RE: The dangers of a sociopath dominant (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion



Message

TaoWoman -> RE: The dangers of a sociopath dominant (4/27/2009 5:00:46 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MarcEsadrian

The human mind is (thus far) impossible to quantify. While we can generally measure brain activity, poke around its anatomy and make rudimentary observations about its nature, there is so much we don't understand about it. The brain is, as far as we know, the most complex arrangement of matter known to science, but the complexity doesn't stop with neurons and chemical baths; the neural syntax itself is without a doubt the most difficult thing we could ever hope to crack.

I suppose the reason I bring all that up is to flesh out the reality that these psych terms are generalizations which are used often with a vast degree of armchair authority. It's tempting to hurl these phrases at people we have come to dislike when they have wronged us somehow, but our diagnosis are forever foreshadowed by our own moral slants. What is a conscience, exactly? It would be nice if we could pop the hood and say, "ah, there it is," or, "oh, we'll need to get a new one."

I believe there's a more reptile part in all of us; a part we don't dare show much to the world, and sometimes even to ourselves, but it's there. We're all sociopaths, if we look long and hard enough in the mirror.

Edited to add: I'm not a sociopath. I'm a nice guy. No, really.



Excellent thoughts~





Owner4SexSlave -> RE: The dangers of a sociopath dominant (4/27/2009 5:16:10 AM)

The true label debate and who's qualified to label people issue reincarnates itself.

I think reading up upon any subject just leads to more knowledge and knowledge is power.

In regards to the posting regarding Border Line Personality Disorder and Sociopath, I've not encountered any thing in my readings of Border Line Personality Disorder that states this is a sub classification of a Sociopath. While Complex Post Traumatic Stress Disorder incompasses both ADHD and Border Line Personality Disorder.

Now, when somebody calls somebody a label. It can be a bit like name calling unless you are qualified to give people labels. The sad thing is that even those that are qualified to pass out labels even make mistakes.

These are just generalizations. Some sociopaths have never killed anybody, some have, so what seperates the two?

The fact remains there is a wide range of varience within any label. There are more extreme sociopaths and less extreme sociopaths. None the less, reading up about what is a Sociopath is not a bad idea. No two sociopaths are identical fully. Diversity is a bitch I tell you, even inside the framework of labels.



sirsholly -> RE: The dangers of a sociopath dominant (4/27/2009 5:20:38 AM)

quote:

Some sociopaths have never killed anybody, some have, so what seperates the two?
some "normal" individuals have killed someone, and others haven't.



Whiplashsmile4 -> RE: The dangers of a sociopath dominant (4/27/2009 5:24:58 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sirsholly

quote:

Some sociopaths have never killed anybody, some have, so what seperates the two?
some "normal" individuals have killed someone, and others haven't.

If a sociopath don't get you, a normal person will.



sirsholly -> RE: The dangers of a sociopath dominant (4/27/2009 5:26:01 AM)

quote:

Only a trained professional can truly make the diagnosis, but those that have come face to face with one, know it when we see it.
What a huge misconception this is. Someone with a mental illness/personality disorder does not wear a sign stating their diagnosis.
Whereas you may be able to pick up clues that the person has "issues", it is grossly unfair to assume a proper diagnosis can be made by a layman.




SlyStone -> RE: The dangers of a sociopath dominant (4/27/2009 5:50:37 AM)


I think that the reason people should be careful bandying about labels like sociopath to describe a partners behavior is that if it is not true, it allows them to absolve themselves from personal responsibility as to the relationship itself,  ie..  he abused me, but how could I
have know or gotten out of the relationship, because he was a sociopath, and they have the ability to fool people, even professionals. 

Perhaps he was, but it is more likely he was only a user and a manipulator, and they are sadly as common as can be, and we have all met one or two in our time. I would think it would be better to learn defense skills against the user and manipulator than worry about diagnosing a sociopath.

This is not about blaming the victim, but rather about taking a realistic approach to learning from the experience, and never being the victim again.






Rainfire -> RE: The dangers of a sociopath dominant (4/27/2009 11:18:41 AM)

~ Fast Response ~

One thing that I'm seeing here is that there appear to be different "definitions" of what a sociopath is, depending on what website you're looking at. In discussing this thread with Lumus (whom some of you may remember), He gave this definition of a sociopath while we were talking about this:

"See, there is no one accepted clinical definition of sociopathy. This is my take on it: the sociopath refuses to accept the social definition of right or wrong. They apply their own personal definitions at all levels of social function, including on an individual level. The sociopath does not resist society, they simply ignore it; and so it is actually possible for the sociopath to agree with society without supporting it. The sociopath does not play well with others, they do what suits them. This doesn't mean putting themselves in harm's way; they will try to implement their own opinions whenever possible but not to their own detriment. That's why they blend in so well."

