Sanctuary for the Abused
Wednesday, January 31, 2018
ENDING COGNITIVE DISSONANCE
The more you read about psychopaths, you realize if their lips are moving, they're lying. And whatever they told you that made you feel so special, they said a hundred times or more to just as many other victims. They're just fishing lines they throw out to keep you on the hook. They cast out enough of them to see who will bite.
The first step in recovery is realizing that you were dealing with a psychopath, which you have done. The second step, and one of the hardest to deal with, is realizing that whatever you shared with them was all an illusion. The relationship and the love was based on lies. Not on your part but on theirs. The feelings YOU had were real, but the person you fell in love with was just a mirage, crafted to mirror and captivate you. It doesn't really exist. It was all fake. None of it was real.
I know what you're thinking. You're thinking, "But surely the time we shared....... (fill in the blank) was real. I FELT it. I never felt anything like that with anyone else!" "But I KNOW this one particular time it was so intimate and real, it HAD to mean something to her." "Maybe I AM the best she's ever had like she says, or I was THE ONE she loved above all others, but we just couldn't make it work because of..... certain incompatibilities, her commitment issues, her self-esteem issues, her trust issues....... (again, fill in the blank)." Worst of all is thinking it was because of something you did or failed to do.
This is perhaps the biggest key in letting go of the illusion and also any blame you may have internalized or feeling of responsibility towards them as someone who once loved you (and still pretends to). The reality is, they don't love anybody, not even their children. Don't take our word for it. Keep reading as much as you can and doing research until it really sinks in. The fact that you feel guilty at ALL for wanting to go NC to finally heal and protect yourself, and still feel some obligation to her, tells me you just need to understand more about how psychopaths operate. Because once you do and it REALLY sinks in, you will be so angry and not feel one ounce of guilt about her "feelings" (which she doesn't have) and what you "owe" her.
from this fantastic website - click here
Tuesday, January 30, 2018
A Chapter from THE PERFECT VICTIM shows some of the methods. If you read this, you will see how some of these things can be done to an abuse victim psychologically, emotionally, verbally or morally to use mind-control and 'hold the victim' in the relationship by abusers. It does not necessarily have to be physical torture. WARNING: POSSIBLY TRIGGERING
Instead, she would have to base her questions on a hypothetical situation. She asked the doctor to assume certain facts, then meticulously outlined the elements of Colleen Stan's first six months of captivity: the kidnap, hanging, whipping, imprisonment in a box, deprivation of food and light, lack of hygiene, dunking, burns, and so on.
"Now, Doctor," she concluded, "assuming those facts, based on your experience, training and education, do you have an opinion as to whether those facts are sufficient to coerce a person?"
Papendick promptly objected to the hypothetical. He was overruled.
Dr. Hatcher said the facts "would be sufficient to coerce the majority of individuals into a desired behavior pattern and to give up any overt resistance."
McGuire then asked: "To ‘break’ a person is that the same thing as coercing a person?"
Hatcher said the term, accepted within psychological literature, usually referred to "techniques initially developed by the Soviets and Chinese to establish coercion [to, a degree that] you are able to extract a behavior or a confession, to the point at which a person essentially gives up their overt resistance and will do what you ask them to do."
"Is that what we're talking about here, given those sets of facts?"
McGuire then asked the doctor if there were specific steps, which could be followed to break a person. Dr. Hatcher began an explanation so closely related to Hooker's treatment of Colleen Stan; everyone in the courtroom seemed to lean forward to listen. The first step, he said, is a sudden, unexpected abduction, followed by isolation as soon as possible. "Refuse to answer questions, place them in a cell-like environment; remove their clothes, and begin humiliation and degradation."
1. Later, it was clarified that these were more accurately "techniques" rather than "steps." Dr. Hatcher pointed out that not all the techniques need be applied, and they needn't be applied in any particular order. "The degree and intensity" of application of these techniques is "so variable that you could take three or four of them and, with particular individuals, achieve the result," he said.
Asked to apply this first step to the hypothetical example, Dr. Hatcher said: "We have an individual who is initially in a situation in which the average person would feel somewhat comforted, in that it is a family in a car with a small child. The captor then not only displays the knife, the first point of danger, but rapidly puts a device upon the head which is beyond the realm of most people's experience or ability to comprehend, so the degree of isolation imposed would be greater than, for example, a kidnapping in which someone puts a bag over their head or pushes them down in the seat and says, 'Don't look up. Don't ask me any questions.'
Dr. Hatcher went on to explain that a cell-like environment stimulates a feeling that one's worst fears are being realized, raising the level of fear and anxiety. Removal of clothes magnifies the feeling of vulnerability.
The second step in breaking someone, the doctor continued, is to physically or sexually abuse the person, to expose the captive's vulnerability and shock her or him. "In other words, not only has the victim been stripped of their clothes and placed in a physically vulnerable position, but you are going to whip or abuse in some other way, specifically with sexual manipulation, to illustrate just how exposed and vulnerable they really are."
Applying this to the hypothetical, Dr. Hatcher cited the sexual manipulation, and the exposure in terms of hanging and whippings, in which there is no perceived way of escape.
