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.)
SOS:
Have a look at the typical “Hero” of an action adventure picture. The James Bond type fits the bill most of the time. Sure, it’s a sympathetic portrayal of the S’s point of view, but nonetheless, many of these “heroes” are not the kind of people we want to get close to.
“According to one individual who suffered at the hands of a psychopath:
“The World has only one problem, Psychopaths. There are two basic types of Psychopaths, Social and Anti-Social. The essential feature of Psychopaths is a Pervasive, Obssesive- Compulsive desire to force their delusions on others. Psychopaths completely disregard and violate the Rights of others, particularly the Freedom of Association which includes the right not to associate and the Right to Love.”
Been reading from this web site “The Psychopath: The Mask of Sanity. Thought others might want to read it. It’s informative and written very well.
http://www.cassiopaea.com/cassiopaea/psychopath.htm
You can read the original which was written by Cleckely at a much safer site. It is the 5th edition from 1988 and the 1st edition was written in 1941:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/2441661/The-Mask-Of-Sanity-An-Attempt-to-Clarify-Some-Issues-About-the-SoCalled-Psychopathic-Personality
Well Steve I have read this topic about 5 time in the last few days and now I feel compelled to say something at least . For my own situation the recurring question that always comes up is ,”What the hell are they”. What is the core essence of a psychopath . We know a lot of the symptoms , which certainly helps in recognising them but that still does not answer the question , ” What the hell are they ‘. Funnily enough another question that also keeps coming to mind is . What is it to be human as opposed to psychopathic . Given that anyone can have some of the characteristics of the psychopath , I then wonder did we pick up some of these traits because of the psychopaths arround us . Psychopaths ,in fact ,that we are ,for the most part ,not aware of . For me I think , and I am just formulating this as I write . It is the predatory nature of the psychopath that is the underlieing nature that causes all the other symptoms to be created , a disguise if you will , the old preverbial wolf in sheeps clothing . Psychopaths are social predators first and the check list comes next with all the phoney personality stuff that we recognise as being the symptoms of a psychopath . I guess the important thing here is that , if you can see the predator you don’t have to be bothered going through the check list one by one , although it would confirm ones recognition of the predator, if all the other pieces to the puzzle fell into place . This is kind of like seeing the finished puzzle before you start putting the pieces together . So why are these people human predators . What could cause one man to turn on his fellow man in such a way , a way that we , all here at lovefraud have experienced first hand . Well at the moment this is the question that I do not have the answer to . Any takers .
Dear Quest,
I definitely understand your question.
Most species of mammals are NOT predators of their own species—some exceptions. Male house cats and lions will kill the female’s kittens so that she will come back into heat sooner and he can re-breed her. Even most carnivorous mammals do not prey on their own species as a GENERAL pattern.
Jesus talked about psychopaths among his followers when he warned them of “WOLVES IN SHEEP’s CLOTHING” and many of us have met these “wolves” in various religious organizations and other places where they pretended to be such “good, kind and pious” people, while they secretly preyed on the “flock.”
I read a book (CRS can’t remember which one) that talked about “Eve’s” knowledge of good and evil making her truly “human” because now she had choices….assuming that the “knowledge of good and evil” (since animals don’t have this knowledge) is what makes us “human”—that would make the “wolves among us” truly human as well as we, but the differences between them and “us” is that they KNOW and DON’T CARE. Plus, in addition to knowing and not caring, I think it is also a bit like the lion killing off the whelps of the previous male lion after he takes over the pride—a way to spread his genes. But even the male lion won’t kill his OWN offspring, only the offspring of some OTHER male.
I DO see some genetic advantage in being a psychopath, especially for males, over not being a psychopath.
In a high number of cases, the P-male will spread his seed widely, having 6-8 or more children which he abandons with their mothers and moves on. He gets more sex than the “average guy” because he keeps several women at once.
In a time of short resources, he will survive because he will steal and take from others and assure that HE survives. The non psychopath will share resources to his own deprivation.
Since the psychopath is all about power and control, some of them become “successful” in achieving high “office”—even heads of tribes and countries and states.
Most predators have some form of “camouflage” –the tiger’s stripes help hide him from his prey in the high grass, etc. and the “sheep’s clothing” of social graces hide the predators among us who are actually our own species. What a wonderful form of “hiding in plain sight” they have developed. If EVERYONE was a psychopath the world would go to “hell in a hand-basket” but since not ALL of a psychopath’s children will be psychopaths, they also leave some prey for their offspring just like a mud wasp puts paralyzed insects in the mud womb with her eggs, there will be a non-P parent, or sibling for the young and budding psychopath to prey on, possibly for life, or a non-P parent to train him how to design and construct a camouflaging “sheep’s costume” so that he can mingle among his victims. Some of these costumes to the uninitiated souls are so cleverly made that they cannot identify the predators among them until they are so gravely wounded it is impossible to escape from their clutches.
Or as some predators do, they don’t totally kill off the prey, but simply vampire-like, suck the life’s blood, but not to the point of complete death—just a “living death.”