There may be specific traits as mentioned but unless the person is being seen in a clinical situation by a trained profession, I don't think we can just slap a label on someone because we don't like their attitude or behaviours, based on something we've read in a forum posting. Especially since based on what's being discussed, it's based on what "society" deems right and wrong, regardless of what a person believes for themselves. I'm not talking about some of the more extreme actions like rape and murder but more like actions of what could be self-preservation. Why if person "A" does something or says something they're a sociopath yet if person "B" does the same thing, they're just a jackass bastard or being careful? I happen to agree with Lumus' thought of "I liken defining a sociopath by social mores to defining an aethiest by the Torah. It doesn't work."

Lumus claims to be a sociopath based on His own definition. He doesn't obstruct or fight society but has developed his own definition of  "right and wrong" based on what works for him. He doesn't go around murdering people, he doesn't go out to con people, he doesn't do a lot of things based on what's been said here. He admits that he's not always the easiest person to understand or get along with. He told me when we first met that he could be a right bastard at times (which I happen to know from personal experience is true) but that doesn't mean he loves me any less. We have a deeply intimate, meaningful relationship that is based on respect, sharing, love and trust. And before anyone thinks (or says) that I've been deluded or have convinced myself of some fairytale happily-ever-after romance, that's not it and both Lumus and I know it. I'm not in "victim mentality", I've dealt with that before as an abuse survivor. This is a conscious choice of knowing a man wholeheartedly and loving him. Faults and all. (Ok, so maybe not the flatulence after he eats beans but hey - that's life!)

As for anti-social tendencies, hell - I have my own anti-social tendencies. There's a reason why I would rather have a few close friends that I know and trust than be "friends" with half the fricking world. I don't need that many people in my life and I was quite happy being single and getting ready to live alone with my critters in a secluded, rural area of Idaho. I'm a loner at most times and know it, does that mean that since I'm female I have borderline personality disorder? Simply put - no. I come from a family where most of us aren't social butterflies. I'd rather have a good book (or movie) and a quiet night at home with my loved ones than out dealing with drama, bullshit and people lying and deceiving me every time I turn around. (Maybe not EVERY time, but you know what I mean.) Trust and respect are what are important to me and since that seems to be getting rarer and rarer in this day and age, I prefer to opt out, thanks. I have my Love, my friends, Punky and Queenie and other family members. I do love people and have meaningful relationships with various people, which based on some definitions used in this thread, exclude me from being a sociopath. But then again, based on definitions here, I could easily fit into the sociopath model by people who don't even know me. For those who have taken the time to really get to know me, they know how passionately and deeply I care, and hurt inside, even if I'm not jumping up and down screaming it from the rooftops. I've been told that I take some things too literal, and I uphold my personal sense of right/wrong strongly. I've also been told that I'm judgmental because of my sense of right and wrong. However, I still accept that not everyone is not going to believe the same way as I do and accept that. Could a sociopath do that?

Maybe to some degree, like misst says, a number of people have sociopathic traits or tendencies but that doesn't automatically qualify a person as certified sociopath. And slapping such a label as "sociopath" or "bipolar" or "borderline personality disorder" on someone just because you don't like what they did seems unfair. Labels, when used properly, can help people. Used maliciously or unfairly, they can destroy.

Just my opinion. We all know what opinions are worth.



LATEXBABY64 -> RE: The dangers of a sociopath dominant (4/27/2009 11:37:37 AM)

you know i love this post  I have better understanding of bad behavior  I do not know if it is sociopathic but  I will say if your a loving caring person in one of these relationships and your doing the right things they act crazy to them. for example  helping them out then next time offering to help them they go off on you or treat you badly  then there is a rem of truth to part of this
Most subs are givers not takers  if a domme or dom gives nothing back but hurt emotionaly abusive type not correctional type
then yeah i can see this fitting 



LadyHibiscus -> RE: The dangers of a sociopath dominant (4/27/2009 11:41:18 AM)

The key to why folks like Lumus are NOT sociopaths is that they are capable of love, capable of understanding the feelings of others, and WHY rules exist.

That's part of the reason it's so very hard to tell that your slave or dominant is truly mentally ill, or just a rat bastard!  It's pretty easy to fake love, after all.



LATEXBABY64 -> RE: The dangers of a sociopath dominant (4/27/2009 11:48:40 AM)

very well put



LadyHibiscus -> RE: The dangers of a sociopath dominant (4/27/2009 11:50:35 AM)

I've been there, LatexBaby...  when  I describe my former slave Hugh as a monster, I am NOT kidding. 



InTonguesslut -> RE: The dangers of a sociopath dominant (4/27/2009 12:12:19 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: allthatjaz

InTonguesslut Im not sure why your so up in arms over this.

What I gave was an example of what could be. I never said categorically that this man is a sociopath but that he was acting like one.

