Cluster A are the odd personality disorders. They’re not so much awful people as they are simply so odd and strange that you can’t have much of a human relationship with them. Their general theme is to drive people away from them in some way or another. Schizoids are ok, but they are very annoying. It’s generally impossible to have any decent human relationship with someone like this because…well…they don’t do human relationships. I’ve talked to Schizoids but I have never really known one in real life. You are unlikely to run across a Schizoid in life because they are such extreme loners that they simply don’t get involved with other humans at all. Schizotypals simply have a mild form of schizophrenia and are more or less impossible to deal with in ways that are similar to how schizophrenics can’t be dealt with but on a lesser scale. They are also quite suspicious and paranoid. They have awful social skills and conversations with them degenerate and start getting tangential and strange pretty quickly. They will give off a feeling of alienation and weirdness that would probably make you want to get away from them.
I had a girlfriend who had Schizotypal traits, but she was mostly just a Borderline. When she was off into her schizotypal strangeness, it was like talking to someone from another planet. She would be saying weird and odd things that didn’t make a lot of sense and the conversation had the creepy feel of someone who is way out there and is not really with the rest of us at all. I eventually broke up with her on the grounds that she was too crazy for me. It was like dating a Martian.
I’ve never met or talked to an actual full-blown Schizotypal, so I don’t know much about them. I don’t see how you can have a decent relationship with someone like this. They’re too crazy for that. You usually won’t meet schizotypals because they are extreme loners who don’t do human relationships. They are suspicious, withdrawn and don’t talk much. They give off vibes of trying to drive you away. When at home, they often get quite shut-in and don’t want to go outside. Paranoids I do not understand very well, but I hear they are hard to deal with too. They can also often be angry. Their constant suspicion drives you crazy and relationships with these people must be hard to deal with. You often won’t meet Paranoids either because, well, they’re too paranoid! They shy away from most relationships too and even if you work with them, they probably won’t reveal much of their disorder. They also give off serious “get away from me” vibes.
None of these people are easy to get along with. It’s going to be hard to have a decent human relationship with any of these people.
Of course Cluster B’s are awful human beings. I’ve gone into them before on this site.
Avoidants differ a lot, but you can’t have a relationship with someone like that either. I knew an Avoidant once for two weeks. I lived with him and some other people. Everyone in the house regarded him as a complete asshole. His APD took the form of actually avoiding people to the point of seeming mean. This is how he drove people away from him. They often literally shove people away from them and they can seem hostile or aggressive when they do this.
You are also likely to not run into Avoidants in your life because, well, they avoid other people! Even if you meet one, it will be hard for you or others to figure out that they are Avoidants. There were three other people living in the house I was staying at, and none of them believed that he was APD. They didn’t even know what APD was. The woman who lived there, a girlfriend of mine, actually liked him but realized how screwed up he was. The two men who lived there hated him and described him as an “asshole.” This is because their extreme avoidance can appear mean and sometimes they flat out are mean when they are trying to shove you away.
People with Dependent Personality Disorder are complete wimps and they are often incompetent. The best way to describe is that they are grownup babies. These are adults that never really grew up. Their wimpiness and pathetic dependency drive everyone around them nuts. They are often very nice, kind, decent people. Some DPD are very nice and have a lot of a good relationships with women, including a lot of friendships. Why grown women put up with these wimpy men, I have no idea, but a lot of people like a friendly person. I’ve never met an actual DPD person, nor have I spoken to one.
Passive-Aggressive Personality Disorder is just horrible. They’re awful people too but it’s hidden most of the time, and you can’t see it. The clue is the word aggression in the name of the disorder. They’re displaying out and out aggression a good part of the time. However, they do so passively, so it is not obvious.
The aggression is not always passive though, and if you get on their case about the car they were supposed to fix in two days but it’s now been three weeks, they blow an Old Faithful geyser through the ceiling.
You are the evil person for “pressuring” them. Their wild, towering rages are a sight to behold. They try to make you feel guilty for pressuring them to, for instance, complete a basic task reasonably on time? But that’s too much to ask. You don’t understand all the pressures they are under except they don’t have any pressures except things they made up. Don’t you realize they didn’t have time to do because they had so many other things to do? Well, they didn’t but this is the lie they tell to themselves. The endless putting off of jobs they are tasked to do is their way of secretly giving you the finger. They stew in resentment all the time. Life’s not fair. Everybody picks on them. They’re misunderstood. People won’t stop “pressuring” them and “hassling” them, for instance about that car that they said would be done in two days that they now stretched out to three weeks.
They “forget” to do all sorts of things. They’re were going to call you? Whoops! They “forgot.” They were supposed to go to your Dad’s funeral? Whoops! They “forgot” again. They’re not forgetting anything. Their memories are fine. “Forgetting” is another way that they resentfully give you the finger for wronging them in some way or another. They’re getting back at you.
A lot of their passive-aggressive behavior is resent-fueled paybacks and revenge for something you supposedly did to them somehow. Or maybe they’re not mad at you at all. Maybe they’re mad at the world. Who knows? You will never get an answer out of them because they all have zero insight and if you bring up their passive-aggressive behaviors, they blow a 50 amp fuse because you hit too close to home.
Some of them get lost in grandiose fantasies that never come to fruition. You know, that silver mine they were going to open up that would bring in $500,000/year? Or was it millions? Oh yes, that. They were going on about that ten years ago. Nothing ever came of it and nothing ever comes of any of their grandiose schemes. If you bring it up the scheme that never happened you get a fog bank of obfuscation blown your way. What silver mine? There was no silver mine. Anyway, let’s change the subject. They never get much of anything done and are behind on everything all the time. They’re not achievers. They’re anti-achievers. On some level they know this, so this may be why they retreat into grandiose fantasy as a defense against their general failure to get much of anything done in life.
On the surface, they often appear so passive that they seem disgusting. Straight OCPD men can seem so passive that they are often feminine and during times of stress, they can become out and out effeminate to where you would be sure that they are gay. They don’t take initiative. They don’t do well with women for this reason and they tend to hook up with bossy, bitchy women who wear the pants and beat them up and push them around all day. Of course, this just reinforces their general resentment against the world at large. They’re often always right. You can’t correct them or tell them they are wrong. They blow a frustrated fuse that looks like a spouting oil well that struck oil. Their rages have a sense of self-righteousness and frustration about them.
PAPD’s differ a lot. I have only known one PAPD in my life and unfortunately, yes, he’s a monster. You have to walk on eggshells around him all the time. And he’s such a big pussy that it’s disgusting. I knew someone else, now dead, who was also very passive aggressive, but I am not sure he had PAPD. He was a lot nicer, but his wife kicked his ass 24-7 and he could never get anything done. He would still have Christmas cards from several years back that he never opened. He had huge piles of stuff everywhere that “he was going to get around to deal with” except he “never found the time.” He was passive-aggressive, but I am not sure if he was PAPD. I suspect that true PAPD’s are pretty awful people and are quite abrasive, like most personality-disordered people.
Obsessive-compulsive PD’s are truly awful people, I am sorry. They just are. I knew my father for over 50 years of my life. They’re not ok.
The problem is because of their extreme conformity, workaholism, and morality, a lot of people who know them they are “fine upstanding people.” Only the people who live with them know what monsters they really are. That’s why no one believed my siblings and I when we talked about what a lousy father my Dad was. All the other adults of his generation thought he was the star of the neighborhood – a classic, fine, upstanding, good, hard-working, moral family man. That’s the face they put on to everyone else. They know exactly what they are doing, and they can control themselves most of the time. They just choose not to control themselves around their loved ones because they can get away with treating loved ones like crap.
OCPD often takes the form of hostility, constant criticism, and rages.
They project all the time and go around pointing out everybody else’s faults. Everyone else is lazy, messy, immoral, and incompetent.
They’re prigs. They’re always calling you evil in some way or another because you are probably inherently immoral.
You’re always a slob, no matter what. They love to go through other people’s stuff and clean it up. They often go through other people’s stuff and throw a lot of the other person’s possessions away.
They work constantly and they never have fun. They try to force everyone around them to do this too and if you don’t, you’re evil or sinful.
Having fun is evil or sinful and you need to be ashamed of yourself. They hate parties. You go on vacations with them, and they spend the whole time working, being uptight, and yelling at people. They are like martyr-saints who believe that life is crap, and life is nothing but suffering. Hence, suffering and constant deliberate deprivation are noble things.
They are frustrated all the time.
They are tightwads. They hate spending money except on necessities and paying off debt. Spending money for fun is literally sinful, and you should be ashamed of yourself. They’re stingy with money. If you need money as a college student, they might grudgingly give you five bucks.
They have no insight whatsoever and they have a defensive structure that is so elaborate that it is like an Escher + Goya painting combined with a Rube Goldberg device. The defenses literally have layers upon layers, trap doors, fake entrances, and the craziest fortifications you have ever seen. If you try to point out their OCPD nonsense, they fly into wild rages because it really hits home.
They can’t delegate any responsibility for any job because everyone else is incompetent, so they have to fix everything themselves. Except they don’t know how to fix anything. They try to get you to help them and then scream at everything you do because everything you do is wrong because you are inherently incompetent.
They are masochistic and are always taking on thankless tasks that other “incompetent” people won’t do. They stay late at work fixing the work of the “incompetents.”
They’re never wrong and they’re always right. Everyone else is always wrong and never right. They’re perfect and everyone else isn’t and needs to be constantly criticized for being such screw-ups.