"The third step is extremely important," he said, "and that's to remove normal daylight patterns. All of us, both biologically and psychologically, are used to a certain day and night kind of sequence, and this has been well-documented in various types of scientific literature." Removing this, either by placing someone in a constantly lit or constantly dark environment, "is very disorienting, and is a rather standard part of the techniques employed."
The blindfold and boxes of the hypothetical, of course, accomplished this purpose excellently.
The fourth step, Dr. Hatcher explained, is "to control urination, defecation, menstruation, and to be present when these activities are performed. Basically, what you want to do here is destroy a person's sense of privacy."
He also pointed out that "if a person soils himself, and isn't able to clean that up, the sense of shame 'in sitting or lying in their own waste product is really quite extraordinary, and individuals become very motivated to do what they can to get permission to clean themselves up. Most people have not had the experience since being a small infant, of sitting or lying in their waste product over a period of time. It takes you back to a period of vulnerability."
The fifth step is to control and reduce food and water. Hatcher stated the obvious: "If you don't get that food and water, you are going to die. So, on the one hand, they may be torturing you and preventing you from leaving, but on the other hand, they are bringing food and water." This helps make the captive dependent upon the captor.
The sixth step is to punish for no apparent rhyme or reason. Initially, the captive tries to figure out some rationale to the intermittent beatings but, finding none, eventually has to simply accept that punishment will occur with no reason.
The seventh step is to "require the victim to constantly ask permission for anything or any behavior. This would involve asking permission to be able to speak to someone, permission to take a tray of food. It is a type of training procedure."
The eighth step is to establish a pattern of sexual and physical abuse. This "indicates to the person that this is what their new life is now going to be like." It's a way of "getting the person to realize things have changed in a permanent sense."
The ninth step is to "continue to isolate the person. The captor has now become the source of food, water, human contact, as well. That's important information, as well as pain. All of us are information hungry people. If you put us in a restricted environment without newspapers or magazines or television, that's real nice for a while, but if it happens [that] you are totally cut off and weeks pass, all of us get a little hungry to find out what's going on.
"Cut that off and tie it to one person. Being a source of information is extremely important. As well as human contact the captor has a tremendous amount of power because he's the human being that you see, he is that only point of contact."
During his explanation, Dr. Hatcher spoke clearly, usually addressing himself to the jury. He wasn't a man of few words, yet no one yawned.
McGuire next asked how someone might learn the steps of breaking a person.
Dr. Hatcher listed three sources: the study of psychology; the law enforcement and military forces of "countries who have a rather low regard for human rights"; or, the most common, sadomasochistic and bondage and discipline literature.
"How are people initially attracted to this S/M and B and D literature?" McGuire asked.
Hatcher's answer must have been more interesting to Cameron Hooker than to anyone else in the room. He'd surely never heard himself explained so clearly.
"The consistency is rather interesting," Hatcher said. About the time of puberty, a boy finds himself stimulated by images of people being tied up or tortured. "It's initially extraordinarily disturbing to them. They tend to feel there's something wrong with them." And so this is suppressed; they don't talk about it.
Instead, they eventually find S/M and B&D literature, which also isn't talked about. "But the impulse and stimulation of this after a while just becomes more than they can keep to themselves," so, at an older age, the boy perhaps approaches girls, showing a picture and saying, "Would you like to try something like this?"
"The literature provides the stimulation, which doesn't cause the behavior, there's no mistake about that," but it also shows "how you can hang someone up, how you can put them in certain types of positions of torture, how it's been done before."
Now McGuire wished to introduce some of Cameron Hooker's S/M and B&D literature. Papendick objected, and again, the jury was excused while the two counsels argued about the relevance of Hooker's collection of hard-core pornography.
Judge Knight finally ruled that "any literature that either has instructions or rules or suggestions on captivity and any literature that contains ideas that were communicated by the defendant to the victim is admissible."
With the jury ushered back in and Dr. Hatcher again on the stand, McGuire introduced another of her impressive exhibits: an enlarged reproduction of the graphics for an article in the June, 1976 edition of Oui magazine, entitled: "Brainwashing: How to Fold, Spindle and Mutilate the Human Mind in Five Easy Steps."
If the jury had thought McGuire a prude, taking umbrage at Hooker's prurient interests, the colorful illustrations before them now presented an interest less in sex than in control. While provocative and lurid, the drawings depicted the "five easy steps," which McGuire asked Dr. Hatcher to review. (LLG was very interested in control.)
As Hatcher pointed out, it wasn't necessary to read the article, written by the Harvard-trained psychologist, Dr. Timothy Leary,' to understand the "five easy steps." The pictures were sufficient:
The scene in the courtroom was now a weird tableau: the thoroughly dignified Dr. Hatcher, in his somber, dark suit, surrounded by poster-size pictures of the slavery contract, of the basement, of the rack, of the Oui illustrations, and of Colleen, stripped and hung. And still, the heavy bed and box occupied much of the courtroom floor.
