Category Archives: Borderline

by | September 11, 2017 · 10:10 PM

Would a Psychopath Purposefully Hurt/Be Cruel to Someone Else (for Fun), Even If They Hadn’t Done Anything to Him/Her?

Answered on Quora:

It is not true that anyone can act this way. Most non-psychopaths will not behave this way. Most narcissists will. Many borderlines will. Histrionics might. Manics definitely will. This is Cluster B behavior.

When normals are cruel, which they often are, there is typically a reason for it. They think it is a good reason, but often it isn’t. I can’t imagine a neurotypical hurting someone out of boredom. That’s ridiculous.

Psychopaths and sociopaths along with narcissists are known for their cruelty. Borderlines can be exceptionally cruel, but they are doing it because they are crazy rather than because they are evil. Narcissists and sociopaths/psychopaths are getting a lot more towards true evil.

I had one psychopathic client in my counseling practice. This young man desperately needed an intervention so he didn’t kill someone for the sheer fun and thrill of it. This man told me that sometimes when he was bored, he acted cruel and mean to people just to have something to do. He acted like this was somehow perfectly justifiable and that there was nothing wrong with it whatsoever.

Understand that sociopaths/psychopaths are often bored. One way to get out of boredom is to be cruel to someone. This will create a lot of tension and drama in the air and will tend to cause a scene. To this type of person, an ugly scene is better than being bored.

 

9 Comments

Filed under Borderline, Mental Illness, Narcissistic, Personality Disorders, Psychology, Psychopathology, Psychotherapy, Sociopathy

by | July 20, 2017 · 3:10 AM

The Untreatable Borderline Personality Disorder Client: A Therapeutic Nightmare

Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD)is one of the hardest disorders of all to treat. It can be improved with some therapies, but the road is long and hard. Many seem to go on for years or decades with little or no improvement. There are reports of cures, and I am familiar with a woman whose BPD cleared up at age 55 after having come on in childhood. That’s probably a typical cure. Decades of nasty illness followed by a lifting of the illness in middle age.

Many mental disorders improve in middle age, and even many personality disorders improve during this age period.

Schizophrenia often ‘burns out” in middle age, and florid positive symptoms are replaced by more negative symptoms.

Many anxiety disorders attentuate in middle age.

Even psychopaths often get better or at least less destructive in middle age, as many of them also burn out in a similar fashion as schizophrenics. A number of highly antisocial psychopathic men get better in middle age as the antisocial behavior attentuates. It is often replaced by depression, heavy drinking and a pessimistic, cynical, imbittered and misanthropic person who nonetheless does little damage to society anymore.

It should be noted the clients with BPD vary widely in their symptom pathology.  Some are much more functional than others. Quite a few can even function well at their jobs all day, but when they come home from work, they fall apart and shift into full BPD pathology.

However, some people with BPD are so ill that they seem nearly untreatable. It is these people who will be the subject of this post, not BPD’s in general. These people seem so far gone and broken that one wonders how anyone could ever even begin to put them back together again. I suppose some progress could be made, but the damage is so severe that I have a hard time seeing how even the best therapist could possibly fix these people in any significant way.

A typical case might be a young woman who, only in her late 20’s to early 30’s, already has 8 -13 suicide attempts and many hospitalizations behind her. She goes into the hospital on a regular basis. Therapy seems to do nothing but feed her pathology as she manipulates gullible new therapists to believe her lies, nonsense, and projections as the new therapist confuses symptom pathology with the truth. Drugs do almost nothing.

Diagnosis itself is often difficult because the BPD is so severe that the person often appears psychotic/delusional. One wonders what are delusions and what are not. Even the delusions do not seem to last for long, as they are dropped, changed around, added to or substituted in a wildly chaotic fashion.

Usually there is a lot of combativeness and involvement with the court system, as the extreme rage leads a litigious person.

Splitting is severe and textbook.

Self-image is so unstable that the person almost literally adopts the full personality and even persona of whomever is on their radar at the moment. The clinician needs to be prepared that this person will so identify with the clinician that they will adopt the therapist’s image and persona as their own. Boundaries nearly do not exist for these people, and they often fall in love with their therapists, try to seduce them, or on the other hand become furious at them to where sessions became rage attacks at the therapist, and the therapists is at odds of how to respond without violating ethics.

The client can become overtly suicidal even during sessions, and infatuation with the therapist can quickly split to where the therapist is the source of all evil. Homicidal threats and homicidal-suicidal threats against the therapist may now appear. The client then hospitalizes themselves due the “horrible trauma from the evil,  incompetent therapist” and soon finds sympathetic new therapist, typically a feminist woman, to unload her story on. The new female therapist forms an alliance with the client against the “evil male” former therapist and accuses him of damaging the client.

Commonly, the therapist gets angry and tells off the client. This leads to abandonment and a vengeance agenda against the therapist, who has now “irreparably damaged” the BPD and “caused them to spiral out of control.” Be prepared to get accused of abandonment, causing severe trauma in the client and making them dramatically worse. The client may become hospitalized due to allegations of damage from an incompetent therapist.

These people are so difficult and chaotic that many clinicians refuse to see Borderline patients. Some are on the record as saying that when they say a Borderline client coming their way, they hide under their desk until they go away. For a lot of therapists, these clients are nothing but trouble, and endless parade of drama and chaos. Therapy itself is chaotic, mercurial, and wild with severe splitting and often extreme idealization of the therapist for good or ill or both, interrupted by fairly regular hospitalizations. The therapist begins to wonder what’s in it for them and thinks you could not pay them enough to suffer through such clients. These clients make an excellent argument that therapeutic abandonment is the proper choice with some clients.

7 Comments

Filed under Anxiety Disorders, Borderline, Mental Illness, Personality Disorders, Psychology, Psychopathology, Psychotherapy, Psychotic Disorders, Schizophrenia

by | July 14, 2017 · 12:20 AM

Do Psychologists Make Their Patients Aware of the Diagnosis of Narcissistic Personality Disorder or Sociopathy?

I recently answered this question on Quora.

Do Psychologists Make their Patients Aware of the Diagnosis of Narcissistic Personality Disorder or Sociopathy?

These personality disorders seem to carry a lot of social stigma, therefore are patients made aware of their diagnosis or does the therapist just continue behavioral therapy to treat the symptoms rather than informing them of the diagnosis?

I am not a psychologist. I am a counselor. I only work with one disorder, OCD, and I can quite accurately diagnose that condition, I assure you. Nevertheless, I am not allowed to give out legal DSM diagnoses. However, I can obviously give out my opinion on a diagnosis. I can also tell the person my opinion on what they do not have. For instance, I have gotten many clients with OCD who have been misdiagnosed with some sort of psychosis. I am an expert at telling the two apart. I simply tell them that in my opinion, they are not psychotic. Then I tell them to fire your clinician and go get a new one that will recognize the difference between OCD and psychosis (many clinicians are very poor at telling these apart).