They are always making long lists of things to do, but then they hardly do any of them. They get lost in the endless planning of the project such that the project itself never really gets going. They can’t see the forest for the trees. They can’t see the big picture.
They put everything off to the last minute, and then they run around frantically, hollering in frustration all the time, doing all the tasks that they put off to the end because now they are in a terrible time bind.
They’re control freaks in a covert way that is not obvious.
They hate change. They are some of the most rigid people you will ever meet. They hate anything new.
They are perfectionists and a lot of their own work is never good enough and needs endless revisions.
They’re always tense and uptight and rarely relax.
Rahul: Have you ever been acquainted with someone with Histrionic Personality Disorder. Is so, can you describe your experience?
I never known one of this particular variety of human monster, thank God for that.
Very, very bad. HPD is the personality of “the whore.” Pornstars, prostitutes, strippers, sexworkers of all types. One reason not to date or get involved with prostitute-type women is because this is the personality that most of them have. Get involved with a prostitute and you get involved with a monster, female version.
Mata Hari was the original HPD. The HPD woman is the “femme fatale.” She’s a black widow. She will draw you into her web and kill you one way or another. A lot of people think that HPD is how psychopathy manifests in the female or feminine character. Men become psychopaths; women (and effeminate men) become HPD’s. ~75% of male HPD’s are gay or bisexual. It’s basically a female disorder. Basically, they’re monsters. Just another group of Cluster B psychos that will ruin your life like the Borderlines, Narcissists, Psychopaths, and the rest of the motley crew.
Similar to other Cluster B personality disorders, Histrionic Personality Disorder forums are often tumultuous and frequently have to be either policed or shut down due to HPD’s coming in, starting fights and making huge scenes.
And also similar to other Cluster B forums, HPD forums usually have few to no HPD’s (because they don’t think there is anything wrong with themselves) and instead are full of the victims of HPD’s, sort of like how Borderline and Narcissistic PD forums are mostly full of the victims of these particular type of monsters. Antisocial PD forums instead are full of psychopaths because psychopaths love being psychopaths and like to run around on stage shouting to the world how cool it is to be a psychopath. Psychopaths literally think being a psychopath is fun. Antisocial behavior is actually their idea of a good time, believe it or not.
“The current dysgenic behavior of the African-American community is a complete and absolute result of the government subsidizing pregnancy and desertion.*
* Professor Thomas Sowell.
Agree or disagree?
Sowell is a conservative, so I don’t like him as I am a Leftist. However, he is right on it regarding a number of issues. I don’t mind his theories. I just dislike his politics. You see here he makes an argument about dysgenic breeding and high illegitimacy rates, he turns into a damned anti-welfare argument because he’s a conservative ideologue first and a sociologist second. Breeding is dysgenic anyway.
It’s dysgenic among Whites and Hispanics too.
For Chrissake, even the Romans wrung their hands and wrote about dysgenic breeding in Ancient Rome. So dysgenic breeding has gone on forever. I doubt if it seriously harms the gene pool since it’s been around since Antiquity. Scumbags, especially psychopaths, have lots of kids. Which is probably why sociopathy stayed in the gene pool. The women keep breeding with the bad boys, and they either became tribal leaders, or they managed to make a few babies before the other tribal members murdered them or cast them out, which was actually the fate of many psychopaths in primitive society.
Robert Hare is one of the world’s leading experts on psychopathy.
At one point, he was up in Alaska for some reason, and he was talking to Inuit about psychopaths. They all nodded their heads after a bit, saying they were familiar with the concept, as these men existed in Inuit society. They lied, cheated, and stole, and when the rest of the men left to go hunting, these men would run around having sex with all the other men’s wives.
Hare asked what was done with these men, and the Inuit said they put up with their antics after a bit, and then all the men would grab them, tie them up, and walk them out to the sea, where they would put them tied up on an ice floe.
I am getting rather tired about having this argument about whether Blacks, or Black males in particular, are more antisocial than men of other races. People are pushing back against this in the comments section. This really ought to be the final word on the subject. Original here.
For as long as official statistics have been kept, blacks in white societies have been overrepresented in all indices of social pathology: crime, illegitimacy, poverty, school failure, and long-term unemployment. The conventional liberal explanation for this is white “racism,” past and present, which has forced blacks into self-destructive choices.
More clear-headed observers, however, have sought a partial explanation in the low average IQ of blacks. Low IQ can lead to crime because less intelligent children do poorly at school and fail to learn the skills needed to get well-paid jobs or even any job. Unemployment is therefore two to three times higher among blacks than whites. People without jobs need money, have relatively little to lose by robbery or burglary, and may therefore commit property crimes. The association between low intelligence and crime holds for whites as well, among whom the average IQ of criminals is about 84.
Nevertheless, as Charles Murray and the late Richard Herrnstein showed in their book The Bell Curve, low IQ cannot entirely explain a black crime rate that is six-and-a-half times the white rate. When blacks and whites are matched for IQ, blacks still commit crimes at two-and-a-half times the white rate. This shows that blacks must have some other characteristic besides low intelligence that explains their high levels of criminality.
Prof. Herrnstein and Dr. Murray found the same race and IQ relationship for social problems other than crime: unemployment, illegitimacy, poverty, and living on welfare. All of these are more frequent among blacks and are related to low IQ, and low IQ goes some way towards explaining them, but these social problems remain greater among blacks than among whites with the same IQ’s. Low intelligence is therefore not the whole explanation.
Prof. Herrnstein and Dr. Murray did not offer any suggestions as to what the additional factors responsible for the greater prevalence of these social problems among blacks might be. They concluded only that “some ethnic differences are not washed away by controlling for either intelligence or for any other variables that we examined. We leave those remaining differences unexplained and look forward to learning from our colleagues where the explanations lie” (p. 340).
I propose that the variable that explains these differences is that blacks are more psychopathic than whites. Just as racial groups differ in average IQ, they can also differ in average levels of other psychological traits, and racial differences in the tendency towards psychopathic personality would explain virtually all the differences in black and white behavior left unexplained by differences in IQ.
Psychopathic personality is a personality disorder of which the central feature is lack of a moral sense. The condition was first identified in the early Nineteenth Century by the British physician John Pritchard, who proposed the term “moral imbecility” for those deficient in moral sense but of normal intelligence.
The term psychopathic personality was first used in 1915 by the German psychiatrist Emile Kraepelin and has been employed as a diagnostic label throughout the Twentieth Century.
In 1941 the condition was described by Hervey Cleckley in what has become a classic book, The Mask of Sanity. He described the condition as general poverty of emotional feelings, lack of remorse or shame, superficial charm, pathological lying, egocentricity, a lack of insight, absence of nervousness, an inability to love, impulsive antisocial acts, failure to learn from experience, reckless behavior under the influence of alcohol, and a lack of long-term goals.
In 1984 the American Psychiatric Association dropped the term psychopathic personality and replaced it with Antisocial Personality Disorder. This is an expression of the increasing sentimentality of the second half of the twentieth century in which terms that had acquired negative associations were replaced by euphemisms.
There are other examples. Mentally retarded children are now called “slow learners” or even “exceptional children;” aggressive children now have “externalizing behaviors;” prostitutes are “sex workers;” tramps are now “the homeless,” as if their houses were destroyed by earthquake; and people on welfare are “clients” of social workers. However, the term psychopathic personality remains useful.
While psychopathic personality is a psychiatric disorder, it has long been regarded as the extreme expression of a personality trait that is continuously distributed throughout the population. In this respect it is like other psychiatric disorders. For instance, severe depression is a psychiatric disorder, but everyone feels depressed sometimes, and some normal people are depressed more often and more severely than others. It is the same with psychopathic personality. There are degrees of moral sense throughout the population, and psychopaths are the extreme group.
There is a difference between blacks and whites—analogous to the difference in intelligence—in psychopathic personality considered as a personality trait. Both psychopathic personality and intelligence are bell curves with different means and distributions among blacks and whites. For intelligence, the mean and distribution are both lower among blacks. For psychopathic personality, the mean and distribution are higher among blacks. The effect of this is that there are more black psychopaths and more psychopathic behavior among blacks.
In 1994 the American Psychiatric Association issued a revised Diagnostic Manual listing 11 features of Antisocial Personality Disorder:
(1) inability to sustain consistent work behavior;
(2) failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behavior [this is a euphemism for being a criminal];
(3) irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by frequent physical fights and assaults;
(4) repeated failure to honor financial obligations;
(5) failure to plan ahead or impulsivity;
(6) no regard for truth, as indicated by repeated lying, use of aliases, or “conning” others;
(7) recklessness regarding one’s own or others’ personal safety, as indicated by driving while intoxicated or recurrent speeding;
(8) inability to function as a responsible parent;
(9) failure to sustain a monogamous relationship for more than one year;
(10) lacking remorse;
(11) the presence of conduct disorder in childhood.
This is a useful list. Curiously, however, it fails to include the deficiency of moral sense that is the core of the condition, although this is implicit in virtually every feature of the disorder. All of these behaviors are more prevalent among blacks than among whites and suggest that blacks have a higher average tendency towards psychopathic personality.
Questionnaires can be used to measure psychopathic personality in normal populations. The first to be constructed was the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), which was devised in the 1930’s. This instrument consists of a series of scales for the measurement of a variety of psychiatric conditions regarded as continuously distributed in the population, such as hysteria, mania and depression, and includes the Psychopathic Deviate Scale for the measurement of psychopathic personality.