(It doubtless required great restraint on the part of the jurors to be confronted with such images and information day after day, yet never discuss it. Every time court was adjourned, the judge asked that they please remember the "admonition of the court" and refrain from reading about, talking about, or viewing programs about the case. They bottled it up and took it home, without disclosing what they'd learned even to their spouses.)
Some of Dr. Hatcher's testimony, while phrased in academic language, was explicit-shocking. For instance, he said that places where, a customer can rent sado-masochistic paraphernalia and perform various acts on a prostitute, which Colleen had described as, Rent-a-Dungeon," actually exist in cities such as New York, San Francisco, and Los Angeles. And he briefly analyzed a selection of articles from Hooker's library, including such literary gems as "Captive Maid...... Sex Slaves for Sale," and "Actual Case Histories of Sexual Slavery."
McGuire asked Hatcher if, in addition to the nine he'd already outlined, there were other coercive techniques.
There were, and the psychologist related these now.
Dr. Hatcher added, "There are many historical examples where slaves not only outnumbered their masters in terms of manpower but also had the opportunity to attempt an escape, and yet that's done in only a very small percentage of cases." The significance of this surely wasn't lost on the two black members of the jury.
With these sixteen coercive techniques understood, and with Hooker's research into coercion presented, McGuire returned to her nearly forgotten hypothetical.
Again, she asked the psychologist to assume certain facts, then outlined the conditions under which Colleen was kept during certain periods-the next six months, the next year, then each subsequent year. At the conclusion of each period, the doctor enumerated which of the coercive techniques had been applied during that time, giving special attention to important aspects, such as the slavery contract and the story of the Company.
Dr. Hatcher shed illumination on Colleen Stan's darkest hours. He took the components of her captivity-the workshop, the "attention drills," the slave name, the slave collar; the box and distilled them into elements of power and control.
Even the freedoms that Colleen was later allowed-to brush her teeth, shower, wear clothes-the doctor explained as giving the person some remnants of self-esteem, with the reminder. "If you displease me, I can remove any shred of personal privacy or personal identity, with the exception of what I have chosen as your slave designation."
As the prosecutor continued with her hypothetical situation, Papendick fidgeted. He objected to each stage of her hypothetical, but the judge consistently overruled his objections.
Commenting on the captive's being allowed to do new activities in new settings where other people are present, the psychologist said, "the fact that these situations do not result in discovery" or in anyone interfering, "begins to reinforce, in the majority of captives' minds, that this is the way life is, and they are going to have to accept that."
Dr. Hatcher also commented on the gift of the Bible: "Part of Christianity emphasizes that you are going to suffer and that God will provide, that no matter what type of disaster or terrible situation may befall you, if you maintain your faith in God, God will get you out of it. Some captors use a religious tract, they want to assist the captive along the pathway of believing they should have faith in God, and that God is really part of all this, that this is not alien from Christianity. It incorporates [the captivity] within the framework of what's normal and serves often to make the person more religious. The sad part is that it does make the captive easier to control."
It seemed a shame that Colleen Stan couldn't hear this. Instead, Cameron Hooker, along with the rest of the court, was treated to an educated view of what made him tick.
Addressing himself to periods of greater freedom allowed the captive, Dr. Hatcher undertook an explanation of the captor's motivations: "The main thing here is that the captor is not necessarily an individual of extraordinary intelligence. He doesn't necessarily have to have a comprehensive kind of knowledge as; for example, Dr. Leary might have in constructing the article we talked about before. What comes across consistently, however, is that the person, to some extent, has a feeling that is like a hunter. Think of the person in your acquaintance who is the best hunter. It usually isn't the chief executive officer of the bank, a person who has a very high degree of status. It's a kind of sense or skill that makes them a particularly good deer hunter or duck hunter a certain amount of patience.
"The analogy drawn for me by the individuals I have interviewed is that they see themselves in a similar way as a hunter.
Initially, they are concerned with the stalking and the capture. Then, rather than killing the prey, they see how far they can train this person.
"After a while, curiosity sets in to see just how far he can let this person go and still have control. There is a certain risk or gamble there, but [this is outweighed by] the value or degree of enjoyment and satisfaction, the sense of being able to hunt with higher stakes. The gratification from being able to allow the person contacts with outside people and still know that you have enough coercion and pressure upon them, that's an extraordinary reinforcement and overcomes some of the other concerns about apprehension."
One couldn't help but wonder what Hooker thought of this.
Dr. Hatcher's direct examination took nearly two days.
He seemed to sort through every aspect of Colleen's captivity and place it in context: The "love letters," he pointed out, were consistent with types of statements in S/M literature, and it was common to have the captive echo the captor's belief system. He reviewed the letters, citing Colleen's repeated references to her position as a slave.
Still posing a hypothetical situation, McGuire asked if the doctor could account for the calls and letters to the captor and his wife.
"There is a great deal of dependency upon the wife in the situation you've described," Dr. Hatcher explained. "It's not as if there was a relatively rapid, clean escape without having the possibility [the captor might come after her]."
By talking with the captor, yet experiencing that this doesn't result in being put back in the box, "the person gradually begins to feel they have a greater degree of control, that they have reestablished themselves somewhat."