Read what I said. I said that my friend used the word sociopath. I didn't say how she used it, I just said she used the word. You wanted confirmation of why that was and I gave it. You chose to make a decision on that, that's your choice but
from where I'm sitting its you that's getting your knickers in a twist.

Ok so you don't like labels... well you know what? some do and some don't and some of us accept that some do and some don't but this is a debate and not a vindictive pay back, as you seem to think.


I'm actually quite bored of it now. There is absofuckinglutely no way that you can spot a sociopath when you see one unless you are qualified to do so and i'll bet even then some get missed.
 
You entitled this thread sociopath dominants implying that the dom you spoke of was a sociopath. You even went as far as to describe his behaviour which in my opinion was just classic ass hole stuff. Perhaps he is a sociopath but really i think we should leave it to the professionals to diagnose this shit.
 
If you weren't implying this dom was a sociopath why not entitle it neutrally. Why is it you only implied doms could be sociopaths?
 



allthatjaz -> RE: The dangers of a sociopath dominant (4/27/2009 12:39:18 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: InTonguesslut

quote:

ORIGINAL: allthatjaz

InTonguesslut Im not sure why your so up in arms over this.

What I gave was an example of what could be. I never said categorically that this man is a sociopath but that he was acting like one.

Read what I said. I said that my friend used the word sociopath. I didn't say how she used it, I just said she used the word. You wanted confirmation of why that was and I gave it. You chose to make a decision on that, that's your choice but
from where I'm sitting its you that's getting your knickers in a twist.

Ok so you don't like labels... well you know what? some do and some don't and some of us accept that some do and some don't but this is a debate and not a vindictive pay back, as you seem to think.


I'm actually quite bored of it now. There is absofuckinglutely no way that you can spot a sociopath when you see one unless you are qualified to do so and i'll bet even then some get missed.
 
You entitled this thread sociopath dominants implying that the dom you spoke of was a sociopath. You even went as far as to describe his behaviour which in my opinion was just classic ass hole stuff. Perhaps he is a sociopath but really i think we should leave it to the professionals to diagnose this shit.
 
If you weren't implying this dom was a sociopath why not entitle it neutrally. Why is it you only implied doms could be sociopaths?
 


First of all this is a discussion forum and people should be able to have a discussion.
Secondly I couldn't give a flying fig if you are getting bored. Some people want to carry on this discussion but if your so bored then just leave. Im bored of your meaningless protests and where normally I would be too polite, Im getting sick of being polite.
Im not going to give you answers because in your opinion any answers I give mean jack shit.

Maria



sirsholly -> RE: The dangers of a sociopath dominant (4/27/2009 2:00:49 PM)

quote:

"See, there is no one accepted clinical definition of sociopathy. This is my take on it: the sociopath refuses to accept the social definition of right or wrong. They apply their own personal definitions at all levels of social function, including on an individual level. The sociopath does not resist society, they simply ignore it; and so it is actually possible for the sociopath to agree with society without supporting it. The sociopath does not play well with others, they do what suits them. This doesn't mean putting themselves in harm's way; they will try to implement their own opinions whenever possible but not to their own detriment. That's why they blend in so well."

There may be specific traits as mentioned but unless the person is being seen in a clinical situation by a trained profession, I don't think we can just slap a label on someone because we don't like their attitude or behaviours, based on something we've read in a forum posting. Especially since based on what's being discussed, it's based on what "society" deems right and wrong, regardless of what a person believes for themselves. I'm not talking about some of the more extreme actions like rape and murder but more like actions of what could be self-preservation. Why if person "A" does something or says something they're a sociopath yet if person "B" does the same thing, they're just a jackass bastard or being careful? I happen to agree with Lumus' thought of "I liken defining a sociopath by social mores to defining an aethiest by the Torah. It doesn't work."
outstanding post Rain...but i want to add a thing or two. A sociopath does acknowledge societies rules for himself when they suit him, but acknowledges the rules for others at all times.
And there is little or no conscience, little or no acknowledgment of the effect his negative behaviors have on others. He is expert at table turning to make the consequences of his behavior the responsibility of his victim



Ialdabaoth -> RE: The dangers of a sociopath dominant (4/27/2009 5:41:09 PM)

"Sociopath" is one of those incredibly useful words, like "pedophile" or "communist" or "heretic" or "witch".

Sometimes, it even has actual meaning, but that's rarely the purpose for which it's uttered.



SweetiePie26 -> RE: The dangers of a sociopath dominant (4/27/2009 6:47:00 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: allthatjaz

This man takes control by being everything the submissive could ever of hoped for but then starts to fleece them of there money. He tells them he wants to marry them, spend the rest of his life with them and he has been known for doing this to two different women on different nights of the week. Once he has what he wants he's gone but not before he has found another victim to move in with.
The other thing he did was lie continually about his career, his money, his education, his experiences and of course about where he was yesterday night.
He moves in very wide circles and so his reputation doesn't follow him quickly but this particular sub who has investigated him was persuaded through his control to rid herself of her BDSM circles and for a while she did.