During the 65 or so years following its publication, the MMPI has been administered to a great many groups. Mean scores have been published by different investigators for a number of samples of blacks, whites, Asian-Americans, Hispanics, and American Indians. All of these studies show a consistent pattern: Blacks and Indians have the highest psychopathic scores. Hispanics come next followed by whites. Ethnic Japanese and Chinese have the lowest scores. The same rank order of racial groups is found for all the expressions of psychopathic personality listed by the American Psychiatric Association, and these differences are found in both children and adults.
The terms psychopathic personality and Anti-social Personality Disorder, however, are not used for children or young adolescents up to the age of 15 years. They are instead said to have conduct disorders. The principal criteria set out by the American Psychiatric Association (1994) for a diagnosis of Conduct Disorder are persistent stealing, lying, truancy, running away from home, fighting, arson, burglary, vandalism, sexual precocity, and cruelty. Childhood Conduct Disorder is therefore an analogue of psychopathic personality in older adolescents and adults. A number of studies have shown that Conduct Disorder in children is a frequent precursor of psychopathic behavior.
Studies have found that the prevalence of conduct disorders is about twice as high among blacks as among whites. This is the case not only in the United States but also in Britain and the Netherlands. Other racial groups also differ in the prevalence of conduct disorders among children. As with all the other expressions of psychopathic personality, conduct disorders are frequent among American Indians.
Children with conduct disorders are sometimes suspended or expelled from school because of constant misbehavior, particularly aggression. In both the United States and Britain, black children are disciplined in this way three or four times as frequently as white children, while East Asians have low discipline rates. In misbehavior in schools as in so much else, East Asians are the “model minority.” In the United States, Indians have a high discipline rate.
Lack of honesty is one of the core features of the psychopathic personality, and one measure of this characteristic is the default rates on student loans. About half of American college students take out loans, but not all graduates repay them. The 1987 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study consisting of 6,338 cases reports default rates as follows: whites—5 percent, Hispanics—20 percent, American Indians—45 percent, blacks—55 percent.
Bad credit ratings also reflect a failure to honor financial obligations. A report by Freddie Mac of 12,000 households in 1999 found the highest percentage of poor credit ratings was among blacks (48 percent). The next highest was among Hispanics (34 percent), while whites had the lowest at 27 percent.
Psychopathic personality is the extreme expression of a personality trait that is continuously distributed throughout the population.
A prominent feature of psychopathic personality is a high level of aggression, which is expressed in a number of ways including homicide, robbery, assault, and rape. All of these are crimes, so racial and ethnic differences appear in crime rates. High black crime rates have been documented by Jared Taylor and the late Glayde Whitney in The Color of Crime. For homicide, rates for black males are about six times the white rate, and for black females they are about four times higher. The homicide rate for East Asians is about half that of whites. The high homicide rate of blacks is also found in South Africa, and homicide is generally higher in black countries than in white and East Asian countries.
As regards other crimes, the robbery rate for blacks is about twelve times the white rate, while the assault rate is about five times higher. The high black rates for these crimes are followed in descending order by Hispanics, American Indians, whites and East Asians. The rate for rape is about five-and-a-half times greater for blacks than whites, and two to three times greater among Hispanics and Indians as compared to whites, while East Asians commit rape at about half the white rate.
Domestic violence shows the same race differences. Severe violence by husbands against wives is about four times more common among blacks as whites. Black wives assault their husbands at about twice the white rate. American Indians assault their spouses even more often than blacks do. High crime rates among blacks have been found not only in the United States but also in Britain, France, Canada and Sweden.
A prominent feature of psychopathic personality is an inability to form stable long-term loving relationships. David Lykken, a leading expert on psychopathic personalities, writes of the psychopath’s “undeveloped ability to love or affiliate with others,” and Robert Hare, another leading expert, writes that “psychopaths view people as little more than objects to be used for their own gratification” and “equate love with sexual arousal.”
Marriage is the most explicit expression of long-term love, and a number of studies have shown that blacks attach less value to marriage than whites. Questionnaire surveys have found that blacks are less likely than whites to agree that “marriage is for life.” Two American sociologists, R. Staples and L. B. Johnson, write that “Blacks do not rank marriage as highly as whites” and that “Black Americans’ acceptance of this form of relationship is inconsistent with their African heritage.”
In a study of an American sample of 2,059 married people, C. L. Broman found that “blacks are significantly less likely to feel that their marriages are harmonious and are significantly less likely to be satisfied with their marriages.” Other studies of racial and ethnic differences in attitudes have found that whites think about marriage more often than blacks and have a stronger desire than blacks to find the right marriage partner. There are also racial differences in rates of cohabitation, which also reflects a commitment to a long-term relationship. A survey of 24-to 29-year-olds in Britain found that 68 percent of whites had cohabited but only 38 percent of blacks.
Blacks in the United States, Britain, France and the Caribbean are less likely than whites to marry or enter into stable relationships. In an American survey of 18-to 64-year-olds carried out from 1990 to 1996, 61 percent of whites were married but only 35 percent of blacks. The most likely to be married were East Asians (66 percent).
Fifty-five percent of Hispanics and 48 percent of American Indians were married. The same race differences are found in Britain. In a survey carried out in 1991, among 30-to 34-year-olds 68 percent of whites were married but only 34 percent of blacks. Studies of marriage rates for France in the 1990’s have also found that blacks are less likely to be married than whites. These differences are also found for cohabitation, with fewer blacks living in unmarried cohabitation relationships than whites.
Differences in marriage rates are reflected in differences in illegitimacy rates. In the United States, black illegitimacy rates are down slightly from their high in 1994, when 70.4 percent of black women who gave birth were unmarried. The 2000 figure of 68.7 is still the highest for any racial group and is followed by American Indians at 58.4 percent, Hispanics 42.7 percent, whites 22.1 percent, and Asians 14.8 percent. The Asian figure includes populations with greatly differing illegitimacy rates, with native Hawaiians for example at 50 percent, Japanese at 9.5 percent, and Chinese at 7.6 percent.
Low rates of stable relationships are found among blacks in the Caribbean islands. In a review of the literature the sociologists B. Ram and G. E. Ebanks write that “In the Caribbean in general . . . there is a substantial amount of movement from one sex partner to another and also a very high percentage of reproduction outside marriage.”
When they do marry, blacks are less tolerant than whites of monogamous constraints. An extreme form of intolerance is murder of one’s spouse. In Detroit in 1982-3, 63 percent of the population was black, but 90.5 percent of those who killed their spouses were black.
Less extreme forms of aversion to monogamy are adultery and divorce. The Kinsey data on college graduates collected in the 1940’s and 1950’s found that 51 percent of blacks were unfaithful to their spouses during the first two years of marriage compared with 23 percent of whites. Several other studies have confirmed that the incidence of marital infidelity is greater among blacks than among whites. Blacks cite infidelity more frequently than whites as a cause of divorce.
Blacks also have more sexual partners than whites. The Kinsey survey found that about twice as many black college graduates had had six or more partners before marriage than whites. Many later studies have confirmed this. A survey of 2,026 15-to-18-year-olds in Los Angeles in the mid-199’0s found that 38 percent of blacks had had five or more sexual partners, 26 percent of whites, 21 percent of Hispanics and eight percent of East Asians.
The same differences are found in Britain. In a study of a nationally representative sample of approximately 20,000 16-to 59-year-olds carried out in 1990, 36 percent of blacks had had two or more sexual partners during the previous five years, compared with 29 percent of whites and 18 percent of Asians.
Delay of Gratification
The impulsiveness component of psychopathic personality includes an inability or unwillingness to delay immediate gratification in the expectation of long-term advantage.
The first study to demonstrate differences between blacks and whites in the delay of gratification was carried out by W. Mischel in Trinidad in the late 1950’s. He offered black and white children the choice between a small candy bar now or a larger one in a week. He found black children were much more likely to ask for the small candy bar now, and this difference has been confirmed in three subsequent American studies.
This racial difference has been noted but given different names by different writers. In The Unheavenly City Revisited, Edward Banfield writes of the “extreme present-orientation” of blacks, and Michael Levin writes of “high time preference,” an economist’s term for preferring cash now rather than a greater sum in the future.
The APA Diagnostic Manual refers to the psychopathic personality’s “inability to sustain consistent work behavior,” and a number of studies have shown that blacks are less motivated to work than whites and Asians, while Hispanics are intermediate. For example, black students do fewer hours of homework than whites and Asians. Among college students with the same Scholastic Aptitude Test scores, blacks get poorer grades than whites, probably because they don’t work as hard.
This helps explain black unemployment. Several American ethnographic studies of inner city blacks have concluded that many are unwilling to work. Thus, E. Anderson writes that “there are many unemployed black youth who are unmotivated and uninterested in working for a living, particularly in the dead-end jobs they are likely to get.” The sociologist S. M. Petterson writes that “it is commonly contended that young black men experience more joblessness than their white counterparts because they are less willing to seek out low paying jobs.”
American Asians are the opposite of blacks in this respect. They have low rates of unemployment, and it has been shown by James Flynn that they achieve higher educational qualifications and earnings than would be predicted from their intelligence, suggesting they have strong work motivation.
In the United States, unemployment rates are highest among Indians followed in descending order by blacks, Hispanics, whites and ethnic Chinese and Japanese. These differences are frequently attributed to white racism, but it is difficult to reconcile this explanation with the lower rate of unemployment among East Asians as compared with whites and also with the higher rate of unemployment among Indians as compared to blacks.
