Downton Abbey was on TV last night, and Terry and I are among the millions of fans. Last night’s episode (Season 3, Episode 4) ended in tragedy because of behavior that looked so familiar to me.
(Spoiler Alert: The following description gives away the story.)
Lord Grantham’s daughter, Lady Sybil, is about to give birth. Rather than depend on the local country doctor, Dr. Clarkson, Lord Grantham has imported a more socially acceptable obstetrician, Sir Philip Tapsell, to deliver the baby. As the birth approaches, both doctors are in attendance at the estate.
Lady Sybil starts acting incoherently. Dr Clarkson fears that she may be toxemic. He recommends that they rush to the hospital so the baby can be delivered immediately by C-section. Sir Philip insists that nothing is wrong—Lady Sybil is experiencing a normal childbirth. The two doctors argue in front of the entire family and the nature of the argument is why I’m describing the show.
Dr. Clarkson worries that Lady Sybil may be in grave danger, but admits that he doesn’t know for sure. Sir Philip, on the other hand, is totally confident that nothing is wrong. He never wavers. He is pompous in his confidence. He practically sneers at the country bumpkin doctor for being an alarmist, and actually tells him to shut up.
Lord Grantham notes that Dr. Clarkson isn’t sure about the possible danger, whereas Sir Philip is 100% confident that everything is fine. He sides with Sir Philip, and they do not go to the hospital.
Lady Sybil goes into labor and the baby is born. But a short time later, she goes into convulsions and dies.
Argued like a sociopath
Dr. Clarkson was right all along. But Sir Philip spoke with unshakeable self-confidence, unwaveringly certain that he knew best. He argued like a sociopath.
I am not saying that the Sir Philip character is a sociopath. But I am saying that his extreme confidence, his self-righteousness and his hubris are all traits that sociopaths display when they are pushing to get their way.
I write about this in my book, Red Flags of Love Fraud:
How do they do it? How do sociopaths convince you to go along with their agendas, even to your own detriment?
They command it. This is a function of their charisma because they command unflinchingly, with complete self-confidence, they get results. Now, this doesn’t mean sociopaths are always barking orders. Often the commands are delivered on cushions of sweetness, or camouflaged as appeals for sympathy. But in their minds, whatever sociopaths want, they are totally entitled to have. Therefore, when they make their desires known, they show no doubt, only certainty. Compliance is demanded, and targets respond.
Those of us who are not disordered usually aren’t as adamant in expressing our views, opinions or desires. We may think we’re right, but recognize that we could be wrong. We may know what we want, but we’re willing to compromise. So when we come across people who communicate vociferously and forcefully well, we tend to be bowled over. Because of the sheer force of their words, we tell ourselves that they must know what they’re talking about, they’re telling the truth, and they’re right.
My ex-husband’s convincing lies
I’m soon going to be on another TV show I’ll tell you all more when I have details. The producer asked me if I had any more video or audio of my ex, James Montgomery. Well, I found some tapes that I had forgotten about recordings of voice mails, and a recording of our first telephone conversation when I arrived home after leaving him. The tapes illustrate the steamroller tactics with which he argued even when he was lying.
Let me set the scene. James Montgomery swept into my life, portraying himself as a successful entrepreneur. He invited me to be part of his business plans, which, if I could help him get started, were sure to make us fabulously wealthy. He pressured me to lease a car for him it was in my name, and I made all the payments. To feed his unending need for money, I drained my savings and loaded about $60,000 in debt to my previously zero-balance credit cards.
Montgomery also told me he was a member of the Australian military who had heroically served in Vietnam, and still acted as a consultant, particularly on terrorism. He often flew to Florida, telling me he was stopping by MacDill Air Force base in Tampa, home of the Special Operations Command. While there, he was able to get around by borrowing the cars of other military members that were parked at the base.
In December 1998, Montgomery dragged me to Florida, saying he had a contract to open a Titanic show in Orlando. We spent money we didn’t have to move down there. A few weeks later Montgomery admitted he never had a contract. Then, while he was flying to yet another business meeting, I discovered that he had fathered a child with another woman during our marriage. I left Florida, and took the car that he had been driving.