Further, the psychologist said, it's common that captives, once free, express the idea "that they want to let God or someone else take charge of retribution or punishment," and he quoted sections of Colleen's letters to Cameron and Jan saying, for example:
"I don't want to play God and I forgive you and Cameron for all things." Additionally, Hatcher said, victims are often averse to pressing charges because criminal proceedings would force them to relive the experience.
Hatcher made comparisons with several other cases in which the victims were "mentally restrained," fearful of attempting escape, and then, once free, reluctant to go to police. These cases shared many elements in common with Colleen Stan's, but by the time the psychologist concluded his remarks it seemed clear that Hooker's coercion of Colleen had been uncommonly intense.
Dr. Hatcher said as much: "The circumstances as you have described them to me, with the possible exception of issues that go farther back in time (such as black slavery in America), would be unique in recorded literature. There would not be a similar situation in which this degree of captivity and of sado-masochistic torture of a human being had existed in a previous case."
After nearly twelve hours of eliciting expert testimony-an outpouring of information-the prosecutor at last came to the end of her questions, took her seat, and handed Dr. Hatcher over for cross-examination.
Defense Attorney Papendick opened by trying to belittle psychologists as opposed to psychiatrists (since the expert witness for the defense, Dr. Lunde, was a psychiatrist), but Dr. Hatcher's answer was so complete it seemed only to emphasize his competence.
Papendick persisted: "You are not a licensed physician, are you?"
"No, I am not."
"You are not an expert on the physical effects of diet control, are you?"
"No, I am not."
"Or the physical effects of lack of sleep?"
"I would have a degree of expertise in the physical effects of lack of sleep, but as it pertains to captivity."
McGuire was astonished that Papendick had retained Dr. Donald Lunde, the Stanford psychiatrist she had interviewed for the prosecution months before.
From here Papendick launched an extensive examination of Dr. Hatcher's experience in related cases, such as the Parnell case and the People's Temple and Jonestown. Though Hatcher's accounts of these were informative, they served more to showcase his experience than to discredit it and seemed far from the matter at hand. It was difficult to understand what Papendick was trying to get at. Judge Knight finally stepped in: "I fail to see the materiality of this rather detailed questioning about Jonestown. What are we getting to?"
Still, Papendick continued his questions about tangentially related cases, such as Patty Hearst and Korean prisoners of war. Since it was late in the day, McGuire privately wondered if he were simply trying to kill time so he could prepare overnight for the beginning of his case tomorrow.
At length, Papendick referred to the spectrum Dr. Hatcher had described: from persuasion, to coercion, to brainwashing. Specifically, he wanted to know at which point persuasion ended and coercion began.
The doctor naturally said there's a gray area here, and that, for example, some people would call a military draft persuasion, and some, coercion. But, he added, "A person in a captive situation against their will is in a coercive situation."
"In your opinion," Papendick asked, "can a person involved in a captive situation be subjected to persuasion?"
This was the answer Papendick wanted to hear. He brought up the example of a prisoner in a Nazi concentration camp having relations with a guard or officer. "Is that an example of persuading the person as opposed to coercing the person into a sexual type of relationship?"
Hatcher wouldn't grant those kinds of liberties with the term. He pointed out that, while there may not have been a specific beating or incident preceding the development of a relationship, the guard or officer was nonetheless perceived as a person in authority who had the power to protect the prisoner from torture or death.
Here the defense attorney asked Dr. Hatcher if he were familiar with the term "coercive persuasion."
The psychologist said the term had arisen in the 1950s, but had fallen from use and was no longer a common psychological term.
"Does coercive persuasion have a generally accepted definition in your field?"
"No, it does not." Dr. Hatcher explained that it had never gained general acceptance, and that it wasn't listed in the index of the American Psychological Association Psychological Abstract, or the Index Medicus.
Overall, Papendick seemed unable to take control of this witness. He unwittingly gave Dr. Hatcher the opportunity to further assist the prosecution when he asked: "What are the effects that one would expect to see in a coercive situation?"
"There are several," the psychologist said. "The most interesting one is a numbness of affect. You may, for example, ask someone to describe something related to their captivity, and they will describe something that is, by most objective standards, truly appalling, yet it is not expressed with a great deal of emotion. There is a flatness or blunting of affect."
The meaning of Colleen Stan's indifferent manner instantly clicked into place.
Hatcher explained another effect might be "intrusive images," something like nightmares in the daytime. McGuire hadn't asked if Colleen experienced this, but it seemed a reasonable guess.
A third characteristic, Hatcher said, "is that they want to try and get their lives back to normal. Before they can begin to deal with the images and impact of this, they have to put a great deal of effort into creating what is almost a veneer of a normal life. To have a job, to have some friends, to have some activities, is almost like a kind of teddy bear. It's a security, and they will work to do that before they start to go back and, in depth, deal with the problems they have had in their captivity."
To McGuire's mind, this fit Colleen perfectly. She wondered if the jury perceived this.