Blacks in Britain, Canada, and France are frequently unemployed. In Britain, the 1991 census found that 26 percent of black men were unemployed compared with 11 percent of whites and ethnic Chinese. In Canada in 1991, 13 percent of black men were unemployed compared with seven percent of whites. In France in 1994, 11 percent of black men were unemployed compared with eight percent of whites.
Psychopaths appear to enjoy taking risks because it stimulates them, and there are several ways in which blacks show greater recklessness and risk taking than whites or Asians.
In the 1989-93 American Teenage Attitudes and Practices Survey, 9,135 youths aged 12 to 18 were asked to consider the question: “I get a kick out of doing things every now and then that are a little risky or dangerous.” Fifty-six point nine percent of blacks agreed, as compared with 38.6 percent of whites. Driving habits are an index of risk taking and recklessness. A number of studies have shown that blacks run red lights more often than whites and have more frequent accidents. Five studies have shown that blacks do not use seat belts as often as whites. Hispanics and Native Americans likewise have more accidents caused by recklessness and risk-taking than whites and East Asians.
Sexual behavior can be reckless. Among those who do not wish to have children, blacks are less likely to use contraception than whites, and this has been found in both the United States and Britain. One result is that black women have more unplanned babies than whites. In the United States in the 1990’s blacks had about twice the proportion of unplanned babies as whites and Asians. In Britain, a survey of teenage births carried out in 1994 found that these were three-and-a-half times more common among blacks than among whites and Asians.
The behavior of reckless men also causes unplanned pregnancies. Surveys have asked adolescent males if they would feel “very pleased” or whether they would care if they were responsible for an unplanned pregnancy. Twice as many blacks as whites say they would be very pleased or that they would not care. To be very pleased or not care about saddling a teenage girl with an unplanned pregnancy expresses a great degree of reckless regard for the well-being of others. In the United States, the percentage of teenage blacks who have fathered an illegitimate child is approximately three times greater than that of whites, with Hispanics intermediate.
Another consequence of reckless avoidance of contraceptives is that blacks are more likely to get sexually transmitted diseases—including HIV and AIDS—all of which are more prevalent among blacks than among whites and Asians. At the present time, about 80 percent of the word’s HIV carriers are blacks in sub-Saharan Africa.
A common expression of Conduct Disorder in children and young adolescents is sexual precocity. Many studies have shown that blacks are more sexually precocious than whites and Asians. Surveys in the United States in the 1990’s have found that 33 percent of black 13-year-olds have had sexual intercourse compared with 14 percent of whites and Hispanics and four percent of East Asians. Similarly, a survey in Britain in 1990 found that by the age of 16, 18 percent of blacks had had intercourse compared with 13 percent of whites and five percent of Asians.
We consider finally the psychopathic characteristic described by the American Psychiatric Association as “inability to function as a responsible parent.” One of the most straightforward measures of this is abuse and neglect.
The American Association for Protecting Children has found that black children constitute approximately 15 percent of the child population and about 22 percent of cases of child abuse and neglect. The First (1975) and Second (1985) National Family Violence Surveys carried out in America examined the use of violence towards children, defined as hitting them with the fist or with some object, and kicking, biting, and beating them up. It does not include slapping or spanking. It found that 1.2 percent of white parents and 2.1 percent of blacks inflict this kind of severe violence on their children.
Data published by the United States Department of Health and Human Services for 1996 showed that maltreatment was about three times more common among blacks and about one-and-a-half times more common among Hispanics than among whites.
The most extreme expression of the inability to function as a responsible parent consists of killing a child. Racial differences in the homicide of infants in their first year of life were examined for approximately 35 million babies born in the United States between 1983-91. This study found that 2,776 of these had been murdered, the great majority by mothers or the mothers’ husbands or partners. The rate of infant homicides for blacks and Native Americans was 2 per 10,000, compared with 0.6 per 10,000 for whites and 0.4 per 10,000 for East Asians. In the early 1990’s the racial differences became even greater, with blacks having four-and-a-half times the infant homicide rate of whites and Hispanics.
There is almost complete consistency in the racial differences in outcomes that can be considered measures of psychopathic personality. In everything from child behavior to sexual precocity to adult crime rates, we find Asians at one extreme, blacks and American Indians at the other, and whites Hispanics in between. These differences are not only consistent through time but are found in countries such as France, Britain, Canada, and the United States, which have very different histories of what could be called “racism.” Indices of high psychopathic personality in blacks are likewise found in the virtually all-black societies of Africa and the Caribbean.
Racial differences in psychopathic behavior persist even when IQ is held constant, and the same racial differences are found in essentially every kind of measurable behavior that reflects psychopathic personality. The most plausible explanation for these differences is that just as there are racial differences in average IQ, there are racial differences in what could be called “average personality,” with blacks showing greater psychopathic tendencies. The argument that white “racism” is responsible for black social pathology is increasingly unconvincing.
Much has been written about how many transwomen are murdered. Many transwomen are indeed murdered. Whether these are the true transsexuals (homosexuals) or the transtrenders (transvestites, crossdressers, and autogynephiles) is not known. Many transwomen (men who think they are women) work as prostitutes. Many are not able to work in ordinary jobs, they often have very poor mental health that prevents them from working at regular jobs.
Transwomen have the highest rates of mental disorder of any group seen clinically. 90% of transwomen are significantly mentally ill, and they have everything under the book, from mood disorders such as depression and bipolar disorder to anxiety disorders of different kinds to personality disorders. They also have very high rates of paraphilias and sexual disorders and have rates of being convicted for sex crimes (these are the transtrenders). The transwomen working on the street are often homeless and many have drug and alcohol problems. Very high HIV rates have been found for transwomen prostitutes – up to 42%.
Although the murders of transwomen are tragic, it is helpful to note the circumstances under which these are occurring.
A lot of these murders occur when they are prostituting themselves, and their label doesn’t always say what’s in the bottle. In other words, they are out on the streets advertising themselves as female prostitutes. They get picked up by male clients thinking they are picking up a woman.
At some point, they are shocked to find that it is actually a man as many transwomen are pre-ops, that is, they take the hormones but they have not taken the surgery, so they look like women, have women’s breasts, and yet they still have penises. When the client finds out that this is a “woman with a penis” sometimes they fly into a rage and kill the transwoman in a blind rage murder of the type that men are susceptible.
A friend of mine picked up a “woman” in a cab and went home with “her” only find out halfway through the blowjob that it wasn’t a woman at all. He didn’t get violent but he was pretty freaked out and upset.
It’s pretty abusive for TIM’s to tell us other men that they are women, and we men get into dating/sexual stuff with them and suddenly find out they’re a guy. They’re men pretending to be women and worse they are not even telling everyone!
No one wants to hear this, but a lot of gay bashing is actually done to gay men who are openly propositioning straight men (like, say, grabbing their cocks?). I am not supporting bashing of course, and I have been gay-bashed three times myself, once with a baseball bat! So I’m not wild about gay men, but homophobes are 100X worse. Also, how come no one talks about straight men getting gay-bashed? It’s epidemic.
But it is actually true. Many gay bashings occur not just when gay men hit on straight men, which they do constantly, but when they won’t take no for an answer, which is all the time. You women think straight men are bad about not taking no for answer, well, gay men are 50X worse.
And no one talks about this either, but gay men are far worse than straight men as sexual harassers, in fact they wrote the book on sexual harassment. Sexual harassment is the unspoken norm in gay male society.
I do dislike gay men but I support them politically and even work on their campaigns. I dislike them because they have been hitting on me for decades, and they won’t take no for an answer. My reaction is similar to that of women mad at men over sexual harassment.
Yes, gay men sexually harass straight men. You cannot talk about this either because it is “homophobic.” When I lived in LA, I lived in a gay community for a while. Supposedly I was good-looking back and then had some male modeling offers. I had a couple of friends who were straight models who started out pro-gay but became almost violently homophobic over time due to constant harassment by gay men. Male models are not all gay. Actually 2/3 are straight.
Anyway, the place was swarming with gay men, and I would walk down the street, and all of them would be rubbernecking me in their cars driving by. I had one who waited outside my workplace every night right before work. I would go to the window and look out, and there he would be, staring right up at my window. I almost had a panic attack every time. And he would watch me like a hawk as I walked to my car.
When I would go to parties, etc. they would creepily stare at me for long periods of time.
I related this on my site and got called homophobe of course, but some of my female readers commented and said, “Ok, now you know what it feels like to be a woman!” And she was right. I didn’t like those gay men treating me like a piece of meat. Now if women want to, ok, maybe.
The generally feeling would best be described as unnerving, which may be how women feel with constant male sexual attention?
I also disagree that sexual harassment is driven by misogyny. As you can see, men harass other gay men worse than they harass women and gay men harass straight men like crazy.
Men sexually harass women because they are men, and that is what men, do – they sexually harass other humans?
It’s a more science-based theory.
You had many girlfriends? I’ve had more than I can count. Well, first of all, all women are bitches to one degree or another. What you want is a woman who is less bitchy, not one who is not a bitch at all because there’s no such thing.
The one I can think of was crazy in love with me, more in love with me than any woman has ever been, like Hollywood movie romance of the century stuff. She acted like she would give her life for me. So mixed in with the psychobitch stuff and the insane fighting was the most passionate love for me that I have ever experienced. And the good times were truly wonderful. She adored me. I figured that the price of the good was the bad, which is the way it is life. In life, you pay for the good things in life with the bad things. If you don’t want the bad things, you will never get the good things.
