We’ve discussed many of the sociopath’s traits, such as his missing empathy and compassion; his tendency to remorseless interpersonal exploitation; and proclivity to audacious acts of lying, deception and sundry other violating behaviors.
Now, I’m tempted to add to the mix what I call the sociopath’s tendency to “irrational optimism.”
By “irrational optimism,” I mean the sociopath’s irrationally optimistic belief, if not conviction, that he’ll either evade or, somehow, otherwise prevail over, the real, probable consequences of his actions.
Consider this brief, hypothetical interaction between a sociopath and his partner, who learns with certainty that he, the sociopath, has been cheating on her with three different women simultaneously:
Partner: How could you do that?
Sociopath: Do what?
Partner: Sleep with three different women behind my back. Are you f*cking demented?
Sociopath: First of all, that’s abusive. So stop right there and don’t abuse me. Second, I didn’t sleep with f*cking anybody. Not that I haven’t been tempted, given how lame our sex life is.
Partner: Why are you lying? I know who these women are, and I can prove you’ve been sleeping with them. Do you think I’m that f*cking stupid?
Sociopath: Let me ask you something. Why the hell would I sleep with three women and risk getting some f*cking STD? Think about it. You know me”¦or maybe you don’t? Does that make any sense?
The sociopath here is (or was) irrationally optimistic on two levels—first, that he’d be able to perpetrate this caper, undetected, indefinitely; and second that, once busted (as, now, he is) he’ll be able to squirm his way out of accountability.
We could address many aspects of this interaction, but I’d like to emphasize his last argument: “Let me ask you something. Why the hell would I sleep with three women and risk getting some f*cking STD? Think about it. You know me”¦or do you? Does that make any sense?”
This argument captures, I think, the sociopath’s “irrational optimism” beautifully. In offering the glibly insulting invitation to “think about it,” he makes a spectacle of his audacity and contempt: he really expects, and believes his partner should, accept his invitation [to think about it].
But even more than expecting her to “think about it,” which is outrageous enough, he expects her, in his irrational optimism, actually to be persuaded by his argument. In his irrational optimism, he is hopeful, if not confident, that she’ll choose to disbelieve the evidence she holds indisputably in her hands in favor of accepting his insulting logic.
How classically sociopathic is this?
More importantly, what contributes to the sociopath’s irrational optimism?
We might begin with his malignant sense of entitlement—that is, the sociopath’s belief that he is entitled to obtain the gratifications he wants. One of the most dangerous aspects of the attitude of entitlement is how it renders impotent—denudes of power—rule, limits and laws.
When you feel entitled to something, if it’s not accomodatingly forthcoming, you feel entitled to take it. You’ve laid, in your entitlement, a kind of psychic possession of what it is you want, so that now it becomes, in your mind, yours—specifically, your right to have.
And so if someone (or something) obstructs your seizing what now, in your mind, is your right to possess, then you are free to take it—to take, in fact, whatever is yours—by any means necessary.
Conferring this entitled status upon oneself encourages the irrationally optimistic view that, one way or another, accomodation looms”¦it must!
Closely related to this is the sociopath’s grandiosity: he believes he can and should succeed at his high-wire machinations because he’s that good, that clever and—it can’t be stressed enough—that entitled.
His grandiosity may take the form of thoughts like, “Sure, normal guys couldn’t pull this shit off, but I’m not your normal guy.”
And so, when you feel like you can do things that others can’t—especially things unsupported by “reality—”this is grandiosity. And grandiosity feeds, I believe, very directly, the sociopath’s tendency to irrational optimism.
Then there is the sociopath’s contempt, so inseparable from his grandiosity. As we discussed, the sociopath, in the example above, expects his insulting argument to succeed, either because he’s convinced he’s smart, clever and persuasive enough to be found so convincing, or else he’s convinced that his partner is dumb, naïve and/or desperate enough to believe him. (Or both!)
As a consequence, the sociopath’s contempt leaves him at constant risk of underestimating others, and overestimating himself. In his irrational optimism, fed by his contempt, he fails to appreciate how close he is always is—perhaps just one more reckless risk away—from being busted.
What else feeds the sociopath’s irrational optimism? How about his stupidity?