I think we, now that we KNOW and are initiated, must be careful to learn the “red flags” that signal the presence of one of “them” among us…the “problem is” however, that just as if we were trying to tell our fellow men that there are “aliens from mars among us, and they look like humans, but they are evil”—–telling OTHERS who have never been victimized, or even some who HAVE been victimized, that these “wolves in sheep’s clothing” are among us, and are EVIL, falls on deaf ears.
Thanks BloggerT7165
OxDrover
“Most predators have some form of “camouflage” ”“the tiger’s stripes help hide him from his prey in the high grass, etc. and the “sheep’s clothing” of social graces hide the predators among us who are actually our own species.”
I agree that many animals and the animal kingdom can be used to understand the sociopath and their behavior. Sociopath work on a very basic need which is to survive and survive at all cost. Morality and ethic are not part of their inner thoughts or concerns no more then it is with the animal kingdom. Win at all cost is the battle cry and they view sociality and us just as them. Get them before they get us is their daily bread which they live and eat. This explains why most if not all of them call us and sociality hypocrites and liars. Of course this has more to do with “projections” then reality. Our understanding about them is itself filled with “hypocritical and with lies”. Anyway like any predator to be a successful hunter one must learn to bend in with their environment to be able to get close enough to kill their prey. Tigers have stripes, sociopath uses fake expressions of emotions that they neither understand nor feel.
From Mask of Sanity site:
“In short, the psychopath – and the narcissist to a lesser extent – is a predator. If we think about the interactions of predators with their prey in the animal kingdom, we can come to some idea of what is behind the “mask of sanity” of the psychopath. Just as an animal predator will adopt all kinds of stealthy functions in order to stalk their prey, cut them out of the herd, get close to them and reduce their resistance, so does the psychopath construct all kinds of elaborate camouflage composed of words and appearances – lies and manipulations – in order to “assimilate” their prey.”
Steve-
In Driven to Do Evil I discuss the biology of the “compulsion” you describe. In addition to having this strong “compulsion” sociopaths have worse than average “self regulation” or impulse control. That means even if “a sociopath” were to decide to try to control the antisocial impulses his/her capacity to do so is severely limited.
In the end of the biology chapter I conclude they have diminished capacity.
The other issue regarding addiction is that sobriety comes with replacing the addictive behavior with strong interpersonal connections. The 12 steps help a person do that. Well “sociopaths” lack the capacity for these strong interpersonal connections. So then what do they replace the power addiction with??? The only answer I can come up with is something intellictually or physically stimulating. Study and athletics??? But that takes work and also they don’t like to work.
In the end they are trapped by their obsession with power and can find no way to escape it.
Quote of the day:
“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.”
Elizabth C can I use this in my presentation at the psychopathy meeting?
HAPPY EASTER TO ALL
This subject brings up a point I struggle with every day. How do I treat my N/s to be ex-husband? I am so angry now most of the time at what he does that I cannot be nice. There is always a tone to my voice now. He does not understand that I will no longer excuse and explain away his behavior to the children. Not that I will give them the dirty details – but I will not allow him to deny the reality of their feelings anymore. His parenting time is spent dragging my son around or at work on weekends and it isn’t necessary. He says my 10 yr old son has to accept those terms if he wants to be with him and I shouldn’t allow my son to be so expressive that he doesn’t want to sit and watch him work all day. And this is not to make money to live on – it is one of his obsessions he is attending to -and he will probably lose his shirt.
Anyway, his father demands unconditional respect and left me a message of how horrible I am, deteriorating more every day, he is so ASHAMED OF ME- he is in utter shock how I go aghainst him now.
He doesn’t understand I am in utter reality now and see how manipulatibve he is. Yet the name calling and bashing still gets to me.
So what is he- obviously not the man I thought – he isn’t an animal – but he isn’t normal either. If I treat him well – he thinks he has won and the manipulation gets worse. If I treat him like an adversary – well same result.
So in his mind – what is he expecting? After all he has done – and now I know he was involved in more perverted behavior than I EVER would have suspected – dio I treat him like the fake he is??? I even called him a freak this week and it hurt me to say it-even though he provoked me beyond human tolerance over our son.
Does anyone struggle with this? I am not used to showing him my anger in such base terms – yet I feel more betrayed than ever and what he is capable of scares me – not in a physically violent way – but in how he is so indifferent to his effect on all of us- behaviorally and financially.
Has anyone had any success going to the immediate family and telling them what they really are ??? Does it do any good???
After all these years of being close they have abandoned me – and basically the kids – it is so sad. But I suppose to keep us in their lives they would have to abandon him?
What is he to me now ???
He doesn’t even look the same to me and treats me with such hate and contempt it still knoocks me off balance.
I am crazy, dillusional, need a new counselor – angry , hateful, says I am using the kids against him when I am only trying to protect them when I can. I spent years covering for him and it almost cost me my relationship with my kids.
Perversion seems to fit – everything he does goes aggainst any kind of human decency.
He is a bottomless pit of need – but still evokes my pity.