Also I did not sit there and take it. I fought back against her in a lot of ways. I cussed her out all the time and called her every name in the book.
But tied in with wild love that was a lot of crazy hate because you know, hate and love are very close, and the woman who really loves you may just really hate you to when she gets mad. It’s a matter of intensity.
It was one of those nutso love affairs where they adore each other as much as Romeo and Juliet, but they also fight like wildcats a lot of the time.
Also she was a knockout (former model), brilliant, funny as Hell, and she was ravenous and seriously kinky in bed. She wanted to fuck all the time, day, night, whenever. We would go at it for hours a day. She was almost 50 years old too. Anyone who says older women don’t want to fuck is crazy. Those are some of the horniest women of all!
I honestly think she was a Borderline. But sometimes I think all women are Borderlines. It’s like there’s a Borderline scale of 1-100 and few women are 1’s or 100’s, but a lot are in between. “Borderline” just seems to be a name who the style that the Female Character uses when it goes crazy. It’s their “crazy style.” The Male Character tends towards sociopathy and narcissism when it gets nutty. Cluster B’s are just the prominent crazy styles that each gender or character utilizes. All Cluster B’s are Hell though – Borderlines, narcissists, sociopaths, all of them. Dig a hole, throw them all in it, and cover it up. Seriously, Cluster B’s are literally the worst humans on Earth. Their toxicity is almost sensual. You feel it in your bones.
LH: Interesting post. I’ve recently noticed some things that have painted Indians in a bad light for me. (Of course, at this point I’m not sophisticated enough to differentiate between different groups/castes, so I don’t know to which subset this applies.)
Is pettiness, jealousy and envy, mixed with frankly bad judgment a common set of traits? I’ve seen this in more than one person and was wondering whether I was seeing a pattern based on a too-small sample. RL: LOL! This is an essential aspect of the Indian character! Not sure about the bad judgement part, but the other three, of course. That is the “Indian personality.” dumbo: I think that’s true. They act catty like the ugly friend does when you talk to the pretty one – except all the time. All they do is cock-block each other in everything and act petty and jealous – crabs in a bucket. If you try to treat one like a normal person with trust and respect, they think there must be something wrong with you. It’s repeated prisoners’ dilemma with low trust – everyone gets zapped every time.
Hence the shitting on the streets and corruption. And all the tall claims about how Indians figured out everything thousands of years ago. They don’t expect anyone to believe them, much less take them seriously- the purpose of talking is to bullshit, not to communicate a point or have a proper discussion.
Dumbo’s comment is perfect. That’s why I love this site. Only eight sentences and the last seven of them are perfect. Read each sentence carefully and try to picture what’s going on. Also try to piece it together into a coherent whole and you will see how most of these things sort of latch onto and tie into each other in a common syndrome.
I never cared anything about Indian people until I started meeting some on the Web. I talked to them for a while, and after a bit, I became appalled at these amoral scoundrels. And soon I realized that about everyone over there was a scoundrel. Being a scoundrel is normal in India. That’s actually how you are supposed to be. I tried to talk to some of them about this and I ran into a brick wall.
One guy was cooking up endless schemes to get money. None of them were well thought out and some were rather scammy. Also in the US we don’t really like people who every time you talk to them are always talking about some money making scheme they are trying to get you in on. It’s considered sleazy to be like that all the time, at least in my White middle class upbringing crowd.
Indians go on and on about how it’s racism that people don’t like them. We don’t get a damn about how you look. If someone has a crap personality and you dislike them, are you an evil bigot? Of course not. Well, when an entire nation has an appalling personality and you dislike the people who come there because they all seem to have this same crap personality, how is that racism? Were they born being lousy people? Do Indians have a Crappy People gene? Well of course not.
If they’d get rid of their crap personality, we’d like them just fine. As it is, I don’t really want anymore of these lousy people in my country. We already have enough narcissistic sociopaths running about. Hell, our own president is one and his followers love the fact that he is a sick as a death ward malignant narcissist. They think being a malignant narcissist is good. Trumpsters would be right at home in India. Is the Trumpster personality like the Indian personality or is it different. Would Indians be offensive to Trumpsters in their personalities?
The weird thing about Indians is that they act dumbfounded if you are appalled at their awful personalities and worldviews. To them this disgusting way of thinking is completely normal. They can’t understand why everyone isn’t a selfish fuck only out for himself like they are. “You mean there are people who actually try to be good? That’s so weird?” the Indian says, baffled.
Americans regard their own people who have typical Indian personality as pretty much lousy people. People who act that way are targets of a lot of negative comments about how disgusting they are. Sure, a lot of society like capitalist fanboys think this is just groovy and everyone should be a greedy little shit like them. But a lot of us still cringe at the used car salesman mindset and personality. Get out of here!
This racist accusation is getting abused. If you don’t like some ethnic group because their culture is crap, that’s not racism. The early Soviets and Maoists attacked the cultures of a lot of ethnic groups in their countries, calling them backwards and barbaric. Were they racists for saying that? I am tired of this word racist being used by barbarians, backwards, uncivilized people towards those who criticize their primitive behavior. The word racist was not meant to be an umbrella protecting all reactionary peoples and cultures from criticism. Death to the Cultural Left! They’re the ones promoting this insane definition of racism.
India is where the Human Soul goes to die. India is like a place where everything good about the human soul has died or been cruelly murdered and all that’s left is the lousy, mercenary parts of being human. It’s a testament to our remaining humanity that Americans still say two thumbs down on this stuff.
I just gave you a lot of reasons. It’s insane. All the IP’s can’t possibly be true. Only one of the conflicting IP’s can be true and the other must be false, or they must both be wrong. It can’t be true that Blacks are bad and Whites are good and also that Blacks are good and Whites are bad, etc. It’s crazy. Same thing with all of the others. Basically these are all positions that are various forms of nonsense.
In particular, they are much too quite to call anyone who says boo about them a hater, to demonize their enemies du jour, and frankly to be paranoid.
Most people who criticize various races, ethnic groups or nationalities are not racists. Most men who criticize women are not misogynists. Most women who criticize men are not misandrists. Most people who criticize Jews are not anti-Semites. Most people who criticize Islam are not Muslim haters. Most people who criticize gays are not homophobes. Most people who criticize transsexuals are not transphobes.
So it’s just a bunch of thin-skinned paranoid haters who can’t take any criticism, all with different glorious identities and demonized enemies. I agree with gays hating homophobes, transsexuals hating transphobes, Jews hating anti-Semites, etc., but all of these people are paranoid crazies who think everyone is an evil enemy out to get them, they all have a huge chip on their shoulders, who can’t take any criticism, who think all critics are deadly enemies, and are frankly very narcissistic with inflated self-esteem.
When these qualities are present in a person, we generally say they are unhealthy or mentally ill. Generally they have a personality disorder. If these mentally ill people have the same qualities as these groups, then we say that these groups themselves are paranoid crazies who think everyone is an evil enemy out to get them, all have a huge chip on their shoulders, can’t take any criticism, think all critics are deadly enemies, and are frankly very narcissistic with inflated self-esteem are either groups of mentally ill people or perhaps the groups themselves are mentally ill.
Actual societal structures can become mentally disordered just as a person can. So all of these groups are more or less mentally ill groups full of mentally ill people. The people in the groups have personality disorders and the groups themselves actually have personality disorders! IP people are crazy. IP groups, being full of crazy people, are crazy groups.
Zamfir: You say Trump “stole the election with computers”. Really? What are you talking about here? I’ve looked into these bizarre claims and never found any proper evidence of anything.
They’re not bizarre. Republicans been doing it since 2000 because the public doesn’t really support them anymore, so like all capitalist, ruling class, and oligarchic political parties, they have to lie, cheat, and steal to stay in power. See the Latin American Right for example. The Republicans been stealing them with computers, especially since 2004. Bush out and out stole the 2004 election.
We can tell they were stolen by how the exit polls went radically off compared to the actual vote. Exit polls are the gold standard of politics for over 50 years now. They always reliably track with results. Out of 50 states, polls will be off in maybe two states, no more. They’ve been going off, often by a lot and almost always in a Republican direction, since 2000. This is when the Republicans started stealing them with the computers. That’s why the Republicans put the computers in in the first place – to steal elections.
In Michigan, all polls for weeks before the election – hundreds of them – were all off, including the exit polls. That can’t possibly happen. So Michigan was stolen. They refused to count 70,000 votes in Detroit for no reason except that they are nigger votes I guess. And many fraudulent votes for Republicans were found even before the recount. A recount was never done because all Michigan politicians opposed it. Why did they oppose a recount?
Wisconsin was also stolen. Exit polls were off but always in Republican districts. There was no real recount in Wisconsin. There was only a fake recount, and some precincts were incredibly shady to where it appeared to witnesses that they were seeing actual fraud taking place.
Also 30,000 fraudulent votes for Republicans were found before the recount even started. The vote in Milwaukee was not possible, and I think they never even recounted it. Write-in’s supported Clinton and those lean rightwing. All exit polls showed Clinton winning. Exit polls were perfect in all precincts that had hand counted ballots but went off in all precincts that had computer counted ballots.
50,000 fraudulent votes were found in Pennsylvania before the recount even started. Write in votes supported Clinton and those tend to lean conservative. There was no recount in Pennsylvania because the DNC governor fought it in court! All exit polls showed Clinton winning.