So, here’s part of my conversation with James Montgomery when I was back at my home in New Jersey. (Warning: Contains some profanity.)
Here’s what I know now that I didn’t know during the conversation. My entire marriage was a financial scam. James Montgomery was never in the military. When he travelled to Florida, he was visiting other women including, but not limited to, the mother of the child., who probably owned the car he drove.
Yet listen to how he argued about the car. I was wrong for taking the car back to New Jersey, which inconvenienced him. I was wrong about him using cars from the base. And I was stupidly ignorant about the policy for using military cars. Montgomery was adamant and self-righteous in his argument even though everything he said was a lie.
At the time, the conversation was terribly upsetting. He threw many more accusations and threats at me, which, because of the conviction of his words, made me wonder if he was right.
Later, I discovered that everything he said that day, and practically everything he said during our marriage, was a lie no matter how convincingly the words were stated.
I didn’t know someone could lie with such confidence and conviction. And that’s how I got into the entire mess.
“These rambling posts add nothing to the discussion. Can y’all just agree to disagree or something?”
This would have been quite helpful in the other thread in question.
I’ll address darwin’s mom even if he or she doesn’t read. They might. I didn’t intend to trigger or offend anyone when I said what I said in my first post to that other thread. You did not intend to be insulting or unjust in your own long post addressed to me. Sometimes people fail at what they intend or unwittingly or carelessly do what they didn’t intend.
I am wary of people who expect someone else to not get set off by questionable stuff they say just because they mixed it with some positive things or lip service about good will. I did absorb what you wrote, and some of it was even helpful. I should have thanked you, sorry. I think I did a good job of explaining where/why I found your words hollow or downright false. You succeeded in prompting my words of apology at the end of my post. It’s unfortunate that you yourself found nothing to reflect on in it or can’t accept that I have been given good reason to be wary of your extended hand and don’t agree at all with some of what you said about *me*. Your post granted me the opportunity to comment on the culture of this place, which really troubles me about a place that can do so much good, and could do more that it’s not. I am sorry if it happened at your expense. You clearly have tried previously to clarify this or that for me, mostly in a diplomatic tone, what is much appreciated for its contrast with other people’s behaviors. But given your last response, I think the ignore list idea is best.
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.christinedemerchant.com/files/photos/rocks.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.christinedemerchant.com/toronto-photos.html&h=355&w=473&sz=19&tbnid=SfMbjmBp0aLitM:&tbnh=97&tbnw=129&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dphotographs%2Bof%2Brocks%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=photographs+of+rocks&usg=__LpuljE8DeBAYMxEkwjh7N6Asf0Q=&docid=yXqIgbN6JrPVMM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=rGkJUfLVA4XO9ASwvYGgDQ&sqi=2&ved=0CGIQ9QEwEA&dur=1314
No Kim, those were too colorful. 😆
WOW, Kim, thanks for sharing that. As a former professional photographer I loved those photos. With the invention of digital cameras and photoshop I am no longer in the loop….my skills are the transportation equivalent of a buggy whip. LOL But I DO love to look at meaningful photographs.
Sometimes a picture is worth 10,000 words.
Please keep in mind the difficulty of this medium. 65% to 90% of human communication is non-verbal – it is body language, tone of voice, eye contact. All of that is missing when people are communicating via electronic words on a monitor. Therefore, these typed words can be easily misconstrued.
We are all hear to learn – and I believe intellectual learning is a part of that. We are here to process the pain of our experiences, receive support, get advice. We are at different stages and have different needs. We are different personalities.
Let us please assume that everyone has honorable intentions. If a person’s comments bother you – just skip them and move on to something else.
Raggedy Ann,
This discussion has so many ideas and perspectives mixed in on so many things that it would take pages to address them all. So I will only say that I don’t disagree with everything you’ve said but that it’s possible for you to be correct on one level, while the opposing view is correct on another level.
There is only one thing that I really would like to address with you. I hope you will further explain one thing that you said:
You say that their intention/motivations are varied. Can you please explain what some of these variations might be? I study spaths, and this is what I search for, the kernel of motivation.