This may sound provocative, but let me explain. I suggest that blind faith supports a perspective of irrational optimism, and the sociopath operates with a kind of blind faith. That is, he operates in the blind faith that, somehow or other, he’ll escape accountability for his latest transgression.
Where does his blind faith come from? Two good sources, I’d suggest, are his grandiosity and arrogance—they blind him, I contend, to certain realities, effectively making him stupid on some level.
And his stupidity reinforces his irrational optimism.
Quite obviously, I’m not talking I.Q. stupidity, but rather judgement-level stupidity. The sociopath’s personality pathology mars his capacity to make wise, intelligent judgements in many circumstances.
(My use of “he” in this article is a convenience, not to suggest that females aren’t capable of the behaviors and attitudes discussed. This article is copyrighted © 2009 by Steve Becker, LCSW).
Dear Oxy – I want to thank you again for the post to me last night. I need to clear the air here on a couple of things though .
First – The assumption that maybe you triggered me is a misplaced one. I realize that people here have different beliefs and different opinions about various things. I was stating what was obvious in my posts to you that you chose not to even address. If you want to toggle your tone of language from aggressive to nice when someone calls you on what you are doing, that’s entirely your choice. I went back again and read the posts over a couple of more times.
You know, we all have at one time or another, been the target of some stealth abuse. When it’s something said to us by a significant other or anyone that is important to us it can be devastating. We know that we have just been slammed, but often times, in a weakened state, or if we have been programmed not to stand up for ourselves, we just go off and lick our wounds and wonder just how they can get away with that?!!
That’s not the case here, and I think this is an excellent time to deconstruct your opening statement to me as an example of stealth abuse in action. I’m doing this to be illustrative of the dynamics that come into play when one person won’t come out openly with a plausible excuse for their strongly held beliefs that are, in actuality, being stated plainly when we look at what is said.
Remaining aware of our intent is always key, when we communicate with others, and again I would like to just request that you keep the discourse civil. I didn’t make any assumption that I triggered YOU when I questioned you on your position about the use of condoms as a means of prevention of STDS or AIDS.
When I got no response at all, let alone a plausible one, I interpreted that to mean you just didn’t want to come out and openly state your belief that abstinence is the only moral alternative, if that was your reason.
I don’t know. I just know that that position is an irresponsible one. Lives STRAIGHT and GAY are lost because of it, irrespective of that reality, you STILL are entitled to hold that view. You just didn’t want to declare it openly, again your choice and perfectly okay.
Secondly – Nowhere in our posts did I assume that you are “anti-gay” as you state in your opening line.
Matt and Henry may be two of your “bestest friends” here on this blog, as you say. I never made the assumption that you are prejudiced at all. I had been addressing two previous posts, the first about the predatory nature of a STRAIGHT MAN who infected a number of WOMEN with HIV and the vitriol that you spewed as you appropriated a word, EXCLUSIVITY, from my just previous post, to demonstrate the invalidity of exclusivity in men when a MAN breaks his word about sexual exclusivity to a WOMAN, and how unreliable men are. This coming out as you addressed 7STEPSTOHEAVEN just after I posted. I searched her comments for the word exclusive, found none there, and chose to call you on what you were doing.
Again, I’m an adult and I know how to identify my feelings. I wasn’t triggered. I was questioning the merits of what you were demonstrating, namely that of “man-bashing” as you called it. Your tone went from vitriolic to sweet after being called out. That my dear, is an example of stealth abuse. If you want to appropriate something from the post made just before you make your own, to shoot someone down for expressing a sincere desire for real intimacy, then just address me directly. I have my “big boy britches” on and can ’splain myself with the best of them.
Third – You said, “The only gay people I DESPISE are the same people I would despise if they were straight! People who hurt other people with callous disregard for their safety and their feelings.”
What you said, in that one statement can be laid out as follows 1) You despise some gay people. 2) You
WOULD DESPISE straight people if they behaved like the gay people you despise, namely, those GAY people who hurt other people with a callous disregard for their safety and their feelings.”