The vote in Florida was not possible. 70% of votes were write-in’s and they supported Clinton by a decent margin. For Trump to win, a huge number of voters on election day would have had to support Trump. That number was so large as to be statistically impossible. Republican turnout was not elevated on election day anyway. As many Democrats came out as Republicans.
Trump started saying the election was going to be stolen because he was going to steal it himself. He always accuses his opponents of doing what he does or is going to do. This is called projection but it is particularly prominent in this man. It is considered to be a primitive and immature defense that kids use a lot. Yes, adults use it a lot, but people who project all the time are notably unhealthy. It is particularly prominent in personality disorders.
Also Trump, Conaway, and Guiliani became unusually calm about Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania a few days before the election. All polls were pro-Clinton. Manafort said he had just talked to the Russians, and they said not to worry about Michigan. I assume the Russians may have been in on the vote-hacking. Vote-hacking in this last election was never investigated by the FBI or by anyone.
I will add that sleazy Democrats do this too. Hillary had to have stolen a number of primaries. There is no way for the exit polls to go off like that, and the DNC laid down the law that Sanders could not win. Democrats don’t seem to want to fix these machines either I guess because they use them to steal elections themselves.
Republicans are fanatically opposed to all recounts of elections and to fixing the damned voting machines. They must know that the way they are set up now, they are hackable.
Really we need to get rid of them altogether and go back to hand counted ballots. States that hand count ballots never see their exit polls go off.
Zamfir: I’m surprised you have a strong preference for Democrats over Republicans. To me it seems like a hopeless choice. If you vote Republican you’re voting for one set of evil elite interests, but not explicitly against your biology and cultural heritage; if you vote Republican you’re voting for another set of evil elite interests, and explicitly against your biology and cultural heritage.
Hard to pick between those two! What is the real advantage in voting Democrat in your opinion? (I guess I’d vote for Bernie, but then again I’d vote for Trump for similar reasons… Not that I expect either one would ever do much on anything I care about.)
Trump’s incompetent. Trump might be senile and he’s obviously dangerously mentally ill.
Trump suffers from Malignant Narcissism, the same disorder that Ted Bundy and other serial killers had. That’s right. Our President has the same mental illness that serial killers do! Original theoreticians on this disorder said that it was the closest thing to pure evil in the mental illnesses. And that’s correct. The best description for Trump is that he is evil. Trump’s a bad person, a jerk, an ass, a prick, a lousy human being, an idiot, a fool, a moron, and worst of all, he’s dangerous. Trump’s obviously too mentally ill and otherwise impaired with dementia to be President.
If you want to find out if someone is an anti-Semite, the last person you should ask is a Jew. This is because Jews see probably 10X more antisemites than actually exist. In other words, they’re paranoid.
One wonders why one would want to think that people who like you actually hate you or go about worrying all the time that many people in your day to day life surreptitiously hate you. If you go to a therapist with symptoms like that, you get diagnosed with a mental disorder. It’s called paranoia. When it gets very bad, it becomes Paranoid Personality Disorder and it gets even worse in a lot of psychoses, especially Paranoid Schizophrenia, Manic Psychosis, and Delusional Disorder.
If paranoia is a mental illness, does that mean that most Jews are nuts? Maybe. I’d much rather call Jews crazy than evil. Besides, it’s a lot more accurate.
But one wonders why the need for the paranoia? It’s simple. The Jews are a tribe, a human tribe. Judaism and Jewishness is simple a manifestation of human ethnocentrism found in every tribe. All tribes are paranoid about all the other tribes and have an extremely elevated view of themselves that implies that they are either the best people on Earth, the only people on Earth, or the first people on Earth. Paranoia tends to go hand in hand with grandiosity. After all, if you are a measly nothing of a man, why would all of these powerful entities be plotting against you all the time. The only way you could have all these people out to get you is if you were pretty damned important!
People with low self-esteem are not usually paranoid. They assume people don’t like them, often correctly. At any rate “people don’t like me” is an anxiety process related to low self-self esteem, anxiety, guilt and high inhibition. The classic process is Social Phobia. Social phobics often feel that people don’t like them because they are inferior. But that’s not paranoia!
Paranoids, instead, go far beyond the notion that people don’t like them. It’s so much worse than that. Paranoids believe that the people who don’t like you are actual enemies and they are plotting against you! And it’s associated with high self-esteem, not low self-esteem, and low levels of anxiety as opposed to high levels. Instead of anxiety and depression, the paranoid feels grandiosity and anger.
Now here we tie into the Jews.
Look a the description I just wrote of how paranoids act and feel and tell me that doesn’t sound exactly like some of the negative stereotypes of Jews.
Why be paranoid?
The Jews are paranoid because paranoia is the only thing that keeps them going. In the Middle Ages, they actually built some of those ghettos themselves in order to keep their people away from the Gentiles. In 1800, a proper Orthodox Jew would not only not dine with a Gentile. He would not even take tea with one! The Yemeni Jews are like this to this very day.
For centuries in the ghetto, the rabbis preached how the Gentiles hated them and how the Jews had to keep away from the Gentiles. In Medieval Spain, if a Jewish woman had sex with a Gentile, her community would punish her by cutting off her nose!
The Jews are remarkably inbred. They have existed for 2,000 years in the Diaspora and they are still remarkably pure. A good way to keep your tribe pure is to preach that all of the outsiders are evil people who hate you. Of course you don’t want to mingle with them, much less have sex with them.
So the Jews actually owe their very existence to centuries of paranoia along with all the attendant emotions that go along with it – grandiosity towards themselves, anger and hostility (not anxiety) towards non- Jews and basically aggressive, belligerent, chip on the shoulder mindset, which clinical paranoids also have.
All paranoids are victims. Not only that, but they are innocent victims. Innocent victimhood is a necessary state for the paranoia to develop in the first place. The Jews also are perennial victims. They are supposedly victims of centuries of oppression everywhere they have gone and the future only holds the same if not worse. And of course the Jews are always innocent. They got thrown out of all those countries through no fault of their own. They dindu nuffin. Those Gentiles were just being irrational or insane and downright evil. Pure evil. Pure evil for no reason at all, the worst sort of evil of them all.
Hence it follows that Jews have a need to be victims. Hang around Jews long enough and it will become apparent that they actually desire and cherish their victimhood. In fact, in my opinion, victimhood is the most precious thing a Jew has. One thing you don’t do is take away a Jews sense of victimhood. It seems they will almost kill to keep that.
So what happens if you take away the paranoia and sense of victimhood from the Jews? Simple. The Jews go extinct. The only reason they persisted all this time was due to their hatred for non-Jews. The day the Jews stop hating non-Jews and seeing themselves as victims of all-encompassing anti-Semitism is the day the Jews start going out. Because once that happens, the Jews will have no reason not to assimilate and marry non-Jews.
And this is the Catch-22 of Jewish assimilation. And in fact some of these very arguments have been used by Jews themselves in the centuries-old debate about assimilation.
Answered on Quora.
Simple. If you had either one, you would probably not be asking this question right now.
If you had paranoid schizophrenia, you would not be asking this question because people with this illness do not recognize that they are ill, typically refuse to seek help, and also refuse to take medication. If you tell them they are ill, they will not agree.
If you had Schizotypal Personality Disorder (really mild schizophrenia) you would probably not be asking this either. These people probably do not believe there is anything wrong with themselves either, and they are typically too paranoid to go in for treatment. There is a forum for Schizotypals on the Net, and many of them are on there saying that they are too paranoid and distrustful to go to therapy.
Answered on Quora.
If by obsessive behavior you mean OCD-type behavior, there is no connection at all other than perhaps the coincidental incidence of both illnesses in some individuals.
However, the presence of BPD in an individual with OCD greatly complicates the OCD and makes much harder to treat than without the BPD.
JohnnyHG writes: There is evidence schizophrenia is developmental like Autism. I would exclude the cases of diagnosis of someone with a history of drug use or brief psychotic hallucinations from environment. The fuck up just gets delayed – it’s latent, which is why it happens in one’s teens/early 20s rather than toddlerhood. But there are signs lasting years leading up to it if I am correct, prodromal? It doesn’t happen overnight.
Experts have watched videos of children who later went on to develop the condition and could pick them out after a while. Often poorer school grades, abnormal movements, and irritable behavior could be found. Plus the negative and cognitive symptoms overlap heavily with Asperger’s/ASD or just Autism Disorder. I believe they bundled it all up because there is too much heterogeneity, hence the distinction between AS and Autism was a bit artificial.
Some things seem to be opposites: clumsiness in autism vs. stupor/stiffness in SCZ, repetitive literal speech or no speech in autism vs alogia or garbled speech in SCZ, obsessiveness with one topic in autism vs apathy in SCZ, but stereotypies are shared and so are bizarre habits. However, there is a different flavor to them, hard to describe.
Do you believe it is neurodevelopmental or stick with the old belief it’s degenerative?
Thanks for the excellent comment. I share your views. I have long believed that schizophrenia is developmental. Really they are born with it or born with the tendency. With enough stress or genetic loading, they get schizophrenia, and if they have little stress or low genetic loading, they either get schizotypal personality disorder (really just mild schizophrenia) or they may get schizophrenia with a later onset.
There really are two things they are seeing in the early symptoms.
The first are the early symptoms – clumsiness, oddness, poor grades, irritability, etc. Those are childhood symptoms.
