnosis and spirit's immanence. We mistake the rock for the philosopher's stone.
Top Bottom