WOW”That alone took my breath away, no gut twinge even needed. All that, and what prompted the whole series of posts was a STRAIGHT, PREDATIOUS MALE WHO INFECTED WOMEN with HIV, who YOU brought up to illustrate your point. All the while you were invoking the use of a word from my previous post, EXCLUSIVITY, in a SEXUAL context to demonstrate how unreliable MEN are.
I found that to be abusive, in light of the fact that when I confronted you about how imperative it is to NOT dissuade the use of CONDOMS in your position as a sex education instructor , but to ENCOURAGE use of them, you chose to remain silent in response.
Don’t you find that position to be hypocritical in the extreme? When: 1)You launch into an attack on a MALE PREDATOR (who just happened to be straight btw) and 2) You say you despise (not would despise, but DESPISE) gay people who hurt other people with a “callous disregard for their safety and their feelings.”
But this Dear Oxy, is what is entirely irresponsible on your part and totally betrays your position and sentiment on gay men in particular and gay people in general: “Personally, I don’t care if someone screws monkeys as long as they tell the monkey they are HIV positive, having sex with the elephant down the road, or whatever their pleasure is.”
Do you realize or EVEN CARE how patently OFFENSIVE your equation of gay male sexuality to BESTIALITY is? I think not, or you would have never made the correlation between the two. It no longer surprises me when a religionist trots out this kind of nastiness dressed up in dulcet tones of voice or word
to declare their despising of gay men.
You can use your friendship with Matt and Henry as a shield. I can’t or won’t speak for any other gay man, but to my mind, what you said is highly offensive. I don’t want or expect you to back off from your position. Please be cognizant of the fact this statement alone speaks volumes about what you really think of gay men in particular, and men overall, that they are predators and can’t be trusted. Again, I’m not pointing out the obvious to attack your POSITION, Oxy, you’re entirely entitled to these views. I just want shine a light on abusiveness.
I am using what you did to illustrate to the other Love Fraud readers a very good example of STEALTH ABUSE. It leaves the party on the receiving end of it feeling like something really bad just happened to them and not knowing just exactly what that is.
7STEPSTOHEAVEN made the accurate observation in regard to one of my post points about first having to LEARN to IDENTIFY just what the stealth abuse is, before being able to call out the abusive person on their offensive communication.
You say to me, “I’m sorry that your parent and family did that to you, SUPPOSEDLY because you are gay.
Here, what you are saying by subtle inference, with the word supposedly is that while they may have done this to me because of my orientation, or preference, as most religionists like to say (as though orientation were a choice) that in your mind, it was probably something else that YOU perceive. Why add the qualifier to your statement Oxy, if you are truly expressing empathy?
Please understand that I am not triggered by you, but am gently trying to illustrate a very good example of stealth abuse to the Love Fraud followers, so when it happens to them, they’ll be able to identify it and respond to it with understanding and compassion in their own lives.
When we come here we often lay bare our personal selves that leave us open to others who may not like us for WHO or WHAT we are as they perceive us from their world view. When they speak from a place of dissonance, saying one thing, but really meaning another, it’s our own responsibility to separate their truth from what we know rings false to us. Many times they don’t feel comfortable enough to just come out and justify their views openly.
If this happens to you in your own lives, regardless of the circumstance or person, please know that you will carry the toxin that they are injecting you with through their words until you choose to respond. Please note that at no point herein did I tell Oxy she isn’t entitled to her beliefs. She’s entitled to whatever opinions and beliefs she has about gay men in particular and men in general. My objective is to let her know that I am aware of what she meant. My only request is that she just come out and be open about launching an attack. This is the type of abuse that comes from being around sociopaths and adopting their mode of communication. Oftentimes, once we learn to understand the message within the communication we can come to a place of peace and just know that that person HAD TO communicate that way to survive what they survived in their lives. It doesn’t make them bad, just not forthright about their real intentions.
I believe honesty of intention is what is of most merit. Being self aware of our intention is crucial when we communicate here and in our lives in the outside world. It keeps us from doing harm.
It’s virtually impossible to misconstrue the intent in her communications. I hope looking at what she has done will bring a softening to her heart .
Dear Keensight,
Your post is quite long and you have made many “Assumptions” that I do not think are anywhere near correct about my thinking…i.e. read WAY more into them than was meant. That is why I think I “triggered you.”