Then there is the prodrome which hits in adolescence at some point. This causes a slow deterioration over a few years’ period leading to the classic onset from 16-24. I was best friends with a man with paranoid schizophrenia for a year. I hung out with him every day that year. It was a most interesting experience!
At the time, he was 27 years old and he was in the prodromal phase of paranoid schizophrenia. It had been going on maybe since age ~22, so five years. A long slow prodrome is common in paranoid schizophrenia. He was hearing voices the whole time, but his charming personality was quite intact. He was half-Black, very good-looking, and very charming, and he attracted White women everywhere we went together. He later got slowly worse and worse, and after a while, he was not even talking much. I haven’t heard much about him since, as my relatives are telling me to avoid him.
NOTE TO COMMENTERS 1: I am getting really sick and tired of saying this over and over, but most of the material below is made up of rumors and my own opinions and theories. None of that is represented as fact. Furthermore, I am not using rumors as reliable sources as has been alleged. I never said they were reliable sources. How reliable is a rumor? That’s for you to determine, but in general a rumor is not considered to be a reliable source, and they are not treated as such below. The only thing that is represented as fact are statements sourced from LE or the media. If you have issues with rumors, theories, opinions. etc., just quit reading right now and get off my site and don’t come back. You will not be missed!
NOTE TO COMMENTERS 2: I thought I made this one thing perfectly clear as Richard Nixon used to say: I have no sources whatsoever among the families of the girls. I have no sources whatsoever in LE, local or otherwise. There ya go. What I do have is sources close to the families. These people generally live in Delphi and the surrounding region. So that makes my rumors even more hearsay. I’m not even talking to the families. I am talking to people who talk to the families! Of course I have no LE sources. I thought I made that clear. Never have. Yes, I have talked to some of them, but of course they didn’t tell me a thing. A couple of times they told me that a certain person was a POI or that a certain person had been cleared with an airtight alibi. I suppose they don’t mind giving out that information. But other than that, they don’t tell me jack. It’s hard enough to even get them to call you back. I think if I asked them if my name was Robert Lindsay, they would say, “I am sorry, but I cannot comment on matters relating to an ongoing investigation.” That’s how bad it is. So what do I have? Once again, I have sources who are close to LE. They get their information from LE, then they talk to me. So once again this is even more hearsay, as I am not even talking to LE but to the people who are talking to LE. I really wish people would quit claiming I have LE or family sources. I just don’t. If you think I have these sources, just quit reading my stuff right now and go away. You will not be missed! NOTE TO COMMENTERS 3: The lies never end. The latest is “Lindsay takes other people’s theories and claims they are his own.” Of course I don’t. This website is nothing but a compendium of rumors from all over the Net regarding this crime. I go through the rumors and try to rank them on a scale of weak to strong. I compare them against other rumors to see which one is better. All sorts of theories have been flying around since day one. I report those too. The theories are really just more rumors. I’d say the vast majority of the rumor theories reported here were thought up by other people. I find most of my theories on other sites about this crime. That’s how it works, you know. You get theories about the crime from others. Yes, you use your own theories, and you use other people’s theories. I really do not have time to down through the list of theories and say where I got them from. I have come up with a few of my own, but even with those, I guess someone else thought of them first. Also a lot of the theories here are also the result of constant brainstorming I do with my fellow sleuths. Notice: All of the really hot discussion and sleuthing on the site has headed over to the private password-protected forum, where our team of ~200 websleuths has been working on this case and has assembled a huge case against our suspect, including videos and many photographs. Instructions on how to get on the private forum.
This is a profile of a man who we feel is the best suspect in the double murders of Abigail Williams and Liberty German in Delphi, Indiana on February 13, 2017. In also contains some new evidence on the crime and a new rundown of the crime itself.
But first of all, we have some new important information on a Vehicle of Interest in the crime.
Vehicle of Interest
We believe we have identified a Vehicle of Interest (VOI) in the Delphi Murders case. It is a late model white Dodge Dart with paper plates. This vehicle was spotted by a witness at the north end of the bridge at 3 PM on the day of the murders around the time the girls were killed. To our knowledge this is the only vehicle at the scene that was not cleared, so we believe it may be the Bridge Man’s car. We believe the car was a rental car, and the paper plates were stolen.
This same vehicle was also spotted seven miles south of Delphi in the early AM on the morning of the murders at a woman’s home. We believe that our suspect is in this photograph with the VOI. He was visiting a woman’s son, BH, at the home. The woman thought the suspect looked suspicious, so she photographed him and wrote down his license number. We have that license number, and we have several photographs of this vehicle with the suspect standing next to the trunk.
Later the woman’s son, BH, was swabbed for DNA by LE. Reports indicate that the woman who took the photo, shown photos of our main suspect and the man on the bridge, said our suspect was both the man by the car and the man on the bridge. However, her statements have been very inconsistent, and she is not the best witness out there.
One story is that this man was there to pick people up to go off in the woods near the bridge to make methamphetamine. However, I question that, and it has not been proven that our suspect is involved in manufacture of methamphetamine. Further, we are not even sure if our suspect is meth-involved at all.
However, it does appear that at some time later, the woman’s daughter M, her boyfriend KC and another man named TJF did leave (probably in a separate vehicle) to go make methamphetamine in the woods near the bridge. It does seem that there were two small teams making meth in the woods around the bridge sometime during the day or night of February 13. This is part of the “Meth Theory” according to which some of these people murdered the two girls. I am quite dubious of the Meth Theory of the Delphi Murders.
We believe that the car photographed may have been the same car used in the crime. We investigated the license plate and traced it back to the nearby city of Kokomo. We believe that the license plate was either stolen in Kokomo or provided by someone in that town. The license number is #G908510. At the time of the crime, the license plate was still valid, but it expired in April. We believe these plates have probably been discarded. This information has been shared with LE, but we have no idea if LE agrees with us that this may be the VOI in the crime. This is simply the car that the Beyond Highbrow team of ~200 websleuths believes may be the VOI.
We have reason to believe that LE may be interested in this photograph although they have not made any statements about these photos. Nevertheless, we feel that if you recognize the man in the photo or if you saw this vehicle or license number around the time of the crime, we think you should notify LE. We also would also like to talk to you. Contact information for this site is on the Contact page.
If you are innocent and you are the man in the photo, or if that is your vehicle, or that was your license plate number, we feel you should go to LE and inform them of that so you are no longer under suspicion. Nevertheless, we have serious doubts that an innocent man, vehicle or license # is in this photo.
It is correct that LE has not released any information about this photo, but perhaps they may in the future. Although these photos have been released on some Facebook fora, they have sparked little interest. We have been holding these photos for a long time and were afraid to release them for fear of interfering with the investigation. However, with the release of the composite and after thinking long and hard, we are having a hard time understanding how releasing this information harms the case. Instead, it may well prompt more tips. Also, MSM news sites may pick up on this story, which may prompt even more tips.
At least some of us sleuths here sometimes work with LE on this case. We cooperate fully with LE on all of these posts. After publication, LE was asked if they wanted us to take down any photos or information on this page due to possible harm to the investigation. We were not told to withhold any of the information or photos here, so we are going to continue publishing this material until we are told to stop. These photos were specifically turned over to LE on Friday morning, July 21.
The Actual Murders
Items Owned by the Girls
We doubt if Libby’s phone was recovered by LE. We believe all of the information on the phone was taken from the Cloud before the phone died. We believe her phone was taken by the killer. We continue to believe that he may have disposed of it in a gravel pit lake on the Mears property next door to Ron Logan’s property. We do not believe that LE has yet searched or drained this lake. They would probably need a warrant to do that, and I doubt if the Mears wish to give LE permission to search or drain that lake.
The Audiotape of the Crime
One of the victim’s family was allowed to hear only the first six minutes of the audio. It is from the following listening session that we have learned the following:
Only six minutes of the 40 minute video are known. After the killer say, “Down the hill,” there are only the sounds of people walking through the forest for several minutes. There are muffled voices of more than one person talking at this time, although it is hard to make out what anyone is saying. Towards the end of the six minutes, the Bridge Man and the girls can be heard crossing the creek, which was knee-high where they crossed, albeit icy cold.
At some around this period, you hear both girls screaming on the audio, probably before the attack took place. Why no one heard these screams is not known. We believe the actual attack started after the three had crossed the creek. It is unknown what prompted the attack. We believe that the first attack consisted of a knife attack to the back of the neck of one of the girls, and the victim went right down after this attack. It is not known what is on the rest of the audio, but it appears to consist of the sounds of the two murders taking place. Both murders were apparently caught on audio in full.
The following consists of a number of rumors about how the girls were killed. Most of these rumors have not yet been validated and should be taken with a huge grain of salt. However, the rumors in italics are apparently true to the best of our knowledge:
Probably or Fully True Rumors
Both girls were disrobed either partially or fully. One was naked, but the other had a top on. Both girls were bottomless, and the panties of both girls were found at some distance from the crime scene. Some of the girls’ clothing was found in the creek. One girl was propped up against a tree in a sitting position. One girl had the top half of her body covered with leaves. There was blood and dirt under Liberty’s nails and dirt under Abbie’s nails. Abbie’s nails were badly torn up. One girl had an F carved or burned into her chest. Police believe that Libby had 4-5 chances to escape, but did not flee because she was so dedicated to her friend that she vowed to not leave her friend in this horrible state with this monster. In real life, they were inseparable. One or possibly both girls had their throats slit. One girl’s throat was so badly cut that she was nearly decapitated.
