Is sociopathy a perversion? If yes, a perversion of what? And if it is a perversion, does this compel us to revisit the sociopaths’ culpability for his transgressions? After all, perversions imply antisocial, irrepressible impulses. If an impulse is irrepressible, or unsuppressible, how culpable is its expresser?
I think a good case can be made that sociopathy is a perversion—a perversion of personality characterized by the unsuppressible tendency to exploit others.
It’s not so much a question of the sociopath’s sanity: most sociopaths, by criminal standards, are sane. Then again, so are most kleptomaniacs.
When I refer to the sociopath’s unsuppressible tendency to exploit, I mean unsuppressible in a characterological, more than compulsive, sense. The sociopath, that is, appears characterologically to be driven to perpetrate incursions against others’ space and security.
While I think that sociopaths, like most transgressors, can exercise, on a case by case basis, some selective choice in determining when next, and whom, to violate, I do not think that sociopaths, in the bigger picture, can control their exploitive tendencies any more than saints can control their beneficent tendencies.
I regard it as inevitable that the sociopath will violate others and, unless stopped, violate repeatedly.
In my view, many wrongly interpret the sociopath’s capacity for situational self-restraint as suggestive of what ought, therefore, to be the sociopath’s capacity to cease his exploitation more broadly.
But I stress—while it’s true that most sane individuals, including sociopaths, can exercise some suppressive control over the expression, timing and direction of their antisocial tendencies in the short-term, it does not follow that they can maintain their self-regulation in the long-term.
The sociopath’s peculiar and profound self-centeredness, along with his inability to genuinely care about the harm he inflicts on others, explain why his exploitive tendencies, in the long-term at least, will demand expression.
Yet one often hear variations on the theme, “You know, when he’s not being cruel, deceptive and self-centered, he’s really a good guy.”
Or, “When she’s not scamming seniors out of their life savings, she’s got really good instincts.”
Carrying this logic a step further, it’s like saying, “You know, when he’s not raping women, he can be a quite tender, trusting lover.”
I commonly work with clients who see the refractory period separating the antisocial displays of their partners as tantalizing evidence of the latters’ “real personality;” of their “true potential” as partners/parents/friends; of how they’d be “all the time if they could just work through their demons.”
This is “enabling” thinking, steeped in denial and fantasy. It reflects the desperation to want to believe in the underlying goodness of the antisocial mate. One insists that with just a little more time, a little more forgiveness, a little more patience, one’s partner will recognize, finally, what he or she has been jeopardizing, and will finally properly value his or her mate, family and blessings.
Sometimes religious/spiritual individuals, for whom faith and forgiveness are integral to their identity, are especially prone to this self-delusive thinking. Their endurance of countless lies, deceptions and betrayals feels less about self-compromise than the fulfillment of their higher values.
They may harbor the hope, and faith, that their travails, if endured uncomplainingly and for long enough, will result finally in vindication—for instance, this will be the time he really sees the light!
I call this “reform-aholoc” thinking—that is, believing with a kind of blind faith in the antisocial partner’s capacity for reformation.
(This article is copyrighted (c) 2009 by Steve Becker, LCSW.)
Regarding how “non-victims” view the S, I had an experience today that really drove that point home. I was talking to a friend at work who I haven’t really spoken to at length since the d&d. She asked me why I wasn’t seeing the S any more and I said he dumped me. “Oh, but he is so nice and charming”, she said. I said that after he treated me wonderfully for 18 months, he blindsided me by telling me “I think I’ve given you the wrong impression, I don’t love you” Then I went on to tell her how he told me I was like an “unpaid whore” to him and he really didn’t miss me at all when his job moved to a different building because he didn’t love me. And then I told her how he now has a new girlfriend in his new building who he says he “loves”,
My friend was absolutely shocked. She just kept saying “I can’t believe he did that” – he seems like the nicest guy ever.” I tried to explain to her what he’s all about- that his recent five day suspension was not “bad luck” but was certainly a result of something underhanded or dishonest that he did. Again, she could not believe me.
So, I think that Ss can snow most people- really only the victims can see and understand. It is almost impossible to explain what they do and the devastation they cause to a non-victim. That is why this blog is so important to us- we are communicating with others who really understand.
This week is still hard for me because of the Ss father dying(right on the heels of the 5 day suspension- and perhaps he is very near losing his job). I just have had a very hard time not feeling sorry for him and somehow wanting to comfort him although he clearly has no interest in my comfort. I did send him a brief e-mail saying I was sorry about his Dad and he sent an email back saying “thanks much”. I know I have to leave it alone now, but it is very hard for me to not reach out to him. And for some reason many memories of the good times that we (or at least I) had have been flooding back this week. I need to re-set and get back to my program of distancing from him and the memories. (But at some moments I still-stupidly- miss him so so much, miss the good times, even if they were only a fantasy).