Yes, I DO despise some gay people —people who are abusive.
Yes, I DO despise some straight people—people who are abusive.
QUOTE: KEENSIGHT:.
I found that to be abusive, in light of the fact that when I confronted you about how imperative it is to NOT dissuade the use of CONDOMS in your position as a sex education instructor , but to ENCOURAGE use of them, you chose to remain silent in response.
I did not “take” the word “exclusive” out of your post, I used that simply to indicate that Philippe had pretended to be exclusive wijh each of these women. Therefore it was part of his attempt to lower their caution so taht they would have unprotected sex with him.
Anyone, straight or gay, who PRETENDS to be exclusive with a partner to decrease their cautions and fear of STDs and is not, is putting that person at risks that they don’t know about. It is sexual roulette.
As far as encouraging the use of condoms, in many previous posts I have ABSOLUTELY encouraged condoms, but do oNOT prescent condoms as Absolutely SAFE, because they are NOT 100% effective in preventing pregnancy when a woman is only fertile about 2-3 days a month, so how could they be “absolutely safe” in preventing diseases. Plus, there are some diseases that can be transmitted “around” a condom. The last time I counted there were 18 of this type of STD. Fortunately it does slow down the major diseases.
I am no prude about sex and believe that any consenting adults with FULL knowledge of the risks they are taking are allowed to engage with my full consent (as if it were needed whitch it is of course NOT needed). That doesn’t mean I think it is always WISE behavior, but they have a right to be unwise, and the consequences, like all of us, come from the behaviors we choose to engage in. In my life I have done UNWISE things many times, and reaped the consequences.
I am NOT “hiding behind” Matt and Henry as a shield. I do not like being told what I am thinking. Telling someone what they are thinking is what is called a “discount” and I would appreciate it if you would not “interpret” my motives in my friendship and caring for these two very remarkable men who are great survivors and have been very very helpful in helping others heal here.
QUOTE: Oxdrover “I’m sorry that your parent and family did that to you, SUPPOSEDLY because you are gay.
My meaning there, Keensight, was that they used the “excuse” to devalue you because you were gay, but in fact, they may have DEVALUED you for ANYTHING, if not gay, then they would have found some other excuse to devalue you for. Soi what I am saying here is that you misinterpreted what my meaning was. When someone is RAW from the FRESH or old wounds from others it is easy to be wounded by misinterpeted word (especially when they are typed)
I was unable to get back to you promptly yesterday and the day before because I was having server problems and I would try for hours to get back to LF and get kicked off before I could post an answer. I finally got through last night fairly well, but had to reboot several times and it was very slow.
The way we post here it is easy to think someone is not “responding” to you, but there are various cause of this…being away from the compute when you post, compter problesm, or just nto having enough time to read through every post when it is a time there are quite a few posts.
QUOTE KEENSIGHT:It’s virtually impossible to misconstrue the intent in her communications. I hope looking at what she has done will bring a softening to her heart .
Keensight, while I don’t agree with your above statement since I do believe you have misconstrued many of the intents of my posts, and even in the above post.
I don[‘t think your INTENTIONS are bad, I think, indeed that they are GOOD, but I do think you are RAW enough that you are seeing “intentions” that are not there. I can testify that those intentions are NOT there.
QUOTE: KEENINSIGHT Don’t you find that position to be hypocritical in the extreme? When: 1)You launch into an attack on a MALE PREDATOR (who just happened to be straight btw) and 2) You say you despise (not would despise, but DESPISE) gay people who hurt other people with a “callous disregard for their safety and their feelings.”
I don’t see the differences in the meaning of the words that I used to mean that I am hypocritical in the extreme. I did launch into an attack on a male predator and I despise him, and if I knew of a gay male who was a predator I would also despise HIM. I don’t see any problem there. Basically I despise any predator, not based on anything else except him being a predator. Frankly I think most sexual predators are very “politically correct” they are neither strait no gay. Look for Dr. Leedom’s article on that. Some have preferences, of course, but many do not, they will have sex and abuse any age, any sex at any opportunity.
