It’s disconcerting, no question about it, working with someone who’s antisocial, with real sociopathic qualities (forgetting, again, for the moment, the hell of living with such an individual).
Recently, I’m struck again, in my work with a client I’ll call Howard, by the brew of certain qualities, certain attitudes, certain defenses that strike me as forming a rather sociopathic orientation.
Howard is 19. He understands the suffering he’s causing others in his life: he can “talk the talk,” meaning that he “gets it” on a cognitive level. He can say, for instance, quite accurately, what he’s doing, why it’s wrong, that it’s wrong, even that he feels bad about it.
How badly he really feels is highly debatable. In my view, not nearly as badly as he claims, and certainly not nearly badly enough to make real efforts at change. In our sessions, I confront him regularly with my perception of the discrepancy between his assertions of remorse and regret, and what he’s really willing to do about them?
I see him as someone who can hear my challenges without reacting very defensively. His undefensiveness may seem like a good quality, and maybe it is; but it’s also likely that it stems, to some extent, from his ultimate unconcern with what I feel about, and think, of him. That is, I suspect it stems in part, at least, from his relative indifference to my (or anyone’s) view of him.
When I say he’s undefensive, I mean this specifically with regard to how he fields my confrontations. He is fairly placid in his absorption of them. On another level, though, he’s quite defensive in a classically narcissistic/sociopathic fashion: On one hand, as I’ve noted, he can seem remorseful (quite regretful) for his misbehaviors and abusive attitudes. But if you should probe him at all—not just accept his statements of remorse at face value—he predictably lapses into his truer position: this is a position from which his abusiveness is always, ultimately, rationalized as a response to his perceiving himself as having been victimized, persecuted or otherwise treated unfairly in some fashion.
Now he is canny enough to attempt to disguise this pattern, especially with initial assertions of politically correct sounding accountability. But always, with a little prodding, you will bring him back to his true experience in which self-justification for his abusiveness and an attitude of unaccountability prevail.
Just as noteworthy: no matter how many times you point out to him how rapidly he shifts from taking “seeming” responsibility for his behavior to abruptly abdicating responsibility for the same behavior (again, rationalizing it as a response to others’ persecution), he is rather uninterested in this contradiction and basically unconcerned to reconcile it. He just doesn’t find this contradiction particularly troubling, peculiar, meaningful, or worth his time to look at.
This is a highly sociopathic quality and attitude.
It seems to reflect the “glitch” that allows this personality, in his blithely untroubled, incurious fashion, to verbalize awareness and regret over his abusiveness and exploitiveness on the one hand, while on the other (almost simultaneously) to rationalize it as a valid reaction to his perceived, or contrived, victimization.
When I confront him routinely with this contradiction, he may give lip service to the validity of my observation; but always, his interest to explore it, to own its possible ramifications, is superficial and transient.
Similarly, he will periodically assert his desire to cease his hurtful behaviors; then, in the next minute or so, when presented with evidence that he’s continued the very behaviors he’s claimed to want to cease, he may say something like, “Well, maybe I’m really not that motivated. To be honest, I’m really not.”
The honesty itself could almost be seen as admirable. But the problem lies in his blithe disinterest in the rapid, contradictory nature of his assertions. He isn’t embarrassed by this. Point it out to him and he’s almost bored, like a kid who’ll say, when inconvenienced, “Whatever.”
I regard this pattern as a sociopathic form of indifference to the contradiction between one’s statements, and between one’s statements and ongoing actions. What’s striking isn’t the contradictory content itself, but the missing shame and embarrassment when confronted with the nature of the discrepant communications.
This can leave me shaking my head, privately, in a kind of amazement. But even if I were to shake my head in visible amazement, while Howard might notice it, and might understand why he’s left me shaking my head, you can bet he wouldn’t care to make any more sense of himself to me than he cares to make sense of himself to himself—which is very little.
(This article is copyrighted © 2010 by Steve Becker, LCSW. My use of male gender pronouns is for convenience’s sake, not to suggest that females aren’t capable of the behaviors and attitudes discussed.)
Kim, as an ex-masochist (mostly in fantasy), I have my own ideas about “O”. I think that the abdication of power is a relief to people who are crippled by shame. No power = no screw-ups. And that kind of relief can be so exhilarating that it’s like going through the looking glass to another world where you’re free of all the weighty dark gloop that blocks freedom and happiness. Or at least that’s the theory I developed when trying to figure out why I was so fascinated by submission. To my non-surprise, when I finally realized there was no reason for me to be carrying around all that shame, the fantasies lost their power and actually became kind of icky.
But Steve, I really meant to be writing you about how much I enjoyed this piece. You paint such a vivid picture, you sitting across from this ethically ambidextrous character wondering when his need for internal consistency is going to kick in.
I have a memory from the last days of my relationship with the sociopath, when I’d given him the deadline to leave and we were having one of our final conversations. As he was walkng away, he said in a kind of lamenting cry, a voice that begged to be understood, “I’d do anything up to and including murder to get my writing published.” And that, in a nutshell, was his excuse for all that he’d done to me — the financial exploitation, the deliberate destruction of my self-esteem to keep me “pinned down,” the infidelities that were to him “escapes” from this involvement that was so beneath him, the use of my resources and personal reputation to make himself seem like more than an indigent bum, etc., etc.