He just sounds like a greedy scammer to me. I've known a few who were lazy and greedy but not sociopaths. Like this one;
A woman met a man online talked for a week on the phone and then moved him in with her in another state. He used her, took her money the usual, and then left her when she started getting suspicious. Well why did her stupid ass take so long to get suspicious? I think if you do dumb shit like move in someone you met online within a week you are a victim, you are asking to be used and I refuse to sit back and put the full blame on the lazy jackass who only took what you laid out in front of him. People need to take responsibility and stop being so damn desperate for attention and a man (or woman). THEN maybe some of these losers would get themselves together. So in the end the fault falls on both in most situations, there are some where the victim was just totally duped, but rarely is that the case, if you choose to ignore blatant red flags no need to come crying about it later.



MarcEsadrian -> RE: The dangers of a sociopath dominant (4/27/2009 7:56:25 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ialdabaoth

"Sociopath" is one of those incredibly useful words, like "pedophile" or "communist" or "heretic" or "witch".

Sometimes, it even has actual meaning, but that's rarely the purpose for which it's uttered.


Hear, hear!



LATEXBABY64 -> RE: The dangers of a sociopath dominant (4/27/2009 11:29:28 PM)

but i have seen these people and understand that this type of persona does and infact exsits  so i would like to  hear more keep the one sided objections off of it i want to here what other people think
good post allthatjazz thanks for opening up a great discussion. Oh for  you people who can not stand labels Piss off 
society has them and will always get over it    now back to the regulary schedual posting



allthatjaz -> RE: The dangers of a sociopath dominant (4/27/2009 11:55:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sirsholly

quote:

"See, there is no one accepted clinical definition of sociopathy. This is my take on it: the sociopath refuses to accept the social definition of right or wrong. They apply their own personal definitions at all levels of social function, including on an individual level. The sociopath does not resist society, they simply ignore it; and so it is actually possible for the sociopath to agree with society without supporting it. The sociopath does not play well with others, they do what suits them. This doesn't mean putting themselves in harm's way; they will try to implement their own opinions whenever possible but not to their own detriment. That's why they blend in so well."

There may be specific traits as mentioned but unless the person is being seen in a clinical situation by a trained profession, I don't think we can just slap a label on someone because we don't like their attitude or behaviours, based on something we've read in a forum posting. Especially since based on what's being discussed, it's based on what "society" deems right and wrong, regardless of what a person believes for themselves. I'm not talking about some of the more extreme actions like rape and murder but more like actions of what could be self-preservation. Why if person "A" does something or says something they're a sociopath yet if person "B" does the same thing, they're just a jackass bastard or being careful? I happen to agree with Lumus' thought of "I liken defining a sociopath by social mores to defining an aethiest by the Torah. It doesn't work."
outstanding post Rain...but i want to add a thing or two. A sociopath does acknowledge societies rules for himself when they suit him, but acknowledges the rules for others at all times.
And there is little or no conscience, little or no acknowledgment of the effect his negative behaviors have on others. He is expert at table turning to make the consequences of his behavior the responsibility of his victim



I agree, it is an outstanding post but I also agree with you. I can only go by what I am reading consistently. The word cunning comes to mind.



kuriouswitch -> RE: The dangers of a sociopath dominant (4/27/2009 11:56:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: InTonguesslut

I have a dislike for words like sociopath and the little box that it conveniently puts a person into. It is automatically assumed that the person is a bad one and that they should be avoided at all costs. Now whilst i can understand this aversion to someone displaying the qualities (omg can you believe they used the word qualities to describe the traits lol) listed i have to wonder how many people actually stop to think why they behave this way? How many people try to undertand these people? How many people try to help these people? I'm betting most just for the hills away from them.
 


My father is one of these people, he's been diagnosed as such. he refuses help, he thinks we're all the nut cases and that he's just fine. I know why he behaves this way, but it's something that can't be helped, until he's ready to deal with it and he's never going to. I understand and love my father but I also know that if I tried to have a relationship with him I'm the one who's going to end up hurt because that's what he does, those who are closest to him are the ones he hurts the most. I haven't seen the man in ten years, haven't spoken to him in three and I haven't lived with him since i was 14 and I'm still afraid of him.

I'm sure some can be helped but like with all things they need to want the help and it's hard to believe that you're the one who's sick when it feels natural to be shut off and to feign the emotions ect. besides if they get help that means they're going to start drowning in all these emotions and in my father's case, memories that they'd rather not have to deal with, so they don't.



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875