Other than OCD/psychosis, I also have to make differential dx on OCD/sociopathy, violent thoughts, etc., OCD/pedophilia, pedophilic thoughts, etc. and OCD/homosexuality. In a limited number of cases, I told clients that in my opinion, they did not have OCD but instead had some psychotic disorder, or sociopathic traits, or pedophilia, or that they were homosexuals. Most of this differential dx is pretty straightforward.

I have never had any narcissistic clients, God forbid clients with NPD. One thing nice about working with OCD clients is that they are usually very nice people. Not all of them, mind you. But if they are not nice, there is often some other reason, for instance, Borderline Personality Disorder in an OCD client could possibly make them impossibly vicious, cruel, unstable, not to mention extremely crazy, far crazier than any OCD sufferer ever gets.

OCD by its very nature strikes nice people. The fact that they are so nice, meek and kind is actually one of the main reasons that they have the disorder in the first place! For the most part, only nice people get it, and the nicer you are, the more likely you are to get it. I will leave it at that for the moment and give you a chance to think of why that might be. I know why but it goes beyond the scope of this post at the moment.

But in general, I never even give my opinion on other anxiety disorders or on any mood disorders or personality disorders. I only rarely see clients who have psychotic disorders, and the two that I have seen were already diagnosed. I also very rarely see people with personality disorders, and the few that I have seen were all females with Borderline PD diagnoses. I did see one woman for two sessions with obvious Borderline Personality Disorder, but I had not figured it out yet in the first session, and by the second session, I declined to diagnose her. She has already been diagnosed by a psychiatrist from afar anyway. So apparently I am guilty of failing to dx a Borderline PD client.

The session was about her OCD, not her BPD and she was very nice through the whole session. It would have ruined the whole thing if I told her she had BPD, and I doubt if she would have accepted it anyway. At any rate, I am not allowed to give legal dx’s anyway, so it’s apparently proper for me not to diagnose someone!

That only comes up if there is differential diagnosis. I simply say that I not only can I not legally give these out but that I am not qualified to work with any condition other than OCD, which I can actually work very well with. If they want me to work on their depression or whatever, I tell them that I have no expertise or training in that area so I can guarantee nothing and it would be similar to talking to a friend or family member.

If I were able to give out diagnoses, I think I would simply give them out in most every case. Possibly if it might make a suicidal patient go over the edge, I might decline to give one out. But I will disagree with the clinicians below. In my opinion, physicians and other medical professionals in addition to all licensed clinicians should give out whatever diagnosis is appropriate. I feel it is a moral matter. The patient or client is simply owed a diagnosis on the part of the clinician or MD and I feel it would be remiss of the clinician or MD not to tell the patient what is wrong with them, and I mean everything that is wrong with them.

This is just my personal opinion and I believe there no ethical rules on the subject. Also I respect the clinicians below for not giving out diagnoses in cases where it would not be helpful. I simply feel that this is a case were morals or even the categorical imperative trumps pragmatics or even common sense.

2 Comments

Filed under Anxiety Disorders, Borderline, Ethics, Health, Medicine, Mental Illness, Narcissistic, OCD, Personality Disorders, Philosophy, Psychology, Psychopathology, Psychotherapy, Psychotic Disorders

by | June 7, 2017 · 6:08 AM

Psychopathology of Serial Murderers

The primary problem with almost all serial killers is simply ASPD, Antisocial Personality Disorder, derived sociopathy or primary psychopathy. It is present in almost 100% of such cases. Most everything else is rather secondary to this primary character disorder, which is the most prominent symptom.

Very rare is the serial killer without this disorder, although there have been a few. I remember a long-distance trucker who turned himself when he walked into a Northern California police station with a woman’s breast in his top shirt pocket. He had camped out in forests while trucking and had picked up women and killed them. He kept the body of one in the truck for three or four days and drove around with it.

Experts said he was quite unusual in that they said he actually felt bad about what he had done. I wonder how bad he really felt though. You could not get me to drive around in a truck with a dead woman in the back for very long. I would go into severe panic pretty fast, would stop the truck, get out and start walking or probably running away. I would not be able to walk around with a woman’s breast in my shirt for long either. I would completely panic almost right away, take the shirt off, throw it on the ground and start running. But then I am a pretty guilty type person with a strong conscience.

Based on that, while I am sure he may have felt some guilt for his killings, the fact that he was able to drive around in a truck with a dead woman in the  back for 3-4 days shows without completely flipping out shows to me that he didn’t feel that much guilt, certainly not on the level that most of us would. And the fact that he could rather calmly walk into a police station with a cut off breast in his pocket without flying into total panic shows to me that he didn’t feel that bad about it. So guilt, even when it is present, is not as strong as in most of us, otherwise they would not have even done such horrible things in the first place.

Sexual sadism is also often present, and I have heard that Sadistic Personality Disorder is very common. Juvenile delinquency, voyeurism, exhibitionism, burglary, prowling, petty thievery, etc. typically precede the serial killings. When the serial killer starts killing, he usually has a fairly long rap sheet of more minor offenses. The murders are best seen as an escalation of a chronic criminal character type.

The ones who kill children are typically though not always preferential or fixated pedophiles. Certainly the ones who kill only children are preferential pedophiles. There is a type of pedophile called a mysoped, which is a sadistic pedophile. They are not very common. I doubt if 5% of pedophiles are like this, but these people are very dangerous. Probably almost all serial child killers are mysopeds and these crimes often have a sexual basis.

95% of rapists are the type that rarely if ever go serial, but the sadistic rapist, composed of no more than 5% of rapists, is very dangerous. Most if not all rapist serial killers are sadistic rapists.

The rage rapist is dangerous, but he generally does not intend to kill his victim although he assault her. If she fights back or gets difficult, he can fly into a rage and beat her so badly that she dies but again he usually does not intend to kill. I doubt if these types go serial much if at all. Serial killers intend to kill; rage rapists do not.

Malignant narcissism, the disorder, believe it or not, of our wonderful President, is also present sometimes. Ted Bundy was a malignant narcissist. Yes, our wonderful President has the same mental illness as Ted Bundy! Comforting thought.

A few have Schizoid Personality Disorder, and some of the more disturbed ones have Borderline Personality Disorder.

Schizotypal, Paranoid and Narcissistic Personality Disorders are rare if ever seen in serial killers. Schizotypals are probably too disorganized and decompensated and just out and out strange to commit such crimes. The serial killer must blend in, and schizotypals do not do that. A few schizotypals have committed mass murders. James Holmes the Aurora Batman Theater Shooter, was a notable case. But note that he was caught immediately.