Donna, that is a helpful reminder. However, it is very hard to take serious misattribution as welcoming, respectful, empathic, or even “interested”.
I think a helpful reminder is that a place like this does NOT have a culture of expectation that we trust others just because they want us to or slipped some kindness in with seriously questionable statements to and about us.
I do regret not being able to speak in more grateful or friendly language to DM, but was simply too shocked and upset by the ideas that were being attributed to me. (my first words in my long post)
I will definitely continue to read your posts and posted articles. Thanks for what you do.
Donna,
I agree that intellectual learning is part of it all. I found the article interesting in the other thread that sparked all this. It did not pain me, and I agree that there is no harm in scientific research.
But you are right, I start skipping posts for good from those posters when they start to call me a hypocrite for events that happened beyond my control, without my involvement or even witnessing it, let alone condoning it. I refuse to be the pissing post for whatever ails someone, or continue any further inconstructive exchanges. It’s not because I am attempting to be diplomatic or compassionate and find some middle ground, that I will allow anyone to try and smack me in the face with it…. and no apology afterwards, sincere or not is besides the point, will alter my mind on that drawn line. When a line is crossed there is no going back for me anymore. I understand people may be upset, hurt, angry and raw, but it gives them (whomever it is) no license to lash out at others. I myself do not lash out at others, and I have explicitly made no claims of another person’s personality in here, but only reflected the possible appearance their possible unwitting behaviour may have had.
As I tell my pupils who persist in a behaviour I requested them not to persist and then apologize… “Apologies mean nothing to me, without behaviour changes. And if the behaviour doesn’t change, it’s up to me to make sure it hinders me not.”
raggedyann
my only comment:
you inferred words i wrote as directed towards you, when in fact, they were not. i will address with a name when i am directing towards a particular person.
I wish that there was some warm and sunny place one could go for a week or two – and then come home ‘healed.’
But it seems like it is only in between all else that is going on that I find the time and ability to assemble the pieces of the puzzle of what was and is my recent apparent sociopathic relationship and ex-gf. Going on 6 months now, and sometimes it feels like it’s getting harder.
Thanks again to darwinsmom, skylar, OxDrover, Tea Light, KatyDid and everyone else. You feel like friends to me.
This is part of this forum’s atmosphere. It’s like an open house. We may not always be accurate and correct but the atmosphere for patience, sharing, learning – and maybe even… *gulp* …loving – is here. I think that most of us realize that our statements- including our pieces of advice, come with implied caveats. Nobody here is claiming to be an all-knowing ‘healer’ of any sort.
darwinsmom wrote:
“Since they have such low degree of emotions and no regard for other human beings their daily life pursuit is for those “primary” needs, but never those of emotional/mental and social development (soul searching). They simply do not have what it takes to develop on those levels, nor can’t perceive it.”
Again, this post helps me put the pieces of the ‘puzzle’ into place.
I see that the sociopaths that we have encountered may share a definite set of traits. One of these is the ‘objectification’ of their ‘victims.’
The piece of the puzzle that I think I have found a place for is the question: “Why do people stay with the sociopath so long and, why do the sociopaths stay with the victims so long?”
My ex-gf said that she stayed with her boyfriends ‘too long.’ She admitted that she started ‘hating’ the guy she dated before me, for 16 months, after they had been together for about ONE month! And there were similar stories or parallels with her other relationships before that one.
I have a theory. Since sociopaths objectify their victims – it is relatively easy for them to stay in the so-called relationship – because their victims are simply objects. They do not fully feel or perceive what they are doing to the hearts and minds of a human being – that may be so ‘in love’ and hoping and working HARD for a favorable outcome or happily -ever-after ending. This makes it easier for them to ‘string out’ the relationship. In fact, since the crazy-making, gaslighting, projection and all of the other elements of the sociopath dominance may be in place, and, since the sociopath may be ‘feeding’ on the relationship or, whatever they are getting from it – it really takes little effort by the sociopath to keep it going. This almost sounds like a parasitizing action.
This may be a reason why some of these disordered associations last so long. Also, the victim may be getting something that helps justify ‘staying.’ It could be good sex, financial support or, the fear of judgement by society or family if they were to get out.