Beenayearnow – You are thinking of Scott Peterson who is now on death -row – I think his poor wife was Laci and the unborn child Conner – correct me if I am wrong gang – and I remeber Scott Peterson’s mother – if she isnt a spath I will eat Oxys hat…and this Scott Peterson dude get’s ton’s of mail from women that want to marry him – go figure –
Steve Becker – Thanks you so much for that article – I agree with another poster who said it makes her realize the futility in thinking he will admit to his wrong ways – they dont think they have done anything wrong. And I still beat myself up at times thinking it was me that failed him and he is happy now with new victim. My gut tells me pay attention to his tracks not his heart – he 42 never lived alone and a history of short term relationships and has no friends including his family that warned me to avoid him. But not knowing anything about him is still better than knowing anything at all. And as far as the bird analogy – they are desendants of dinasours and they sing to attract a mate not to please us even if the song is nice to the ears they are simply surviving and they will kill another bird over territory rights and keep on singing. So yes spaths have an animal instinct to survive…..
Steve: I have to say I have always waited and hoped for people to change, even the S, but I have learned at this site… it’s not going to happen! Thank you for the article! I have to keep reminding myself about this truth.
Oxy, S O S,
The xmil had one child with her hub (from descriptions, IF TRUE, sounded rather S) and adopted the lrbx*. The bio child is cold, emotionally detached, gets involved with pyramid schemes and other “Get Rick Quick” schemes, addicted to gambling, alcoholic, promiscuous, and selfish…and yet people follow her around like she’s the greatest thing since sliced bread.
The adopted child (the lrbx) was reported to be (by reliable family members) a rotten child at a young age- which progressed into lying, truancy, fighting, running away, sex, arson, expulsion from multiple schools, alchohol, drugs, and a bunch of arrests for various types of crime. He went into the Navy as his other choice was prison. Got kicked out early from there for discipline problems. His bio mother (another loser- but I did meet her, I think, maybe he hired a cheap actress…lol) told a tale about the bio father that sounded like he wasn’t a “great guy” either.
The common theme is their mother- she and her hub make/made enough money to mostly pay for the problems to go away through atty fees, probation, or outright payment to the victims to make it go away. No matter what they did/do, it isn’t their fault. She favored the 2 of them over their 4 step siblings- blatantly and obviously. Think piles of Christmas toys for her 2 children, socks and underwear for the step-siblings. When anyone complains to her about the awful things they do, her eyes literally glaze over. I often wondered if she was singing “yankee doodle Dandy” in her head when she did that- she sure as shootin’ wasn’t listening.
So was it the gene pool or the parenting? Was it when the bad parenting fertilized the gene pool? I think Oxy’s right about it being a combination of factors- the right, or wrong for that matter, combination of factors. In the cases where the child followed the path to a pd, how much contact with other p and s figures was there? How much INFLUENCE did they have? I think that can vary too. I have family members that I am close to and others I don’t feel the need to seek the company thereof. Just like there isn’t one diagnosis, there isn’t one answer. And scary and sad as it is to think about (I have 3 children from 2 scary marriages), I think sometimes something so small and precious can just be born bad. That goes against everything I believe in that is right and good…
*lrbx=lying rat bastard x
Hello all my lovely comrades: In case you are wondering if you’ve got this straight, check out this link to “Eraser Killers: Men who make women disappear.”
http://www.lemondrop.com/2009/03/30/eraser-killers-men-who-make-women-disappear/
Was he really fairly nice right up until he wasn’t? You might have escaped this fate. (I believe I was dealing with one of these types who just had’t killed yet — that I know of.)
Remember that NC means that you are sliding out of his sights, and you are less liikely to be targeted for his deadly actions.
“Insuppressible” is a term that’s making a lot of people angry. It sounds like it gives the S/P/N a free pass for his/her evil.
Well, enough about them! I don’t give a “beep” about them!
“Insuppressible” is just one more way of saying, “S/he has done it before, and sooner or later s/he will do it again.”
This isn’t about them, it’s about us. What are we going to do, knowing that the S/P/N is going to re offend? Oh, yes. They’ll charm, they’ll sweat talk, they’ll smooth everyone around us. People will think we’re crazy for being upset with “sweet, charming, wonderful them.” Ri-ight!
We have to toughen up, stop feeling bad about what others think, and get on with our lives cluster B free.
If being right is important to you, wait awhile. The S/P/N will prove you right with his/her new fan club sooner or later. Most of them have criminal records longer than your arm. How they fooled us is a bit embarrassing. Their new fan club will join the ranks of the embarrassed but enlightened sooner or later.
Elizabeth: Thank you for putting the focus where it belongs.
You said, “This isn’t about them, it’s about us. What are we going to do, knowing that the S/P/N is going to re offend?”
They LOVE to have the focus on themselves, and we “energetically” support that as we endlessly examine them. YES, THEY ARE THAT AWFUL, and THEY WILL DO IT ALL OVER AGAIN.
So, EC, you’re right! What can WE do about US?