Paranoid PD is rarely if ever seen. These people tend to be rather retiring and like to hide away from a hostile world. They also do not like to call attention to themselves from a hostile world. They are suspicious and distrustful by nature and this makes it hard for them to blend in well with ordinary society as serial killers often do.

Narcissists are usually too self-centered to kill. While narcissists are often very mean, the disorder is usually well-controlled in that the rage rarely escalates to homicide. There have been a few cases of NPD’s committing mass murder, usually of their families.

The case of Jeffrey MacDonald, the mass murdering physician of Fatal Vision, seems to be such a case. This is a superb true crime case by the way.

Also narcissists think that if they kill, they will get caught, and if they are in prison or jail they will not be able to live this wonderful life they are supposed to be killing. They are “too cool to kill.” Killing would mess up all their wonderful plans to exploit others and hold them up to contempt by millions of people, which the narcissist would have a hard time taking. The narcissist is “too good for prison.” Prison would be such a crushing blow to their self-image that it would very hard to take.

However, malignant narcissists can be very dangerous because this is a combination of psychopathy, sadism, Paranoid PD and Narcissistic PD. When you weaponize NPD with paranoia, sadism and particularly psychopathy, you create a dangerous illness.

Cluster C Personality Disorders like Passive-Aggressive Personality Disorder, Self-Defeating Personality Disorder, Dependent Personality Disorder and Obsessive Compulsive Personality Disorder are rarely if ever present in these types. These are PD’s where aggression is mostly displayed passively, and serial killers display aggression actively, not passively.

Mood disorders do not seem to be common. Bipolar Disorder is not common, and serial killers are rarely if ever depressed. They displace guilt and loathing outwards instead of pushing it inside of themselves as depressives do. Depressives are passive, and depression acts as sort of a freezing agent in that it tends to immobilize people by its nature. Men in general tend to either experience less depression than women or mask it with other things such as anger and rage, drinking, drugs, gambling, promiscuity or even workaholism. It is simply not acceptable as a man to be depressed, so depressed men simply channel their depression into other things and say they are not depressed, they are just drunks or workaholics, for instance.

Substance and alcohol abuse issues are quite common with serial killers, but the better ones are more sober, as drinkers and dopers tend to be scattered and unreliable and serial killers must be on the ball  24-7.

Only a few are psychotic. 2% of serial killers are psychotic. Psychotic people can barely organize a trip to the bathroom. How are they going to plot out elaborate and professional serial homicides?

They are motivated by many things, but your typical rape-murders of murders of attractive young women almost always have a sexual component. I would call these serial killings lust murders. The Germans coined the term. Even among the lust-murders, there are a number of different types. Some are motivated by purely sexual desires, others get off specifically on killing and the power gained from it, others are hunter types who get pleasure from the hunt and chase as if they were hunting an animal, which they are of course, but when we refer to hunters, we are always talking about hunters of non-human animals.

2 Comments

Filed under Alcohol, Antisocial, Borderline, Crime, Criminology, Depressants, Depression, Intoxicants, Mental Illness, Mood Disorders, Narcissism, Narcissistic, Pedophilia, Personality, Personality Disorders, Psychology, Psychopathology, Psychotic Disorders, Schizotypal, Serial Killers, Sex, Sociology, Sociopathy

by | December 21, 2016 · 12:00 PM

Narcissistic Personality Disorder, Malignant Narcissism, and Sociopathy/Psychopathy

Whitedawg: I was kind of wondering, commenting about the personality traits/qualities of regular everyday people or elected officials, more so than Teddy. There is little doubt Ted crossed a lot of lines.

But it’s not so evident to most that President-elect Trump may have some serious problems that can influence his decision making and tweeting. Many people know non-serial killing psychopaths, sociopaths, and malignant narcissists. And some of those traits are looked at as positive.

I am not sure how many non-pathological Malignant Narcissists there are out there.

George W. Bush was said to be sociopathic and the same was said about LBJ. Hitler was clearly a psychopath, and he also had Paranoid Personality Disorder.

I have known a number of people who had what I would diagnose as Narcissistic Personality Disorder. At first they may seem likable, but there is something pretty awful about them somehow even when they are being good. The one I knew best caused massive damage to me in my life until I severely restricted contact with them. Another person close to me got to know two NPD’s very well and has recently fallen out with one of them.

NPD’s are harmful! If you get involved with an NPD, you are probably going to get harmed or damaged. It’s just what they do. They harm people. That’s their nature. I would advise any of you if you have any NPD’s in your life to think seriously about whether you want this person in your life or not. It’s possible to have them in your life while causing little or no damage, but more often than that, there’s something toxic about them. If they haven’t hurt you yet, they probably will at some point in the future. I don’t cotton to assholes much, and I’ve suffered far too many of them for one lifetime. I don’t have any NPD’s in my life, and that’s the way I like it.

It’s generally a good idea to get all of the Cluster B Personality Disorder types out of your life. Cluster B is Antisocial Personality Disorder, Borderline Personality Disorder, Histrionic Personality Disorder and Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

I have dealt with a few people who seemed pretty sociopathic in my life. They all harmed from me. Some of them stole from me. There is one I know to this day, and he is one of the most frightening people I know. The worst is you think he is nice because he has this sort of awful charm about him, so you go make friends with him again, and that’s always a big mistake. He came into my house, stole a $275 Guatemalan knife hanging on my wall when he had my back turned to him and was out the door. I was told he sold it for $10 to buy weed. He is a Bulldogs gang member, has scars from bullet wounds, and I believe he has a criminal record.

I knew his brother, and he came to my house one day carrying a small gun under his jacket. It was larger than a pistol but smaller than a rifle. I guess it was a semiautomatic. Not knowing guns, to me, it looked like a sawed off shotgun. He was bringing it to the local school where he attended in case he might have to fight his gang enemies. He told me he didn’t care if he lived or died anymore. He was only 19 years old when he told me that, a mere boy.

Last time he came over, I let him in and we sat down and watched some videos. He took out a very large knife and put it on the table. He said he did it to put me at ease. I actually did not mind that he did that. I prefer that if people are armed when they see me that they remove their weapons and place them on some furniture near us. That sort of evens the score a bit and shows a lot of trust. I suppose either of us could grab the weapon and murder the other person but it never happens. Plus I sort of like to live dangerously like an outlaw, and this is in line with that image.