Papendick then switched to another line of questioning, and here he made headway. He asked Dr. Hatcher whether, in order to judge a person in a coercive situation, it would be important to know the person's background.
Hatcher said, "It would be contributory."
"What do you mean by 'contributory'?"
"Would that include social history?"
"Social, family, marital, medical, sexual?"
"It would be useful."
McGuire's hackles went up. After having successfully countered Papendick's motion to admit the victim's prior sexual conduct, she was alarmed that Papendick might work it in. She only hoped it wasn't as glaringly apparent to the jury as it was to her that Papendick had uncovered some evidence about Colleen's past which he believed would help the defense.
But Papendick miscalculated when he handed a magazine to Hatcher and asked him to tell the court which of the sixteen coercive techniques it covered. He apparently remained unconvinced that Hooker's pornography collection could be used as instruction for coercion.
The psychologist promptly responded: "Page thirty-two in Captive Maid, we have sudden unexpected abduction."
"Which technique is that?"
"That's number one. Sudden, unexpected abduction. The isolation is begun as soon as possible. You begin the humiliation, degradation, sensory isolation. You remove the clothes."
"That's number one?"
"That's all number one. Fairly clearly, I think, both illustrated and in text. I can quote from the text if you like."
"No I just want to know what number techniques are included."
Dr. Hatcher then mentioned number six, creating an atmosphere of dependency.
"How is that illustrated in that article?" Papendick protested.
"Well, it's illustrated by saying whipping and degradation are always accompanied with sex."
"How is that dependency? Didn't you talk about that before as dependent for food and water?"
"You are also dependent upon the individual whether or not they are going to beat you anymore."
This clearly wasn't developing as Papendick had hoped. He snatched the magazine away and, to McGuire's amazement, continued with this line of questioning. He handed the doctor an article, which was, essentially, a pornographic movie advertisement, surely believing this illustrated no coercive techniques whatsoever.
The doctor appraised the article and listed techniques eight, nine, ten, and thirteen.
Still, Papendick didn't abandon this line of questioning. He handed Dr. Hatcher the article that accompanied the slavery contract. This was a mistake.
He'd given the prosecution's expert full rein, and Dr. Hatcher made excellent use of it. He listed techniques ten, sixteen, eight, and six, giving detailed explanations of how these were illustrated in the article.
Papendick seemed to realize his error in trying to fight Dr. Hatcher on his own territory and concluded this line of questioning by turning it to his advantage: "Are any of those sixteen techniques used by, say, the Marine Corps in boot camp training?"
Dr. Hatcher admitted that "some of the behaviors" were.
Completing his cross-examination, Papendick asked, "Do you know Dr. Donald T. Lunde?"
"Yes, I do."
"Would you consider him an expert in forensic psychiatry?"
"Yes, I would."
And with that, the psychologist was excused.
from: The Perfect Victim by - by Christine McGuire, Carla Norton
2. Dr. Timothy Leary expressed astonishment upon learning that his article had been introduced as evidence in the Hooker trial.
He said that, following the Patty Hearst case, he wrote the article "to warn people" how easily they could be brainwashed.
Though he said he had "nothing against things being sexy," he disavowed any responsibility for "those horrible illustrations," which he called, "disgusting."
Monday, January 29, 2018
The Dirty Dozen - Characteristics of a Psychopath
1. The ‘Jekyll/Hyde’ Psychopath comes on strong, sweeps us off our feet. Appearing to be our 'soulmate', he falsely mirrors our values, interests, goals, philosophies, tastes and habits. He mimics our ambition, integrity, honesty and sincerity. He wants to marry us quickly. This control freak wants us dependent on him. He portrays false integrity, appears helpful, comforting, generous in his 'idealization' of us phase. It never lasts as Jekyll turns into Hyde. He blames others. His victims are objectified and disposable. He convincingly mimics human emotions. His lack of conscience is shocking, incomprehensible and emotionally painful to us. We remember his odd reaction to situations. We end the relationship and salvage what we can, or we are quickly discarded as he cultivates a "new perfect soulmate". He will have numerous relationships. He may drop verbal clues about his true character early in the relationship, but we fail to grasp its meaning. Later, when the psychopath eventually emerges, we remember his early warning. His targets suffer emotional and financial devastation and our emotional recovery is lengthy. Defense Strategy: Abandon your efforts to help or cure him. His true mask exposed, your 'soulmate' is gone forever. Accept the reality. Seek therapy. Join a support group to know you are not alone. Don't take the bait when he blames or lies. They fool even trained professionals. Do not be vulnerable or naive. Prepare for a nasty divorce. Accept no abuse. Learn about mental diseases and disorders.
2. The Female Psychopath: Using her false mask, this charming "Southern
Belle" schemer appears helpless or needy, pitiful, inept or emotionally unable to cope. Even total strangers give her things she gratefully accepts. Falsely claiming to be the victim, this passive parasite lures and abuses the normal protector/ provider instincts in her male target. When her mask comes off she is cunning, ruthless, predatory, and loveless. Defense Strategy: She'll try to hook and reel you in. Take the hook out of your lip. Don't make her emotional neediness your problem. This black hole of need can never be filled. Understand the mask of helplessness is not the "real her". If she won't give reasonable answers to reasonable questions turn and run. Beware and remember "...deadlier than the male." Realize she uses sexuality as a lure. Avoid financial or emotional involvement.