I think actually the statistics are that “straight” males are more likely to be pedophiles than gays. My Trojan HOrse P who was convicted for 3 pedophile rapes, when he got out was grooming a 12 year old BOY and this man styled himself straight.
QUOTE KEENSIGHT: Being self aware of our intention is crucial when we communicate here and in our lives in the outside world
Though I get the feeling from your above quote that you think I may not be very self aware of my intentions—but frankly, I think I am very aware of my intentions. I may at times not be aware of how someone else will perceive my writing, but I am quite aware of what I am trying to convey, and what my own thoughts and feelings are.
No one here is a mind reader. No one can tell what someone’s intentions are unless they are SO clear, like “I hate you” or “you are an idiot” etc. I can’t tell what your intentions are, I can only INTERPRET from your posts. My interpretations of your posts is that you are RAW, that you are reading into my posts and choice of words, rapidity of how I got back to you, the fact that I imay have missed responding to one or more of your points, etc. that I may be unaware of my own prejudices or venom directed more at gays than at straights.
I think the fact that your parents (and maybe others) have devalued you because of your sexual orientation (see I didn’t use the word preference, but to me the meaning is the way, the “way you function sexually and to whom you are attracted”) but I also think those people might have rejected you for other things as well—-have devalued you straight OR gay, just because from what you have said, I think you come from an abusive family background and you were picked for the “family scape goat”–your mother tried to protect you, but without great success, and when she was no longer able to protect you because of her advancing senility, they punished you and restricted your access to her. That was about a low, psychopathic nasty thing for them to do to you. I think a scape goat child in a family can’t do or be anything that will be pleasing to the abusers. I don’t think it was just your being gay, but ANYTHING to use against you to uses as an excuse to devalue and persecute you. Makes them feel superior to have someone they can look down on.
Not every one is that way. My step daughter is having a difficult time accepting my GD’s being gay, I’m not. Personally I don’t care one way or the other, as long as whatever partner she has is not a psychopath or other cluster B abuser. I just want her to be happy because she is a sweet, caring, bright young woman. Fortunately her brother, her only sib, accepts her as he always has and they are very close.
I’ll say again, Keensight, I have no prejudices against anyone who is not an abuser. I do have anomosity against abusers of any sex or situation.
I believe strongly in NC with these predators. I believe strongly in honesty toward those in our lives, if they can’t be honest, then I don’t need them in my life. If they won’t respect my boundaries, then I don’t need them either.
I think we have beaten this discussion between us “to death’ with the cyber skillet or a club or wahtever, so i suggest that we end it here. You’ve had your say, and I’ve had mine and we have hijacked the board enough and I have engaged in too much justifying my stands and my words. I have apologized to you profusely for offending you in any way by my words and stated that they were NOT meant to offend, and they were not. I was not in any way criticizing you or doubting your story or what you had endured. Frankly I seem more malice, I think, in your family than you do. I think scapegoating (and then blaming the victim of the scape goating) is a HORRIBLE thing to do to a child, and then the adult. Blaming them, shaming them, for “ruining” the family is totally malice and abuse. MY GUESS is that you were scape goated from early childhood, and the tossing you out for being gay is just ONE thing you were scape goated for. Maybe I’m wrong, but just my take on it.
Anyway, peace. Let’s end this and get on with our healing, reading, learning and supporting each other. ((((hugs)))) and my prayers for your healing and strength to be who you are and to put these abuses by your family behind you, move on and make a better life for yourself, Keensight. It takes time and work, but I think you are moving in the right direction.
whew!
I certainly admire the forthright manner in which both of you addressed your concerns.
There were misunderstandings, but you didn’t go postal on each other (like people did on me).
This is just another example of what I tried to put forth earlier to the LF members: it’s very easy to misunderstand each other on this board! But Keensight, that was great that you didn’t just get mad, you asked to have all the issues brought on the table. Oxy, I know (from experience) that it was uncomfortable to be misunderstood, but this exchange has set an awesome example for others on this board for how to respond with tact and grace. Thanks guys. Both of you.
BTW, Oxy, ummmm….
can you tell us about the diseases that AREN’T prevented by condoms? Inquiring minds want to know!