A destructive sociopath comes into your life like a whirlwind. All sorts of wild and crazy things happen to you for a while, and it is like you are caught up in an exciting tornado thunderstorm. It’s all pretty wild and crazy, and nothing makes much sense, but you just go along because they seem so fun and charming, and these folks have a sort of a “pull” or attraction to them. I know of no other way to describe it but you might call it a forcefield. There is something about them, possibly in the very look in their eyes, that sort of hypnotizes you and sucks you into them and their world.

At some point, the sociopath vanishes from your life, whirling away in the distance like a funnel cloud. You look around at your life, and everything seems to be in ruins. It’s like someone came into your house and turned everything upside down, threw a lot of stuff on the floor, and now everything is a mixed up mess. You and your life have been seriously damaged by some unknown entity. You don’t even know what hit you. You look around at the human wreckage and think of the times when the sociopath was whirling around in your life and you think, “What in the Hell was that, anyway?”

These people don’t make sense. I have been studying sociopaths forever, and I have even done some psychological counseling with sociopaths. If they are young enough, you can still work with them to some extent and maybe prevent serious damage in the future. After decades of studying sociopaths, they still don’t make sense to me. I think the only way to understand sociopaths is to be one.

16 Comments

Filed under Antisocial, Borderline, Crime, Democrats, Mental Illness, Narcissistic, Personality Disorders, Politics, Psychology, Psychopathology, Psychotherapy, Republicans, Serial Killers, US Politics

by | May 22, 2016 · 3:40 PM

Introverts, Extroverts, Pure Introverts and Frustrated Extroverts

Gregory Chelli writes:

I think introverts generally have a lower social intelligence than extroverts.

Autistics are true introverts, they don’t like to be with others because they don’t understand them well. They are like naturally bad at maths people who don’t like maths as a result of their incapacity. There are probably no bad at maths people who fantasizing about equation and maths problems, as there are no autistics fantasizing about being in a conversation with people.

The frustrated extroverts or extroverted loners you are talking about are generally persons with high social intelligence who can’t fully use their gift in real life because of some emotional problem, like timidity for example. So, as you said, they end up created imaginary social situations in their mind to relax themselves. An analogy would be a math genius who is prevented to do maths for some reason, like being in jail. He would be thinking about imaginary maths problem most of the time without being able to do real math stuff on a blackboard or in a notebook.

There are probably true introverts with high social intelligence and true extroverts with low social intelligence. But these ones are exceptions. People generally like to do what they are good at.

NB: people with extremely high social intelligence may not be interested in people, because the general population would look autistic, and thus not interesting to them.

What do you think of this comment?

I suppose it depends on the definitions of introvert and extrovert. Supposedly 80% of the population are extroverts, whatever that word means. True introverts are only 20% of the population, whatever that word means. I suppose extroverts really like to be around people. Introverts like to be around people a little of the time but not a lot of the time. They need their space. I know introverts will talk at a dinner table for a bit and then retreat to their bedroom with a book. Or you will talk to them at a table for a bit, but then they want to stop talking and read the paper.

Introverts absolutely do not sit around fantasizing about being around people all the time when they are alone. Forget it. And anyone who does that is not an introvert. Forget it. They’re just not. Normies would probably insist that this person is an introvert or a “loner” just because they are alone all the time. But Normies are retarded.

I would say that just because you are alone all the time doesn’t mean you are a loner! How about that?

Now we need to define the word loner. Normie retards say that loners are people who are alone all the time, but that’s not the definition of a loner. A true loner or real loner is someone who really has need or use for other people and simply prefers to be alone all the time because that is what makes them happy. If they are forced to be around people, they probably try to leave after a while because they start to feel uncomfortable.

If you are alone all the time but you don’t enjoy it or you hate it and you dream of being around people, you are not a real loner. Really you are not a loner at all. We might call you a “fake loner.” In this case, we are looking at the difference between real loners and fake loners.

I think introverts like being alone, but they don’t want to be alone all the time, although there are some who do.

I do not think shy people are necessarily introverts. Nor are social phobics for that matter. Normies say they are, but Normies are idiots. For instance a shy person who does not really like to be alone a lot but ends up being alone due to shyness is not an introvert. Forget it. Especially so if the shy person is fantasizing about being around people all the time.

I would gather that that person has probably not been shy their whole lives. Perhaps there was a time when they mingled with people much easier, but then something happened to them, and they turned shy. The reason they are fantasizing being around people all the time is because at one point in their life, they were doing this, it was going well, and they were having a lot of fun. In other words, they want the old times back again.

Or perhaps they may have an anxiety disorder. Quite a few extroverts develop anxiety disorders. If a person develops an anxiety disorder, it doesn’t really matter how good their social skills are because they will not be able to use them well. They may well know all the rules and have all the skills, but when the anxiety comes out, it’s all for naught because 100% of the people around them are going to reject them in one way or another. They may well even be extroverts who like the idea of being around people, but the anxiety kills off all the fun by making everyone reject them and makes being around people a great big drag. Eventually they might just stop trying.

Normie idiots think only introverts get anxiety disorders, but that’s just not so. I have even heard of cases where wild, hypersocial, life of the party types in their teens developed social phobia at age 18 to the point of hardly being able to leave their houses. There has been no actual personality change here, and true personality change is not common anyway. The person has simply become ill. Theoretically, if you could cure that illness, the shyness would go away, and they would be their old hypersocial selves again because that is who they are deep down inside.

I do not believe that the deep down inside person really changes in most cases. Normie morons insist, “Anyone can change their personality,” but that’s just wrong. You are what you are. Your personality is your personality. You’re stuck with it. Get used to it. It’s yours. All yours. That said, no one is stuck with a lousy personality.

One theory is that there are good and bad sides to all personality types. The good side of Antisocial personality is Aggressive Personality. The good side of Narcissistic Personality is Confident Personality. The good side of Borderline Personality is Sensitive Personality. I believe the good side of Dependent Personality is Devoted Personality, and the good side of Paranoid Personality is Cautious Personality.

8 Comments

Filed under Antisocial, Anxiety Disorders, Autism, Borderline, Dependent, Mental Illness, Narcissistic, Personality, Personality Disorders, Psychology, Psychopathology

by | May 17, 2016 · 11:35 PM

The “Crazy” Personality Disorders: Borderline Personality Disorder

People with Borderline Personality Disorder can seem quite crazy. 80% of cases are women. These women are often called nuts, crazy, crazy women, crazy woman from Hell, etc. These are the classic crazy women who display remarkable mood changes from depression to happiness to ecstasy to anxiety to rage, perhaps all in one day or even in a single morning. The PD is characterized by frequent and dramatic mood changes.

Borderlines also engage in a lot of push-pull behaviors, teasing and seductiveness, and dramatic shifts between love and hate. They tend to either idealize people as near-Gods or demonize them as completely evil. They also often switch back and forth with the same person, seeing them as both wonderful at one time and diabolical the next.