3. 'Liar Liar' He will lie for no reason. He will skilfully twists our words, evade
questions, and omit important facts in his ever-changing, self-serving goals. "Hang 'em high" he says about the murderer on the 6:00 news. This hypocrite claims high morals then proceeds to exploits, manipulate and abuse others. His lies and projection are emotionally cruel. He will accuse you of being crazy. Defense Strategy: Quietly verify what he says. The grain of truth he drops occasionally is deceptive manipulation. Do not try to negotiate or bargain. Head for the door when things don't add up. Learn about projection.
4. The Thrill Seeker never learns from his past follies. Easily bored, his hunt for new thrills escalates. His reckless disregard for others endangers them. Poor impulse control, bad judgment, criminal activity and substance abuse are common. Defense Strategy: Don't get involved. Use your good judgment. Say No. Don't take the bait of his rage or manipulation. Don't bail him out.
5. The Malevolent Psychopath is now fully unmasked. We remember when his
eyes were vacant, cold and predatory. This wife-beater, murderer, serial killer,
stalker, rapist, fighter, harasser, terrorist has a 'chip-on-his-shoulder' attitude. His short fuse erupts into rages. He anticipates betrayal, humiliation or punishment. He imagines rejection and rejects first to 'get it over with'. He will harass to get your reaction and try to make you look out of control. Can become dangerous and unpredictable. He has no remorse, no conscience and no regard for the rights of others. This coward sadistically picks on the vulnerable, women, children and the elderly. Defies probation or the courts. He has bad judgment. He never learns his lesson and and repeats past actions to his own detriment. The media loves stories about his heinous acts. Defense Strategy: Act to protect yourself physically, financially and emotionally. Don't tip your hand that you're leaving. Don't take the bait of his over-reactions. Be aware of the services of the police, law and shelters.
6. The Arrogant Psychopath Displays his false mask and his haughty strut as he
demands centre stage. He seeks envy, attention even our fear and hatred. He can never get enough. Fame or infamy are the same to him if he can acquire notoriety. Reacts disproportionately to situations. He boastfully displays his possessions to garner attention. Defense Strategy: Learn the red flags of behaviour. Demand equal treatment. Deny him the attention he demands. Learn about Malignant Narcissism
7. The Charismatic Leader manipulates others to obtain status, control, compliance, money, attention. His effective brainwashing tactics often found in religious cults or political venues. He targets the naive, vulnerable, uneducated or mentally weak. He falsely portrays himself to be virtuous, the perfect father, husband, spiritual leader, advisor, mentor, friend. Defense Strategy: Avoid him. Know his payoff is attention, money or abusing us. Be suspicious of excessive charisma emanating from others. Pay attention when your gut instinct tells you to avoid him.
8. The Promiscuous Psychopath (male or female). Pornography, hypersexuality, masturbation, poor boundaries, exhibitionism, use of prostitutes, incest are reported by his targets. Anyone, young, old, male/female are there for his gratification. This predator takes what is available. Can have a preference for 'sado-maso' sexuality. Easily bored, he demands increasingly deviant stimulation. The internet a favourite hunting ground. However, another type exists, the one who withholds sex or affection. Defense Strategy: Expect this type to try to degrade you. Get away from him. Expect him to tell lies about your sexuality to evade exposure of his own. Be aware of their frequent presence on the internet.
9. The Nomadic Parasite has a lack of long-term goals. With unrealistic expectations, he is aimless and lacking commitment, focus or direction. He aggressively pursues opportunistic predatory use of others. Defense strategy: Be aware of their red flags. Don't bail him out. Know his ability to appear helpless, pitiful, confused and needing our assistance.
10. Conman/Manipulator pits people against each other. We may be used as his proxy interacting with others as he sets us up to take the fall while he enjoys watching the performance he orchestrates. Keeps his allies and targets separate to avoid exposure. Verbally skilled at twisting our words, this charmer usually gets his way. Applying 'fear' selling tactics, this scam artist crafts situations to appear indispensable, ready to solve our problems. Money and conning others are his objective. He will agree to anything then turn around and do the opposite. He will accuse you of breaking the contract. Legal, custody agreements and normal social or personal protocol mean nothing to him. Enjoys orchestrating police/legal action and playing the role of the 'poor me' victim. Defense Strategy: Expect him to disregard the agreement. Know the 'nature of the beast'. Facing consequences is his best lesson. Avoid involvement. Be self-sufficient. Avoid any "Trust-Me" get-rich-quick sales pitch. Learn how swindlers and scam artists operate.