I can’t count the times I heard that I had made him a better person or, when returning after one of his periodic abandonments, that he’d really thought about his behavior and he was determined to be a better person.
And I was bamboozled by it all. I figured if he could even speak in those terms, he had a conscience. That his relentless and ruthless drive to climb up out of his humble beginnings in the (adoptive) family of a laid-off steelworker, a venue where someone as gorgeous and charismatic and brilliant and talented as him was clearly placed by mistake, was sort of touching and noble, at least in the clarity of his vision of who he wanted to be. And the few earlier times when I’d pulled myself together to boot him out of my life, I met that sad little boy who begged me not to abandom him.
Jeez. And this was the same guy who sneered at me when I cried and told me “weakness is unattractive.” And told me how he went into classrooms and new jobs looking specifically for the requirements for a “minimum A” and once he knew that he proceeded to “please the fool.” And how some people were just “food people.” And in our first year, when he thought he’d succeeded in draining $20K out of my corporate bank account, he told me “tried but he just didn’t feel that way about me,” and walked away for the first time, thinking he had money in his pocket. (I spoke to the bank’s lawyers and got the money back.)
There’s lots more of this, the many faces of the horrible ex. But there’s just one more that’s worth mentioning. We were living together in California, and I was operating under the assumption that the whole problem was that he hated and distrusted himself, and I decided to make a stab at breaking through that. So I spent a couple of days gentling him through a discovery of what he might care about other than himself. Finally he began talk about how upset he was about unfairness — judicial, familial, academic, gender-related. And he explored the possibility of using his writing to illuminate these injustices and motivate people to take action against them.
It was the first time I’d ever seen him completely mindblown. He looked like a person I’d never seen before. Until that moment, neither of us had seen any credible evidence that he devoted much thought to anything but his own ambitions and desires. It was like he was experiencing a kind of hope or belief that was completely new to him. When he left the room, he left the house and didn’t come back for a long time. When he returned he was more cold and vicious than usual. I believe managed to discredit the memory of these conversations or convert them into some other bit of the plausibility he used to manuever in non-sociopath society.
Steve, I think these people have broken psyches. There is the wounded “natural” child caught like a fly in amber and the hard superstructure that serves both as prison and protector. The inner neediness and desperation of the immature center is transformed into resentful distrust, a focus on power and control, and a robotic self-sabotaging, socially implosive conviction that failure is unacceptable. And the strange relationship between these two characters is what makes these people so internally incongruent.
I’ve never known anyone in my life as needy as the sociopath. Except perhaps my father, who was another one. His boundaries were like 100-foot thick walls. No trust. Reinterpreted love as volunteering for victimization. Would not let himself be satisfied with anything. Only felt pleasure in pursuit, dominance or oversized sensory experiences.
It would be interesting if you could probe a bit into his feelings of being ripped off with an eye to making contact with the inner little one. Unfortunately, the shell probably won’t let you. He’ll mention it in passing because it’s the rationale for pretty much everything, but if you pry, his aversion to showing vulnerabilty will kick in and he’ll block your access to anything like authentic grief or need for nurture, or he’ll use your interest to play you, just for the hell of it, or rather because he has something to prove about how phony you really are.
There’s just no way to win. The construct is a perfect machine for denial of pain and addiction to winning.
Or that’s how I see them.
I read this and in my experience with one, have seen the shell ripped off. It was tragic. Like a child drowning…in shame and self condemnation but with no identity or concept of love.
All of this is a toxic coping mechanism. And yes tied to SHAME which is so damaging. I think the only answer to reducing the numbers of them is prevention through intervention in childrens lives..they must be offered healing and the place to overcome the shame.
Screening for a genetic tendency or somehow identifying at risk kids (genetically) if possible..
I do believe there can be conversions but in my case the entire family dynamic is deceived and cant see the need for help. So sad.
All of us should be thankful for self awareness and that we are not like this! But for the grace of God, there go I…
Kathleen Hawk,
When I refer to quality writing, you are one of the main ones. Wow. Your insights blow me away.
Responding to your last post, I liked my husband to a weeble. those little toys. Weebles wobble but they don’t fall down.
A few times, I think I got through to my husband. Some logic and truths knocked him off center where a normal person would experience an epiphany or a paradigm shift. He’d walked away but he always came back more determined than ever that I did to him what he does best, that I manipulated him, and after that then all logic, reasoning, truths were Moot. He wobbled but regained sociopathic balance.
you said it flower power.
but for the grace of God… we were protected somehow, Ithink that the same thing that creates P’s creates supplies. My parents created 2 P’s and 2 supplies. first daughter is a saint, then the evil brother was born, then me (perpetual supply), and my socio baby sister brought up the rear.
What happened to create the situation where his shell was ripped off? I’m very curious, I would love to see a shell-less spath. do they look like a snail without a shell? you know, a slug?
Kathy,
sounds like a perpetual paranoia machine.