This is called splitting. It is a primitive defense that children frequently use. Young children split the world between good and evil. Good is pure good, and evil is pure evil. The child loves his parent one minute, and the next hates the parent’s guts when they are thwarted, reprimanded and sent to their rooms. How often have you heard a small child scream, “I hate you Mommy!” and run to their room crying?

Most people get over this Manichean view of the world by the time they are adults, but Borderlines never do that.

Relationships with Borderlines are characterized by constant chaos and drama that never ends. If you are in a relationship with a Borderline, you need to get out of it because it is going to be nothing but continuous chaos and drama as long as you are with them. Borderlines often do not think there is anything wrong with themselves, or perhaps even more disturbingly, they actually enjoy being crazy. The latter is my theory from being around Borderlines quite a bit. I am convinced that they actually love being nuts. Perhaps it is exciting.

Borderlines are often in and out of the hospital. They are very commonly suicidal. I met two Borderline women, one in her late 20’s and the other in her early thirties. One had tried to commit suicide 13 times, and the other had tried 8 times. The suicide attempts are often deliberately fake, which is something women do a lot. They actually want the suicide attempt to fail. They probably do this as a means to get attention, and there is a good chance that it is a cry for help too. They are trying to get people to pay attention to their misery and chaos.

Some Borderlines can be dangerous or homicidal. Many or possibly even most male Borderlines are or were incarcerated in jails or prisons. Male Borderlines are much more dangerous than female Borderlines. I do not think I have ever met a male Borderline, but I have heard that they are very bad news. You probably do not want to have a man like this anywhere near your life.

I have met extremely ill Borderlines who appear at first glance to be extremely crazy. I have seen some where I thought, “Wow, this is the craziest, most insane person I have ever met.” These very ill types can appear psychotic. I am not sure if they are actually psychotic or if they just appear that way.

They present as chaotic people who tell wild, dramatic, often contradictory stories about their lives, many of which seem to be completely made up or delusional notions. These stories often have to do with enemies who are supposedly persecuting them or wild and chaotic stories of abuse when they were children. Upon close examination, many of these disturbing stories are not even true. The person is either making them up, has a poor boundary between reality and fantasy, or is delusional.

They can be litigious, battling their enemies in court.

Even female Borderlines are often arrested, often for wild fights with one of their enemies or lovers. Sometimes a disturbing level of violence is used in these fights. The murderer Jody Arias is an example of a homicidal female Borderline.

They are disliked or even hated by many clinicians and mental health workers because of their constant drama and chaos which often involves extreme anger, tirades, tantrums, threats, and generally Hellish behavior. There are clinicians who hate Borderlines so much that they refuse to take them. Not that it matters because they usually don’t get better in therapy anyway.

3 Comments

Filed under Borderline, Gender Studies, Mental Illness, Personality Disorders, Psychology, Psychopathology

by | January 25, 2016 · 6:12 PM

Repost: The Indian Personality: Superiority and Inferiority Complexes Intertwined

This is a great article from a ways back that neither slams Hindu Indians nor venerates but instead simply objectively describes what is going on with them. We talk about India and this subject in particular on here, so I thought this piece would be germane to the discussion. Plus, a lot of you have probably not read it. Hopefully it will stimulate some discussion.

A fine new Indian Hindu commenter named Janardhan has appeared on our blog, and he repeats some of the same things that other insightful Hindus such as ILOR, Rahul and Pranav have said. This shows us that not all Indian Hindus are bad people and that some of them are capable of looking inwards and trying to better their society. I consider both Rahul and Pranav at least to be strong Indian patriots who simply want the best for their country. As they see it, getting the best for India is going to require some massive changes, hence their critical patriotism.

Hindus have a strange mix of superiority and inferiority complexes. Deep down they massage their ego about how their civilization was ‘da greatest’ with a total ignorance about other civilizations and their achievements. According to Hindus, Ancient India compared to the rest of the world is equivalent to comparing the city of Vienna during Mozart with highlanders in Papua New Guinea. As if Ancient India was like this huge Vienna while the rest of the world were primitive.

But during the last centuries they were first enslaved by Muslims from Central Asia/Persia (whom they consider savage bloodthirsty barbarians ignoring the intellectual side of Islamic civilization which itself was plagiarized to a good extent from Greek learning) and then the Europeans.

One difference was that in the case of Islamic invaders they could hide under the carpet the invaders’ intellectual side, and they are thus dehumanized as savage bloodthirsty monsters (this label is justified though as the Islamic rulers were quite brutal). But when the Europeans, especially the British, came, they could not ignore their obvious technological superiority with their steam engines and telegraphs.

Thus the conflicting superiority/inferiority complex feelings.

They were as per their myth Numero Uno Civilization in the world, but now they are nearly at the bottom. White people with their strange but seeming superior looks and behavior give us an inferiority complex. Besides, even the Japanese/ Koreans are way ahead of us, and now the Chinese are racing ahead. Mainland Indians just cannot accept the rise of China: “Those Chinkis like the Chinkis of Nepal and North Eastern Indians going ahead of us, not possible,” we say.

Thus the desire to prove ancient India being as technologically advanced as the modern world since the modern technological world is 90% a White creation and we cannot fathom a people other than us could have done so.

I think this is same with the Arabs with their Islam. Islam, the last word of God and having an Arab as its last and greatest prophet, has fallen behind the White nonbelievers. Oh, the horror.

Blacks, well most Indians consider Blacks as some savage monkey people anyways.

I would say we Indians are some of the most racist people in the world, but our racism is very subtle.

As someone who works in mental health, I would like to point out the obvious. A person with both a massive superiority and inferiority complex going at the same time is a common creature. This is typical for Cluster B personality types: especially Narcissistic and Borderline Personality Disorders. But it associated more with narcissism than anything else.

In fact, all proper analyses of narcissism begin with the supposition that what is going on in narcissism is often a huge inferiority complex which is apparently being compensated for by its opposite, a huge superiority complex. My view is that the worse the narcissist’s inferiority complex, the greater their superiority complex must be to compensate for it. Whereas if one feels only a bit inferior, one has only to feel a bit superior to compensate as all human beings are trying to equalize things and get at what I call the “zero state” of perfect equilibrium where everything is ok.

Many analyses of the Indian personality on this site have noted the profound narcissism apparent in most Indian Hindus. In many cases, this also looks like solipsism, but then narcissism and solipsism tend to go together anyway (Look at the Jews, the most solipsistic people on Earth).