11. The Professional Psychopath is often successful and intelligent in his field. He can masterfully fake his abilities and credentials. He exploits others, and must be in absolute control. He relies on his intellectual manipulation, and charisma. His eye on the boardroom, he backstabs his way to high position. He ruthlessly abuses his power. His bad judgment has adverse affects on many levels of society. He places others in problem or failure situations. This professional bully has no social conscience, and is often suspicious and paranoid. Others may support him to further their own objective but this wheeler-dealer leaves them holding the bag. Defense Strategy: Keep your references and resume up to date. Don't get involved in anything illegal. Document thoroughly to protect yourself. Thwarting them may backlash with a cascade of retaliation.
12. The Psychopathic Child displays signs as early as age 3. This juvenile delinquent shows early red flags of psychopathy including lying, fighting, stealing, bullying, bad judgment, cheating, cruelty to animals, vandalism, truancy, sexual activity, fire-setting, substance abuse, and running away from home. Many see him as 'sneaky'. Defense Strategy: Fix the problem, not the blame. Maintain domestic stability. Recognize signs in early childhood. Reinforce and reward positive behaviour. Seek therapy. Establish firm moral integrity practices and standards within the home.
(most psychopaths we know of have combinations of the traits listed above)
Sunday, January 28, 2018
THE SMEAR CAMPAIGN - Hallmark of a Narcissist or Sociopath
"Since their information -- including emotional information -- is scattered all over both brain hemispheres, it takes too long for the brain to retrieve and process information, and the entire process of socialization becomes so ponderous that ultimately it fails."
(From the book "Without Conscience" by Robert Hare, PhD.)
Saturday, January 27, 2018
How to Identify a Female Narcissist
Friday, January 26, 2018
IS YOUR NARCISSIST/ PSYCHOPATH/ ABUSER PLAYING YOU?
"you are my soul mate" or "this is fate" (came up over 50 times on this poll)
"I'm sorry that you feel that way" (because I'm not taking responsibility for this)
"End of conversation!!!", (when it is your turn to speak)
"I did (whatever BS) because of the medication I'm taking/ forgot to take"
"I'm always supportive of you and your education/career" (but when you're not around, and take the focus off of me, I have to find supply elsewhere, baby)
Cute nicknames: Baby, you are my honey, my sweetie, babe, dear... etc (good for when you have more than one woman on the go; in case you forget her name!)
"You/they made me do (whatever BS). It wasn't my fault. You drove me to it."
"I'm a good husband / father and other women are envious and want to ruin that."
"Don't listen to her (when they get caught by someone) she's in love with me/ obsessed with me/ making it up/ lying/ psycho..."
" I can't control how you feel "
"I'm very literal"
"why do you interpret everything I say"
"I don't feel anything" ( means he doesn't care and truly can NOT 'feel')
"I don't express my emotions well"
"I never said that," (when you repeat something from a prior conversation -- sometimes just an hour ago.)
"that never happened" (even when the proof is right there)
"Not my fault" (projection)
"Explain that to me, I'm thick" or "I don't get it"
"I told you that" or "that's what I told you"
"I would never lie to you"
"Listen to my words" (as he played his word games)
"I swear on my life/to God..."
"if you really think it's necessary."
"up to you"
"I will do anything to make you happy" (except be honest)
"if that's what you want"
"I am a good man"
"It's not what you think"
"just do me one favor...."
"I/ you never...."
"I/ you always...."
For more click here: YOU ARE A TARGET
These were written the 'male', your abuser may well be female!
Thursday, January 25, 2018
Passive Aggressive Personality
PASSIVE AGGRESSIVE PERSONALITY
From Living With A Passive Aggressive Man by Dr. Scott Wetzler
*FEAR OF DEPENDENCY - Unsure of his autonomy & afraid of being alone, he fights his dependency needs - usually by trying to control you.
*FEAR OF INTIMACY - Guarded & often mistrusful, he is reluctant to show his emotional fragility. He's often out of touch with his feelings, reflexively denying feelings he thinks will "trap" or reveal him, like love. He picks fights to create distance.
*FEAR OF COMPETITION - Feeling inadequate, he is unable to compete with other men in work and love. He may operate either as a self-sabotaging wimp with a pattern of failure, or he'll be the tyrant, setting himself up as unassailable and perfect, needing to eliminate any threat to his power
*OBSTRUCTIONISM - Just tell a p/a man what you want, no matter how small, and he may promise to get it for you. But he won't say when, and he"ll do it deliberately slowly just to frustrate you. Maybe he won't comply at all. He blocks any real progress he sees to your getting your way.
*FOSTERING CHAOS - The p/a man prefers to leave the puzzle incomplete, the job undone.
*FEELING VICTIMIZED - The p/a man protests that others unfairly accuse him rather than owning up to his own misdeeds. To remain above reporach, he sets himself up as the apparently hapless, innocent victim of your excessive demands and tirades.
*MAKING EXCUSES & LYING - The p/a man reaches as far as he can to fabricate excuses for not fulfilling promises. As a way of withholding information, affirmation or love - to have power over you - the p/a man may choose to make up a story rather than give you a straight answer.
*PROCRASTINATION - The p/a man has an odd sense of time - he believes that deadlines don't exist for him.
