Monsters.

POSTED BY: Wulfenstar
UPDATED: Wednesday, August 26, 2026 20:52
VIEWED: 14016
PAGE 21 of 25

FREMDFIRMA

Thursday, November 5, 2009 6:25 PM

(Advisement, I am not sure how well imma be able to get this across, since it deals with issues *I* barely understand, and modern "mental health" has not a damn clue about, but I shall try - feel free to ask for clarification, etc..)

Hmm, well it's good that someone finally brought up the distinction between Psychopathy and Sociopathy.

Back in the late 80's our already pathetic "mental health" system/concept rolled them into a single diagnosis for some reason, I've never really understood why because while some of the behavior might be the same, the motivations for it are entirely different.

A psychopath HAS INTERNAL RULES - while a sociopath does not.

This is absolutely, critically important when dealing with them, because a psychopath will never save under the most extreme circumstances, and often not even then (up to and including self-preservation) violate them - whereas a sociopath is liable to do any damn thing they think will win the day for em.

And provided sufficient motivation, a real will to do so, and good enough reason, those "rules" can be changed, little by little - provided the reasons make sense to the psychopath you're trying to reach.

That said, without an awareness of those rules, or operating in complete ignorance of them by considering them sociopaths, you're playing dodgeball in a mine field - a hostile psychopath isn't going to tell you what those rules are, and crossing one is likely to result in an instantaneous explosion of violence wholly directed at you - I've seen "therapists" stupid enough not to make the distinction get blindsided that way before, it's nasty.
Sociopaths generally don't use violence unless they think they can get away with it, but cross a psychopath's internal rules and ker-blooie, no matter what.

The whole idea of a ruleset which sets them off also appears to have some relation to autism-spectrum disorders, which I am not nearly as familiar with since it's so far outside the scope of my knowledge base - which is mostly behavioral and relates to learned behavior rather than biological misfire.

I do see some correlation there, especially where what I call the Dark Spark is concerned - people who come to be partially psychopathic regardless of their upbringing or environment, almost as if their mental course was pre-destined - there's no logical explaination for it than a rare combination of genetics keyed in with some of the factors which cause autism - but that's as much as I "know" on a scientific end, and even that's stretching it.

Behaviorally, I could expound quite a bit but it's a very uncomfortable subject for me - the closest description that would fit a "medical" diagnosis is perhaps "born with PTSD", looked at from an external behavioral assessment, and without fail those who do not destroy themselves acting out eventually withdraw from society and limit their social contacts, often as not preferring to communicate socially via technology rather than face to face as it provides a necessary distance where they can relate to other people without the imminent and/or accidental threat of doing harm to them on sheer reflex.

And yet, while externally all the behavioral factors point to PTSD, the motivations and triggers are different, and again, woe unto the poor sod making an assumption rather than a diagnosis - you try to treat a Dark Spark with clonidine, for example, their internal rythyms and systems will regard it as an attack/threat as soon as it kicks in, and they'll go into overdrive, and become even MORE of a threat to those around them - in fact any medication which reduces their physical or mental capacity is likely to do this, even alcohol, which presents an additional difficulty in one who is self-destructive, the lure of deliberately provoking the euphoric-violence state as an avoidance mechanism against feelings of social rejection.

Proper diagnosis of these facets is critical, and our extremely primitive mental health system/concept lumping them into one classification is just a disaster waiting to happen - ESPECIALLY

NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

FREMDFIRMA

Thursday, November 5, 2009 6:34 PM

Ah, I see you posted while I was writing.

Byte - I *DID* do things like that, to the hellcamps, the folks operating them, but my violence was initially directed at the system and society which I felt had mistreated me, and over time the focus narrowed to those who were mistreating young people in the same or worse fashion, with the intent of obliterating the systems that enabled it to happen on a scale greater than individual.

I guess you could say I "won" - but the price for it...

Be really, REALLY glad you reined it in, instead of directing it against even a worthy cause, because no matter how much tougher the hammer is than the nails - the hammer takes a beating too.

But, I had my reasons, and if I *had* to do it again - I would, even knowing the terrible price.

-Frem
"There must never be, another Milliardo Peacecraft!"

NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

PIZMOBEACH

Thursday, November 5, 2009 6:40 PM

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

(Advisement, I am not sure how well imma be able to get this across, since it deals with issues *I* barely understand, and modern "mental health" has not a damn clue about, but I shall try - feel free to ask for clarification, etc..)

---

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

NIKI2

Thursday, November 5, 2009 8:47 PM

Excellent, Frem; and excellent, all...a really good discussion between some pretty knowledgeable and reasoned people. Glad there weren't any contributions from some of the more radical elements here, it made it pleasant.

One tiny one: I disagree that our psychiatric system "doesn't have a clue"...I think it has a clue, but nothing beyond that, and is its infancy in understanding these things. Maybe it always will be; the brain is inconceivably complex.

One thing not mentioned is "attachment disorder" (not sure if that's the right term), of children who don't get nurturing early on and how it can affect them to the point where it can't be changed. I think that's something accepted as being behind psychopathy; the inability to empathize, etc. But is it a brain/chemical disorder, or behavioral?

Saw an example on TV a while back, little tiny example of how it comes to be. Baby face-to-face with mother. Mother smiles, interacts, baby giggles, interacts. Mother stares off into the distance and doesn't interract. Baby looks confused, smiles, gurgles, tries to get attention...no response. Baby continues for quite a while, again looks confused, their "affect" changes to somewhat blank, then baby starts crying. Keeps it up for a long time, then the blankness returns...and stays. Mother breaks her stare, smiles at baby, laughs and interacts, and baby switches right back to gurgling and interacting.

They were saying this is just a small example of the problem, and to imagine how it would be for a baby/child who never GOT that return of attention, and what it creates in people. It's really serious, increasing, and apparently people who've adopted such children have more often than not been unable to "fix" them...it's just too late.

Those children create a LOT of the people in jail, the violent ones especially, those unable to recognize punishment beforehand, unable to have any kind of empathy, unable to control themselves, etc. How many of those come into the classifications discussed here do you think? That's a "behavioral" cause, certainly, but the result is so extreme, I don't think it comes under "sociopath", yet it's not genetic like psychopathy. ?

As to jail, I agree wholeheartedly with everything here; I wish the rest of the world were as thoughtful and intelligent. I won't even go into the number of mentally ill who inhabit our jails because of the legal system's inability/disinterest in dealing with things like that, so just toss people in prisons. I wish things could change for the better, and if there are enough people like you guys out there learning and thinking about it, maybe someday it will...it is to a small degree now, admittedly.

Jails create criminals, period. The systems are not in place to properly house people or create prisons which don't essential "force" them to learn a violent way of surviving; to rehabilitate prisoners, prepare them for life outside the prison walls, give them something to work TOWARD when they leave to motivate them, and so much more. To say it needs changing is the understatement of the week.

Over many decades my philosophy has changed to the point where I see no "evil" people, only screwed-up ones doing evil things. Even the worst, as sick as they make me feel inside, and horrible as they are, I can't bring myself to "hate"--yes, I'd kill them if they threatened me or my loved ones; yes, I'd stupidly try to intervene without thinking it through (and I have); and yes, it's terribly hard not to hate people like that guy in whose house they're discovering all those bodies.

But the basic truth, TO ME, is that nobody's born evil; mental conditions could be helped if recognized; environmental conditions that create monsters can be changed often; and all life is worthwhile. Yet I ride the fence on the death penalty--how's that for a dichotomy? I know it's cheaper to keep someone in jail for life than execute them, I know there is always potential for error in the system and death penalty is final; but