20 Comments

Filed under Antiquity, Asia, Asian, Asians, Borderline, Britain, Colonialism, Culture, East Indians, Europe, Europeans, Hinduism, History, India, Islam, Mental Illness, Narcissism, Narcissistic, Personality, Personality Disorders, Political Science, Psychology, Psychopathology, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Religion, South Asia, South Asians, Whites

by | December 22, 2015 · 9:42 PM

Harm OCD Versus Other Conditions: Differential Diagnosis

This is a repost of a very popular post of mine on psychology. It just received a massive update and major changes have been made. It is offered here in case you did not read it the first time and are interested in the subject.

A very frequent complaint in OCD patients is thoughts of harm, either harming oneself or others. The general rule is that the person never acts on the thoughts, although this is somewhat controversial. Some say there have been a few cases of OCD sufferers acting on their harm obsessions. It’s just that I have personally never heard of a case.

In addition, as a counselor, I have worked with countless OCD sufferers who have this particular theme over the past eight years as they come to me for help. I haven’t met one person yet who acted on the thoughts nor have I heard of anyone who has, and I have known people who have had this theme for more than 25 years.

However, sometimes sufferers start to commit the act, but they stop before they are able to carry it out.

In one case, a man had an obsession about turning his bicycle either in parked cars and pedestrians. Sometimes he would just start to act on the obsession and turn his bicycle towards the people or cars, but every time he did this, he simply crashed his bike. No one was hurt other than himself.

Generally, people read my articles and simply self-diagnose as OCD with whatever theme they have going. 100% of the people coming to me self-diagnosing as Harm OCD were in fact suffering from that very condition.

What to look for:

Resistance: I would look first and foremost for resistance. Look at how hard the person fights the thought. The harder the person fights the thought, the more likely it is to be an obsession. In fact, I would say that thoughts that are ferociously resisted are always or almost always obsessions.

Resistance to thoughts is not commonly seen in other conditions if it is seen at all. Most persons without OCD simply do not ever try to stop or fight off their thoughts. If you ask them, they will say things like, “I only think things I want to think,” and “I don’t have unwanted thoughts.” So resistance to thoughts in people who do not have OCD is probably not common.

Although it is often said that resistance is a bad sign in OCD as it makes OCD worse, I don’t mind seeing resistance. The reason is that if a person is ferociously resisting and doing so successfully, then first of all, I am quite sure I have a case of OCD so the diagnostic conundrum is over and also I know that the the OCD is simply not that bad yet.

As OCD gets worse and worse, resistance gets harder and harder. I have talked to a number of people who have gotten to the point where the thoughts have simply taken over the person’s mind and are going all the time. They can’t resist them anymore, if they ever could. Inability to resist thoughts or thoughts that have completely taken over is a sign of a more serious case.

Ego-dystonic: The person hates the thoughts, or at least it seems as if a large part of the person hates the thoughts. The new theory is that the entire self hates the thoughts and that no part of a person wants an obsession, but this is a bit controversial. Nevertheless, this is what I believe. One  hears OCD sufferers say things like, “I hate this with every fiber of my being.” That’s a good sign when they can think like that. As the condition worsens, the person gets more and more confused about whether they like the thoughts or not or want to get rid of them or not.

In an advanced case of Harm OCD, the person will feel evil and it will seem as if they like the thoughts and do not want to get rid of them. This can cause diagnostic confusion. Feeling evil, feeling like they like the thoughts and feeling like they don’t want them to go away are all aspects of advanced Harm OCD. The key here is ego-dystonicity. These feelings cause alarm and profound anxiety in the person as they feel that they are turning evil against their will or that they are becoming something that is in opposition to their true self.

Ego-alien: The person is often confused as to why they are even thinking these thoughts. One  hears such things as, “I have thought a million times, why the Hell would I even think of this stuff even one time, ever?…I love my mother/father/husband/wife, etc. so why am I thinking about killing them?” If you ask the Harm OCD sufferer if they feel angry, they will usually say that they don’t. The person is often frankly mystified why they are even having these feelings in the first place.

Another part of the ego-alien aspect is that the person feels that the thoughts are not even really their own. They know that the thoughts are just thoughts and they know that the thoughts are coming only from themselves and not from an outside entity, but nevertheless the thoughts are so alien to the person’s identity that they often seem like they are not the person’s own thoughts.

The person’s inner voice can become split into a “sane voice” and an “OCD voice.” The OCD voice can sometimes sound like it is someone’s else’s voice other than the person’s own inner voice. Really it is just the person’s inner voice morphing into a new form. This experience is so alarming that the person often fears that they are going psychotic.

Thoughts go against the person’s morals: This is the reason for all of the distress, resistance, anxiety and alarm. The thought of hurting or killing random others or loved ones or certainly people one is not angry at all with seems profoundly wrong on at least some level to the Harm OCD sufferer because typically deep down inside the person with this theme is paradoxically enough, an extremely moral person.

And oddly enough, they are often remarkably passive and non-violent. This clashing of one’s morals is what engenders the strong resistance, discomfort, anxiety, worry, and alarm.

Differential diagnosis: There are apparently quite a few people with ego-syntonic fantasies of hurting and killing other people. Sometimes it is someone they hate, and sometimes it is anyone in general, women in general, or some particular ethnicity, race or religion in general. The major problem with thoughts of harming others is that the people who are never going to do it are often the main or only ones who show up clinically.

That is, often the only people showing up inn therapy are the Harm OCD sufferers or in other words, the only people who show up for therapy are the people who are never going to commit these acts.

The people who are really thinking seriously about hurting or killing other people or who like to think about such things it and are not bothered by these thoughts, feelings, urges or plans, and they simply do not seek help. This is a real problem: truly violent people generally simply do not show up clinically asking for help to try to stop acting on their violent urges. It would be nice if they did, but they just do not.

These people are variable. Some go through life choosing to think these violent thoughts, and sometimes it is just a phase that they give up at some point. This is often seen in an  adolescent male. In some cases of course, they act on the thoughts of harming others, and these are the people you read about in the papers.

But in many other cases, they never act on the thoughts and can go years, decades or a lifetime with frequent thoughts of harming others that are never acted on even once. For every one person running around being a serial killer, there are probably 100 more  who dream of such things but due to various controls or fears, they are able to avoid acting on their fantasies. People have more control than we think. Nobody has to do anything.

Sociopathy: This is not OCD. Sociopathy develops in childhood and adolescence and is generally a long-standing problem. A non-sociopathic person simply cannot turn into a sociopath in adulthood de novo; it’s not possible. If you’re not a sociopath by age 18, you will never be one.

An informal survey of sociopaths on an Internet forum for sociopaths revealed that most to all sociopaths said that they enjoyed thinking about harming others. A typical comment was: “Thinking about hurting or killing people is one of the few things that I actually enjoy thinking about.”