No two people (even identical twins) have 100% of the same environment. The ONLY two people who DO have the 100% same genes are identical twins. In the “identical twins raised apart” studies, about 80% of the twins, if one was a P so was the other….so my guess is that 50-80% of the P-ness is genetic.
Of course, my question (unanswered) in those twin studies is, if one is a P, is the other a normal loving person or an “almost Psychopathic” person?
Almost all alcoholics (as I understand it) have a genetic tendency to become addicted to alcohol (ETOH)—-is there a gene that tends for the addiction to ADRENALINE, or one of the other internal “drugs” that the Ps seem to be addicted to?
Or is it the lack of oxytocin (the bonding hormone) receptors that is the problem, and without “bonding” there is no conscience?
Or is it a combination of factors in genetics + environmental or situational?
Since it was noticed that many children who were “abused” BECAME abusers, it was postulated that abuse CAUSED them to become abusers. However, my take is that if a child is abused by a natural parent, the natural parent is a psychopath or other genetic anomaly and has passed the genes on. Not ALL, or even, I think, not the majority of abused kids become abusers. So only some abused kids become abusers themselves (though it may be a higher percentage than non abused kids.)
One of my half sibs was violently physically abused by my P-sperm donor, and I have evidence he is anything EXCEPT an abuser to his children. Since I don’t have a personal relationship with him, I am guessing at this. I know many other people who have been violently abused by their parent(s) and are NOT abusers though, but have sibs who ARE abusers.
In studies with animals, and in observed situations, abuse does not always produce a violent animal, and in many cases, depending I think on the breed, the animal will more likely COWER into a terrorized victim rather than fight back. So genetics is very much involved in animals who are abused either becoming abusers themselves, or violent, or submissive victims.
Is the fact that we submitted to the abuse genetic as well as the Ps’ abusiveness? Or is our submission partly environmental and partly genetic? My guess is that even our submission is partly genetic and partly training. However, because we do have a conscience, and a rational mind, we CAN over come this genetic predisposition with logical and rational thought. I think part of our difficulty in doing this is again, both the genetic and environmental components. We are in the “habit” of submitting and overlooking abuse, but I think we are also addicted to the “internal drugs” that we have consumed along with our abuse, sometimes from childhood.
The fact that some victims will never break free, will continue to stay in this submissive posture no matter how horrible the abuse is (Stockholm syndrome victims for example) is proof (to me) that sometimes it is so controlled by genetics that it is just as impossible for the victim to break free as it is for the P to change their ways.
I think the difficulty that many of us have had in breaking free from this at all shows how powerful the tendency to stay in this situation, or to return to it if you do break free from one P, and means that we have to work DOUBLY hard to STAY free, just like an alcoholic MUST TOTALLY STAY AWAY FROM BOOZE, we have to TOTALLY stay away from ABUSE of even the least amount. We can’t “sip” a little abuse without being DRAWN BACK IN.
Look around you at your friends and people you know. How many of you know women or men who get out of ONE dysfunctional relationship and go right back into another one just as bad? I will bet the farm that everyone of us either is one of those people or knows several, or both.
We can’t stay isolated from other humans on a desert island so we are never again exposed to an abuser, but we must live with other people in an imperfect world, where there are imperfect people all all around us. But we must carefully guard ourselves from slipping back into the “old patterns” of accepting abuse.
Matt and I were talking on another thread yesterday about him “giving probation” to a guy who had stood him up instead of NCing this guy for the FIRST sign of disrespect. I could more easily see what Matt was doing than Matt could see in this instance. So, I “BOINKED” Matt and said “hey, why are you giving this guy another chance?” It helped Matt to see that he had overlooked a RED FLAG because his past patterns were to overlook red flags.
I may not be able to see my own overlooking of red flags, but someone else might see them more clearly. So, it is like an AA meeting kind of, only our “club” is the LF meeting! Just as the alcoholic may always be susceptible to the Siren Song of booze, I think we may to some extent be susceptible to the Siren Song of the Ps. Especially those of us who have had repeated encounters with them, or who had P parents or role models.
Hi Oxy: On the genetics, I went to a family gathering (not my family) that had a high percentage of mountain climbers, extreme skiers and snowboarders, and other sorts of, shall we say, adrenaline junkies. The air fairly vibrated. These were “upstanding people” who appeared to be fairly civilized, but as I observed I noted a lot of extraversion, charm, risk-taking (obviously) and other sorts of “pink flags.” (Not quite red!) Probably in the mix there were several Harleys in various garages. I spent a lot of time musing about that particular tribe, but they seemed, overall, to be respectable in their lives and in pursuing their ambitious dreams.
Knowing what I know, though, I’d observe them carefully from a bit of a distance before getting more closely involved with any one of them.
I also heard, last week, that there seems to be a genetic component to the sorts of friends that teens tend to pick. Interesting, huh? So, not only the internal genetics, but genetics driving the influences that we bring into our lives by our choices of friends!