*CHRONIC LATENESS & FORGETFULNESS - One of the most infuriating & inconsiderate of all p/a traits is his inability to arrive on time. By keeping you waiting, he sets the ground rules of the relationship. And his selective forgetting - used only when he wants to avoid an obligation.
*AMBIGUITY - He is master of mixed messages and sitting on fences. When he tells you something, you may still walk away wondering if he actually said yes or no.
*SULKING - Feeling put upon when he is unable to live up to his promises or obligations, the p/a man retreats from pressures around him and sulks, pouts and withdraws.
A passive-aggressive man won't have every single one of these traits, but he'll have many of them. He may have other traits as well, which are not passive-aggressive.
"Imagine this: You've been invited to a party, but you realize on the day you're pretty sure the party is happening that your not sure what kind of party it is or what time you should arrive. Well, you're smart and you'll give it your best shot.. So you dress in a kind of neutral casual-dressy style and show up at seven.
As you come up the walk, you can hear the sounds of a party: music, laughter and you think, "This is going to be a great party." When you come up the stairs you can smell aromas coming from the house and again you say to yourself, "This is going to be a great party."
You ring the bell and your host emerges wearing a bemused, enigmatic smile... and a tuxedo.
"You're late," he says. "Im sorry. You didn't tell me what time the party was." "I thought you would figure it out" he says. "Well I am here now" you say . Your host looks you up and down. "That may be true, but you are not dressed properly." You look down at your elegant, if casual, clothing and then at his black-tie formal wear. "Yes, that's true. But I'm not that far from home. I can just go and change quickly and be right back."
You desperately think about what's in your closet that would fit with formal wear and how long it will take to press it. You add up the travel time, wonder what you'll have to do to your hair to look right, how to change your make-up.... after all this still seems like it'll be a great party......
Your host shakes his head. "But then you'll be really late." Dinner will be over and I was COUNTING on you to sit right beside me at the head table."
Your heart sinks. Your one chance and you blew it! Inside your head, you say several unflattering things about yourself, your abilities, your intelligence, and your potential, but out loud you declare, "Honest, I'll be back in 45 minutes. I'll be perfect. Can't you wait? You cannot imagine how you'll be back, but you want so badly to be the guest of honor.
Your host shakes his head. "Well, I don't know. But what are you planning to bring to contribute to the dinner? I've told you how much I like those special, individual nineteen-layer cakes you bake. I thought you'd know to bring one for every guest."
Behind him you can still hear the laughter and the music; you can still smell the exotic foods, and you can still see the champagne in his glass. And you still think it's the greatest party ever and you still want to be the guest of honor.
That is what an emotionally unavailable relationship FEELS like. You're just never quite good enough to get admitted to the party. You get seduced by the clear, often indirect and unspoken, message that something is just a little wrong. If you can fix that, the implied promise goes, you'll be the guest of honor and win the door prize: love...
But when you "fix" what was "wrong" the first time, something else is a little "wrong." and when you fix that, something else will appear.
Your host HAS NO INTENTION OF MAKING YOU or ANYONE the guest of honor. Your host also has NO ABILITY to make you the guest of honor - or even to open the door to let you in. Your host is suffering form emotional unavailability. This is the inability of a person to reach out and make a heart connection with another person.
What is so unsettling and painful is that you end up with the CLEAR belief that this somehow YOUR fault and that it's YOUR responsibility to fix it by being perfect. If it isn't fixed, you're not perfect enough.
YOU DID NOT BREAK IT... YOU DON'T HAVE TO FIX IT.
You say to yourself that you would never get caught in a situation like that, it seems obvious... until - you are in the middle of it..... IT DOESN'T START OUT WITH UNREASONABLE DEMANDS of perfection. If it did, you'd walk away after the first five minutes. We all get sucked into emotionally unavailable situations because the process is subtle and progressive. The demands move a little at a time, inching you away from your power base, shifting control of the situation to the emotionally unavailable person. This person doesn't want love as much as he or she wants CONTROL. Emotions are unsafe; control gives the illusion of safety.
It is perfectly reasonable to expect an emotional connection with someone with whom you are in a relationship. We expect police officers to enforce the laws, teachers to teach, etc.. These expectations put us into a particular mnd-set when we're around those people.
Over time you expect a relationship to grow and deepen. When your partner turns out not to be making an emotional connection, it causes trauma; THAT IS WHY THESE RELATIONSHIPS ARE SO PAINFUL. The trauma then does further damage as it undermines your expectations about yourself and YOUR abilities to make connections. As illogical as that may seem, it's human nature to look for the flaws in ourselves when things don't go as we expect. We end up being traumatized twice in these relationships; once by the loss and abandonment and again by the loss of our own confidence in ourselves. That is why the end of these relationships can be so much more painful than the end of a fully realized relationship.. We ruminate about what we could have done differently to make it work...."
from the book "EMOTIONAL UNAVAILABILITY" by Bryn C. Collins.
PASSIVE AGGRESSIVE INFORMATION
NOTE: Passive Aggressive Behavior is now known to be a component of Narcissistic Personality Disorder and has been eliminated from the DSM-V and combined with NPD.
While written in the male, females can be P-A as well.