So we see that most sociopaths take great pleasure in thinking about hurting or killing people. They think about it whenever they want to. If they want to think about it, they do, and if they don’t want to think about it, they don’t. The harm thoughts are ego-syntonic. They don’t feel bad about having these sorts of thoughts. Thinking about these things is simply their idea of a good time.

Unfortunately, most sociopaths never show up in a clinician’s office. Just thinking about something is fortunately not grounds for hospitalizing someone. Anyone can fantasize about being any kind of criminal that they want to be. As long at they don’t do anything, there’s nothing that the law or psychiatry can do.

Lack of guilt: You will sometimes run across people who have violent fantasies about people they hate. This is not OCD. They will often tell you that they are not going to act on the thoughts, but the fantasies sounds like a good idea since they hate the person so much. They do not feel guilty about these thoughts; instead they enjoy them. The thoughts are not resisted. A famous psychiatrist said, “A homicidal fantasy a day keeps the psychiatrist away.”

In more florid cases such as Borderline Personality Disorder or Bipolar Disorder, the person is making overt threats and seems to be capable of carrying them out. They generally don’t act on the threat, at least not homicidally, although they often commit minor acts of impersonal violence, damage property, and are generally menacing. Obviously in some cases they do commit acts of serious violence thought. But in my experience, the overwhelming majority of homicidal threats are simply empty threats.

Nevertheless, if presented clinically, this is cause for alarm, and in the US, under the Tarsakoff Rule, persons making homicidal threats can be hospitalized for making specific threats towards a specific person. In other words, in the US, if a person says, “I feel like killing people,” there is no grounds for commitment. There’s nothing to act on.

But in the US, if a person is making a specific threat towards a certain known individual that seems to be a credible threat, clinicians have to notify the person being threatened, and the person making the threats may be legally involuntarily hospitalized, although in many cases, they are not committed, or if they are, it is only for the 1-3 day minimum.

Note that it is very hard if not impossible to determine in a clinical setting exactly who is dangerous and who is not.

Potential serial killer stopped: A recent case history along these lines in a journal is instructive. A man had Bipolar Disorder. At some point in the disorder, he developed elaborate fantasies of being a serial killer. He had assembled a very fancy murder kit, including all the implements he might need. He also had a list of ~20 people he was going to kill. He had been following and observing them for some time and had taken precise notes on many aspects of their locations, travels, and behavior. He had notebooks with elaborate plans on how he planned to kill these people.

It’s not known how or why he revealed this in therapy, but he did. The threat was considered credible enough to be actionable. He was hospitalized for 1.5 years in an institution in which he underwent intensive therapy and was given medication. At the end of the period, his fantasies and desires to be a serial killer had been completely eliminated.

The team said this was a very unusual case of successful intervention. They noted that he was not a sociopath, and this was probably the only reason that he volunteered his plans in therapy and was able to renounce and be alleviated of his desires, and return to society as a healthy member. The man had some ambivalence about his plans, and this was due to his not being a sociopath.

This was not a case of OCD.

He enjoyed his elaborate plans, had been planning them for some time, had assembled kits and stalked potential victims and had elaborate, pleasurable, long-standing and ego-syntonic fantasies about homicide which were not resisted.

A person with Harm OCD will never assemble a murder kit, write down elaborate plans for how they are going to kill people, stalk potential victims or even carry weapons. The overwhelming emotion in Harm OCD is fear, and the tremendous fear will prevent them from doing any of those things.

Harm OCD sufferers often go to great lengths to keep from acting on their thoughts. Some “disarmed” themselves before they went to see another person. They would remove all “potential weapons” from their person so they could not use them to attack the person they were with. They would also   “disarm their vehicle” when another person was getting into it. They would take all potential weapons and hide them under the seat of the car so they would not use them to attack the person.

Sexual sadism: Sexual sadism is a paraphilia that almost always develops in its strong form in childhood or adolescence. The person’s preferred means of arousal involves hurting, humiliating, degrading, insulting and abusing an other person. These are people who like to hurt other people. They get off on it sexually.

A very large number of serial killers are sexual sadists. They kill in order to get off sexually. Their masturbatory fantasies since childhood or adolescence have typically involved sadism, torture or even homicide.

It is very common for serial killers to have a history of kinky sex with their wives or lovers. The kinky sex usually involved bondage, discipline, sadism and masochism.

In addition, the severe sexual sadist may have an erotic arousal to images of women who are either dead or appear to be dead. These people, typically men, collect photos of dead bodies or women who appear to be dead.

Unfortunately, sexual sadism tends to escalate over time. There have been cases of serial killers or murderers who could only orgasm if they were pretending to strangle their wives.

A rather typical case might look like this:

A gay man with sexual sadism presents for therapy. Sadism is extremely common in the gay community. His sadistic activities have been slowly escalating over time. The last time he had sex, he burned a man with cigarettes. He got so excited that he wanted to kill the man, and he had to restrain himself from doing that. He presented to therapy thinking he was out of control. He was afraid he would kill the next man he had sex with.

This is not OCD. Fantasies in paraphilias such as sexual sadism are typically very pleasurable. The thoughts, images, feelings and urges are either seldom or never resisted. So what we look for her is an ego-syntonic syndrome with a lack of resistance. In addition, we are looking for strong sadistic sexual fantasies, typically dating from an early age, that are powerfully arousing. Such fantasies will be absent in Harm OCD.

The potentially confusing aspect of paraphilias and OCD is that while the paraphilia gives the person a great deal of sexual pleasure, and they often spend a lot of time masturbating to the paraphilic fantasies, it is rather common for them to feel strong guilt after they have an orgasm and the excitement fades. Alternately they can feel a lot of guilt about the paraphilia itself as in the case of exhibitionism, voyeurism or body part fetishes.

What is going on here is something like an addiction. Paraphilias look like addictions to drugs, alcohol, gambling or pornography. The paraphilic “addict” loves his paraphilic “high” and often feels out of control with wild pleasure almost like a roller coaster ride when they are caught up in the high of the addiction. They often describe themselves as feeling out of control in this phase.

When the drug run is over or the addict wakes up with a hangover or an empty wallet at the casino or drug party, there is a crash in which the addict feels terrible that they are so powerless over their addiction. They also feel guilty and pained that they are suffering the aftereffects of the addiction. Feelings of self-loathing are common in this phase.

However, in some very bad cases of Harm OCD, violent and sadistic thoughts about torture, murder, cannibalism etc. intrude quite often during masturbation or possibly sex. This is not sexual sadism; it is OCD. This is relatively common in Harm OCD, and the sufferers often describe it as being  extremely unpleasant. The difference here is the intrusive nature of the thoughts which are generally not present in sexual sadism, where instead of being intrusive and resisted, the thoughts are pleasant and welcomed.

