|
angeldmort -> RE: The dangers of a sociopath dominant (5/1/2009 2:21:41 PM)
|
quote:
I have been with Aspergers on many levels when integrating with people who don't know or understand the condition and although I have heard naive people calling them wankers (because they can tend to get into other peoples space) I have never heard the word manipulative on anyones lips.
Which is exactly the point of the entire discussion - manipulation. INTENT. Aspies can be difficult, but it's not intentional.
Rat Bastards may have intent to be jerks, but they are still capable of compassion and empathy, even if they choose to ignore them.
Even the most evil asshole will at some point feel something for something else, even if it's only their dog. They recognize that other being have feelings and have the ability to care for others.
A true sociopath doesnt, and can't. Anyone interacting with them is depenent on what is good for them being in line with whatever the sociopath wants, or having great enough consequence that the fear of punishment is too great. And even then, at any moment, there is the risk that a whim may be too much, and tip the balance.
"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. "
Well.. yeah. Why would anyone choose to interact with someone they know will abuse them? I don't know much about the Lifestyle yet, but I do know that it requires even more trust than a vanilla relationship, by virtue of it's nature. A sub is placing themselves entirely in the hands of their Dom, for whatever limited space. If you realize that this person has no interest in your well being, you can't trust them to respect a safe word, can you?
This is not a word used because so and so said something mean. It's used to describe someone dangerous, proven over a long time, by many purposeful and intentional abuses.
"Someone who is mature, socially well adjusted and experienced in people and relationships (in the broadest sense) could interpret the actions of someone else's perceived sociopath as a individual lacking in social skills. "
No. A mature, socially well adjusted person should reconize the difference between a gauche misstep, and an intentional attempt to manipulate. A lie is a lie, not a mistake. A strong reaction can't be an excuse for dishonesty.
"If on the other hand I was to form a relationship with someone who repeatably showed many traits of this condition, then what I would understand is that I probably can't change them, can't make them better and can't keep trying to make everything right."
Exactly. Which is the danger. By not knowing the red flags, we make it possible for them. Information is crucial.
"We wouldn't turn a deaf ear or a blind eye to any other information on any number of topics to educate ourselves, so why is everyone acting like it's politically incorrect to acknowledge and speak about mental disorders, and how or if they might apply to wiitwd?""What does a dominant do? he controls does he not? how far can that control go?"
Actually, this is EXACTLY why I am here. It would be immensely easier to tell a newcomer that 'oh, well, this is the way it is supposed to be' and never be questioned. Abuse is easier and can be more damaging here-the need for clear boundaries and information is more important than it would be in vanilla life, as there is greater risk than in vanilla life. The idea of a relationship that potentially offers a nearly unlimited control over another person would obviously draw sociopaths and rat bastards in swarms. To think otherwise would be like wearing blinders.
|
|
|
|