I mean, I know that condoms aren’t fool proof for anything, but are there some STD’s that I know nothing about which can’t be prevented with condoms? You said there are 18! I’ve been locked up in a cabin in the woods for 25 years, so I’m out of touch with this stuff.
Rather than me go into detail here, why don’t you google some of the good web sites.
herpes is one good example, because it is a virus and can be on the hands, and it can “set down” on any mucus membrane, so if teh man say gets the virus on his hands as you/he puts on the condom of your get it on yours applying it (quite likely) if he touches you on teh mouth or genitals with his HAND he can spread that. HPV is another one ditto.
The problem is that as in “J. Alfred Proofrock” it isays “love has pitched her mansion in the place of excrement” and it is NOT a sterile environment down there folks.
a condom only protects (if it doesn’t break) anything that comes out of the penis, and covers part of the penis (but not all the mucus membrane) in that area from being exposed to the woman’s secretions. It is kind of I think like a surgeon doing surgery with his fishing clothes on but having sterile glove on ONE hand. In doing infection control in hospitals for surgeries they are well aware that even the FARTS (yes, I did say that) of the personnel in the room can infect wounds. That is why many times in major and big surgeries they use laminar flow rooms where everyone is suited up in a moon-walker suit like thing and they do not breathe into the room air but through hoses attached to the helments in the room.
The diseases break down basically into viral, fungal, and bacterial. Close bodily contact (like you would have in sex, can spread any one of these to either intact skin or to mucus membrane only. But they are NOT just in the man’s semen, but can be ON his muscus membrane anywhere in the genital area, ditto the woman. Plus things like scabes (“the itch”) and ring work, yeast infections, and Staph infections can be anywhere on the body.
There is also lymphogamuloma venereum which can be on the groin but not just on mucus membrane and molluscum contagiosum which causes little infected pimple like things and can be anywhere on the body.
There are all kinds of other skin diseases that can be spread by the intimate contact of sexual intimacy from athelete’s foot on up.
So I staill say a condom won’t keep you “safe” though it might keep you SAFER than without. The bottom line, having sex with STRANGERs or near strangers that you don’t know who they are sleeping with, or having sex with your “loving” partner who is sleeping around on you can expose you to a HUGE NUMBER OF NASTY DISEASES. Some of which cannot be treated.
It has been estimated that 90% of sexually active people between the ages of 15 and 35 have HPV infections.
That puts the babies born vaginally to these women at risk for getting that virus in their respiratory system. If it gets in the lungs, they die, or if only in the mouth and trachaea, they cannot talk. I know a kid with this problem. Plus his motherr is a freaking P if I ever saw one. His father is a bi-polar high level N with very poor judgment, so this poor kid got the double whammy. He is in a good adoptive home though, but he has had multiple surgeries to remove these things out of his oral cavity and trachea. Babies born to mothers with herpes can also have severe problems up to and including death. STDS are nothing to mess with. Personally for me, I’m not going to take any chances. Batteries optional.
Skylar Oh never mind…
sky I was going to tell you a few std’s you can get with out condoms..but decided not too. After reading Oxys above post I have decided to stick with celibacy.
Henry,
You got it buddy! There’s a bunch of things out there now that penicillian won’t cure! Between the STDS and the H1N1 flu, I think we’re all doomed! LOL I’m glad the stores are getting those little wet wipes for the handles of the carts, though, I use them. I’m thinking of wearing a sterile suit and a respirator! Not sure we’d be safe then. Cough!
Hey Oxy I have a new T – shirt it say’s “Not User Friendly”
I LOVE that t-shirt.
I just re-read an email a therapist wrote to me. Thought I would share it here, in case it helps anyone. (XXXX is my husband)
The four fold way of being is …show up..do what you say you are going to do…be fully present for the experience…say what is true for you…and let go of the outcome. You are working on your own integrity and the integrity of the relationship that you have with XXXX. You can’t change the past…but you can sure work on the present and the future. You want to be the best you that you can be. With the P it was all about intensity…with XXXX you are working on having a close, intimate relationship. When intimacy is missing…it is all about intensity. The intensity is what moves things toward addictive energy. Real love, genuine caring, and emotional intimacy is the bridge to healthy physical intimacy.
I think she hit the nail on the head!