On occasion, a sociopath or potential serial killer will present to someone or other, more often law enforcement than a clinician. Usually they present only once and then go away. Possibly years later, they may begin killing. In one case, one of the prime suspects for the possible Smiley Face Killer Gang presented to a police station about powerful urges to drown young men. He was afraid he was out of control, and he was going to act on them. The police could do nothing to retain him.

This is not a case of OCD.

This is a sociopathic person who simply feels out of control.

In a case in the UK, a serial killer gave a warning years before killing that he felt he was out of control and was afraid he was going to kill someone.

Once again, this is not OCD.

It’s another sociopath who fears they are losing control. This person will be having strong, long-standing ego-syntonic fantasies of homicide which are not resisted. They are pleasurable to the person, but they do not want to act on them, probably due to fear of going to prison. Over time, homicidal fantasies may become stronger so that the capacity to resist putting them into action becomes more difficult. This is what happens when these people fear they are losing control.

In short, a diagnosis of Harm OCD is relatively straightforward and should prevent few problems.

What we are looking at here is the difference between problems of fear and problems of desire. OCD is a problem of fear. These other problems are problems of desire.

8 Comments

Filed under Anxiety Disorders, Borderline, Crime, Law, Mental Illness, Mood Disorders, OCD, Personality Disorders, Psychology, Psychopathology, Psychotherapy, Serial Killers, Sex, Sociopathy

by | October 6, 2015 · 8:14 PM

What Attracts Women

I will go through these one by one here:

  1. Hypergamy
  2. Women’s dishonesty about what they’re attracted to being biologically hardwired because of them wanting one man to beta provide and another man to fuck her.
  3. Looks = Personality. Your personality and behavior are largely dictated by uncontrollable factors (how people reacted to you during upbringing, hormonal profile during puberty, your background, etc.).
  4. Social life and hence status being extremely affected by the way one looks.
  5. Men being more productive and contributing more to society and to general development throughout history, and how marriage and monogamy in the old days was a way to control and make sure that every man got his needs met and hence contributed to society. Basically one can easily conclude that female to male choice based mating selection is very bad for society overall.

Let’s start with 1 first.

Hypergamy

Yep, females are hypergamous by nature. The Blue Pillers, feminists, male feminists, etc. are absolutely furious about this notion. They say it’s all a great big lie. Are they really that clueless?

But yes, female hypergamy is real. It is also a big problem if unleashed. In order to keep it at least manageable (because you can never get rid of it altogether), institutions such as marriage with enforced monogamy are devised so you can have a halfway civilized society and restrain female hypergamy significantly.

Women’s dishonesty about what they’re attracted to being biologically hardwired because of them wanting one man to beta provide and another man to fuck her.

Yep. Women lie about what they want. They lie about what turns them on. They lie about a thousand things. Why they lie so much, I have no idea, but I suspect that women don’t even know what they want or what turns them on either.

I do not agree with women wanting one man to be a Beta provider and another to provide stud service. Ideally, I think most women would like to marry Chad, tame him so he’s monogamous, and hopefully have Monogamous Chad Dream Man be a great provider for her so she doesn’t need to settle with a Beta as a provider.

You will notice that women’s romance novels are typically about this totally unrealistic dream man who is this hunky male model stud who is a man’s man, masculine as can be but at the same time sensitive, loving and kind, who has women after him all the time but settles down with the heroine after she tames him.

My mother notes that the male heroes of romance novels are men that more or less do not even exist in real life. So women’s dream men are so fantastical that they probably don’t even exist. They’re pining for nonexistent entities!

The problem that Alphas are often lousy providers. Many Alphas are not employed. A lot of others work in the criminal economy, often selling drugs, etc. A surprising number work at low paying jobs and continue to live in cheap apartments and drive old cars into middle age. A stunning number of Alphas are in jails and prisons. Many Alphas spend most of their life essentially living off women in exchange for providing what boils down to gigolo service.

Even if a woman could pin Chad into a long term relationship or marriage, Chad makes a lousy boyfriend and an even lousier husband. He tends to be an incorrigible cheater, among other things. He is at least a little bit narcissistic/sociopathic, he is typically vain, conceited and egotistical and is often rather short on empathy. In other words, Chad is an asshole.

So women don’t need a Beta provider. They need a provider, period. Chad would be the #1 pick of course, but he’s not available, so she settles for Mr. Beta with the good job as a provider. But now she still needs Chad for sex. What’s a lady to do?

Looks = Personality, your personality and behavior are largely dictated by uncontrollable factors (how people reacted to you during upbringing, hormonal profile during puberty, your background etc).

This is very sad, but there is probably a lot to it. I do not think we are doomed by what happened to us in junior and senior high school, but those experiences are so important that it is hard to overlook them. While no one has a set in stone lousy personality, we all have a certain personality type, and it is set by the end of adolescence.

There is a healthy and unhealthy side of each personality type. Even the Sociopath has a healthy mirror image called Aggressive Personality. The Borderline has Sensitive Personality. The Dependent has Loyal Personality. The Narcissist has Confident Personality. And so on.

A man with good looks often has so many great experiences during these formative years that he ends up with a nice personality pretty much locked in place by the time adolescence is over. The man who had a rocky road all through middle and late school years has a huge hurdle to overcome in transcending these traumas and becoming healthy.

Social life and hence status being extremely affected by the way one looks.

This is sad as Hell too, but there is probably a lot to it. People need to consider that when they see people with great/poor social skills and high/ low status that quite a bit of how high someone scores on those variables may be due to uncontrollable factors like looks.

Men being much more productive and contributing much more to society and to general development throughout history, and how marriage and monogamy in the old days was a way to control and make sure that every man got his needs met and hence contributed to society. Basically one can easily conclude that female to male choice based mating selection is very bad for society overall.

Women are not going to like this one. But I would agree that men create civilization. There have been periods in history when most of the men left, often to wars, and the society was left with mostly women to run the show. Things fell apart pretty quickly. Women simply can’t create or run civilizations. They need men to do that for them. Women can help the men run things, but they can’t do it alone. This is quite all right. Women can’t do everything. The sexes tend to need each other.

But since civilizations needed men to create them in the first place and then to run them, marriage and monogamy was a way to control society such that most if not all men got their basic needs met. Once their basic needs were met, these men would be able to do a good job contributing to society. Bottom line is a totally free market in marriage where women’s choices set the tone is probably going to cause all sorts of societal problems, like maybe mass shootings for one.

9 Comments

Filed under Borderline, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Literature, Man World, Mental Illness, Narcissistic, Novel, Personality, Personality Disorders, Psychology, Psychopathology, Romantic Relationships, Sex, Social Problems, Sociology, Sociopathy, Women