That is fascinating that you were able to break through, even if for only a moment.
Skylar,
I’m thinking the slug is right on! Avert your eyes because they are hideous!
I thought I got through to mine a few times when he was like a vulnerable little boy. It’s like he has a hole that can’t be filled so he fills it with unhealthy things like control, manipulation, sex, games, lies, anything to make sure he has control because that little boy is not aceptable.
The exposure is extremely sad to see. That is why I find grace for him BUT must protect our children and watch how he affects them.
He had a psychotic breakdown, thought he was being punished by voices and sounds he heard. He had ongoing severe crying spells.
The specific time I saw the tragedy of it was when he was weeping and saying in a little voice. “I dont know who I am, I am nothing, can you tell me who I am”.
It is heart wrenching, disturbing, and more than anything makes me incredibly thankful . He knows what he does, he can help his choices but he is addicted and has many who want him to stay there…the family dynamic plays a huge role. They are all deceived and are prisoners to this.
He is not a slug, he is a human and is not well. Even now, the memory of that moment reminds me that all humans must be valued or it reduces us to that level. BUT I do believe in consequences to choices and in the case of these people, they can be evil choices that need severe consequences.
Thank God for a sound mind ladies,and that we are all able to grow and learn . I used to think I could help him now I know just to stay away..it is like a fire..stay away or get burned.
In my personal opinion (which some people may disagree with), I don’t think they are “broken”. They are evil, no doubt, but not broken. There is no wounded child, there is no child in there, period. They are soulless, imho. In my opinion saying that he felt for the injustices of the world was something he gleaned ( read : copied ) from someone else. Heartfelt? Hardly. Never. Ever.
Of course.. they would LOVE for you to believe they are broken, and need “some of your love” to transform that “brokenness” into “wholeness”. So you project your own fantasies of healing their “inner child” to realize.. often when it is too late. There is no inner child- just, nothing there at all. A black hole.
Part of their “knowing the words but not the music” is this in fact : they never felt it in the first place. Love is as real to them as Santa Claus is to Stephen Hawking. As Jesus is to an Atheist.
The sociopath always made a great point to “show” how much he “cared” about injustice… poverty… insisting that I should give my food to the homeless ( Steve’s article “When bad people do good things” illuminates this idea ) posting on Facebook.. “Donate to Haiti!” ( after seeing the same thing posted everywhere else ) … ( But if you probed these further, you could see it was for people to “see how humanitarian he was” it was all a sham. )
But one day I told him something that I’d heard. I said, “You know, they say the reason that people so readily shun homeless people (ie : avoid ) is because the homeless represent to them, what they most fear for themselves.”
He didn’t get it. I had to explain it over and over. He still didn’t get it. Why? Because in order to understand a statement like that, you need empathy. He lacked it entirely.
There are varying degrees of psychopathy ( not that any are less severe than the other ) so I suppose not everything can be put into neat little boxes.
PS : They don’t have any feelings.
Dear Dancingnancies,
RIGHT ON!!!! Great insight into the emptiness of what is NOT there inside the psychopath–
Yes, there are degrees of psychopathy, I agree, but it is like “tall” or “short” where does short stop and tall begin? It is, I think, the PATTERN in most cases, but also the individual acts.
Charlie Manson didn’t do all bad acts, nor did Ted Bundy, but the INTENSITY of the fewer bad acts they did was HIGH. Some psychopaths do “low-er level” abuse but lots of acts, and some do fewer acts, but of Higher intensity. (Murder, rape and other sexual offenses, etc) The ones who do the “high level intensity” though, I do not think are ever safely released into society and frequently re-offend if sent to prison and then released. Prison sure doesn’t seem to do them any good. I realize that incarcerating people “forever” isn’t a popular, “politically correct” concept, but for violent crimes I am convinced it is the ONLY solution (and that makes me a “radical” I am sure in some people’s minds) but I would incarcerate violent people forever and let a lot of the non-violent “criminals” do community service and manual labor for the public good. Maybe My idea wouldn’t work, but what we have NOW isn’t working either! LOL
Oh, well when I am dictator it may not be better, but it will be DIFFERENT! Vote for Oxy for dictator!
oxy, yep exactly. Just because a psychopath does not kill people doesn’t mean he’s any less dangerous. Sure, he fits his actions neatly under the radar of society’s laws ( as you said, repeatedly ), but they are just as harmful… Manson and Bundy are the few psychopaths that were serial killers so everyone thinks, “Oooh, so psychopaths = serial killers” Wrong again.
Yes, I saw the black hole and still say “but for the grace of God…” so what is their purpose???
Hopefully to show us that we can go through this and come out joyful, stronger and wiser for having seen and experienced it, because I was so naive before.
Oxy for dictator!!! I do agree, lets lock them all up with no chance to come back to society..they have forfeited that right. Make them grow their own vegetables (no meat) and be self sustaining ( that would reduce the numbers right there). Any deserted islands they can inhabit??
Or maybe I have that backwards..any deserted islands the LF survivors can retire on??? on the other side of the world of course ( see I did learn something) lol.
Okay, Ms. Dictator, add that to your platform…