More Uncertain But Plausible Rumors
At some point, at least one of the girls was stricken with the blunt end of a gun.
At least one of the girls had the back of her head badly bashed in with a heavy object, possibly a rock.
A stake was driven vertically into the abdomen of one of the girls by the killer who was standing over her body. This is another persistent rumor that we have made great efforts to refute but still have not been able to.
One girl had a knife wound to the heart and another to the jugular vein in her throat.
Both girls were beaten nearly beyond recognition.
This stake to the stomach is one of the reasons for the consistent rumors that one of the girls was pregnant. It is not known if either girl was in the early stages of pregnancy, however this is a persistent rumor that we have not been able to refute despite our best efforts to do so. The rumor initially stated that one girl was pregnant, but now it says that the other girl was pregnant. Another rumor is that part of the attack was set off by the killer becoming enraged when he found out one girl was pregnant. How he found this out is not known, but perhaps she told him in an effort to spare her life.
The killer used some sort of strong chemical to try to destroy any of his DNA left at the scene.
The girls were “posed” in the crime scene.
There are inconsistent rumors of whether the girls were sexually assaulted. One rumor says they were, and in fact, it goes into some detail about what happened during and after the assault. We will not go into the details of this rumor at the moment for obvious reasons. But the latest rumor, apparently from an excellent source, is that the girls were not sexually assaulted.
The Bridge Man and Our Suspect: Too Many Coincidences
We believe that the Bridge Man is wearing boots from the Indiana Packers plant in town. The suspect formerly worked at Indiana Packers for a significant period of time from the mid-90’s to mid 2000’s and may have retained work boots from that job. We believe that the Bridge Man is a fisherman. The suspect is an avid fisherman almost to the point of obsession and fanaticism. The Bridge Man is definitely left-handed. The suspect is also left-handed. Actually he is ambidextrous, but he prefers his left hand. The Bridge Man is bowlegged. The suspect is also bowlegged, probably from extensive horse riding as a youth. We have a photograph of the suspect next to a horse. The suspect grew up right around the area of the crime in the vicinity of a lot of horses. The Bridge Man is duck-footed; that is, his feet go outward when he walks. The suspect is also duck-footed. The Bridge Man has an injury to his left knee which is obvious in the moving gif’s of him walking on the bridge. The suspect also has a serious injury to his left knee, has several deep stitches on it, and sometimes wears a brace. We have a photograph of the suspect’s scarred left knee and a photograph of the suspect wearing what appears to be a knee brace on his left knee. The Bridge Man is 50-60 years old. The suspect is 52 years old. The Bridge Man is 5’8 – 5’10 and weighs 180-220 pounds. The suspect is 5’8, and when last weighed was 170 pounds, but that was a few years ago, and he seems to have gained weight after his recent release from prison. The Bridge Man appears to be in good shape for his age based on the way he easily navigates the rickety, frightening bridge. Being an avid outdoorsman, the suspect has been in great shape his whole life, but he has developed a paunch as a recent middle-aged development. The Bridge Man smokes and is smoking during the crime. He may also smoke cigarillos, as a cigarillo wrapper was found at the scene. The suspect also smokes, and he does smoke cigarillos. We have a video of the suspect smoking a cigarillo.
We believe that a white compact vehicle may have been used by the Bridge Man to commit this crime. The suspect was photographed the night before the crime in Indianapolis, and the photographs were posted to a social media page the night of the crime. We have two of these photographs. In one of these photographs, the suspect is standing next to a white compact car. We believe that this photograph was used by the suspect to foreshadow the crime he intended to commit the next day by leaving a tantalizing clue, which is something that he loves to do.
In the number and strangeness of the tantalizing clues this suspect leaves about his crimes, the suspect resembles the Zodiac Killer, the BTK Killer and others. The suspect also likes to ridicule and mock LE. If this case ever goes to trial, it may go down in history on the same level as those other crimes where the criminal left clues behind to tease and taunt LE.
We have quite a few more coincidences between the suspect and the Bridge Man, but we do not want to release that material now due to fears of harming the investigation. All of our material was officially turned over to LE on Friday, July 21.
More About the Man on the Bridge
Although the Bridge Man is said to be wearing a fanny pack in the bridge photo, he is actually wearing what is called a deer kit. This typically contains scissors, knives, etc. for cutting up the game that the hunter has killed, and the Bridge Man’s pack may have contained similar items. He may have used some of these items to cut up the girls.
We know the Bridge Man is left-handed because he has a left-handed gun holster strapped to his right side with a semiautomatic pistol in it. We believe we know more about this holster but are not releasing it for now.
We know the Bridge Man has a gun on him as it can clearly be seen in outline under his jacket. We believe we know more about this gun but are not releasing it now.
We believe that the Bridge Man’s gun is either unregistered or stolen. If stolen, we believe he may have stolen it from Ron Logan somehow. If this is true, we do not understand this aspect of the case.
We know much more about the Bridge Man but are not releasing it due to fears of harming the investigation. All of this information was officially turned over to LE on Friday, July 21.
Suspect’s Background and Life Story
The suspect resides within a 20 mile radius of Delphi.
The suspect is a former resident who grew up in Delphi right around the area of the crime and still knows all of the landowners around there, including Ron Logan, Marvin Sandifur, the Mearses, and Ivan Brumbaugh. The suspect is either Amish (shunned), German Baptist or is strongly associated with one of those communities. He knows the area around the crime scene, including Logan’s land, Deer Creek itself, and the bridge like the back of his hand.
The suspect has a low education level but probably graduated from high school.
The suspect had a very messy divorce with his ex-wife, including violent child custody issues. The suspect did a short stint in prison for badly assaulting his ex-wife.
The suspect has a long record of mostly minor crimes with some jail stints and one short prison stint. All crimes were committed in Indiana. Crimes were mostly repeated drunk driving but also assault and harassment charges. All of his ex-wives have no-contact orders against him, which implies domestic violence on his part in each case.
In terms of crimes for which he has not been caught, he has been accused of petty theft. We also have suspicions that he has been involved in arson, perhaps multiple arsons and that one or more of these arsons has resulted in homicide. We believe he may be a serial killer, and we suspect he may have been involved in another at the very least one other multiple murder in the local area. We are currently investigating his background to look for other possible crimes he may be tied to, especially arsons and homicides.
The suspect is no longer employed and is on disability, but in the past he worked at different jobs, including handyman and electrician.
Suspect – Social Aspects
The suspect has strong, warm feelings towards his two grown children and seems to have a great relationship with them.
The suspect has a new girlfriend about his age who may be a native of the region. She is a kind, sweet, gentle lady who absolutely adores the suspect and nearly worships him as a god. They appear to have a stable, warm, loving relationship. She is apparently completely clueless about his dark side.
Relations with the ex-wife are not known, although both the suspect and the ex-wife showed up for his son’s recent high school graduation. Some say that the suspect has strong hatred for his ex-wife, but this is uncertain.
The suspect has a circle of warm friends with whom he has good relations. These are very masculine, tough, hard, outdoorsy men of about the same age who think he is completely on the up and up. He’s fooling them all.
The suspect can seem quite warm and friendly, “like your best friend.” He is easy to befriend, when befriended seems charming and disarming, and seems increasingly harmless the more you get to know him.
Suspect – Psychological Profile
The subject has Axis 2 Cluster B pathology. The suspect is a psychopath and has narcissism/Narcissistic Personality Disorder/Malignant Narcissism. He has no Axis 1 Disorders. He is not psychotic. In fact, he is very sane, almost too sane, and that is part of how he gets away with his crimes. There are no signs of mood disorder. The suspect appears calm with little or no anxiety issues.
The suspect is strongly heterosexual. Although rage and hatred towards females seems apparent with the crime the suspect committed, these feelings are otherwise not obvious in his life. The suspect sometimes displays hostility to women. A lot of men do this when provoked, but he does it with little provocation, and his reactions are quite extreme, often including vague rape and death threats.
The suspect is very masculine in the manner of many middle-aged men in the area. He is a hard, tough man who uses foul language and has a rough and sometimes menacing way of speaking.
The suspect seems normal, but the following concepts also describe him well: sneaky, devious, unreadable, slick, bad boy, naughty, playful, outlaw, gleam in his eye, and rebellious. He appears to be hiding something or keeping a secret. There is a general feeling of what you see is not what you get.
The suspect is the ultimate chameleon. He is an enigma, puzzling and hard to figure out, an actor who sees life as a series of roles. He does not appear suspicious to most observers. Instead he hides in plain sight and blends right in with society. He is very capable of fooling people, an Academy award-winning actor who sees life is an endless series of roles to be played based on whatever the needs of the given situation may be.
The suspect is capable of fooling people so easily because he is a sneaky, devious, underhanded, conspiring and plotting man. Most of his actions are well plotted and planned, even calculated to the point of being choreographed. The suspect displays little spontaneity other than regular rages.
His IQ is surely within the 84-116 normal range (2/3 of the population) and probably within the 90-110 range (half the population), though he may be towards the lower end. However, the suspect is much more intelligent than he appears and possesses a sheer animal, devious, and cunning intelligence. In terms of this sort of intelligence, he has a genius IQ. He is a very hard man to fool, and he is an expert at reading others.
The suspect has a violent hair-trigger temper which can be set off at any time with little provocation. Although he has committed acts of serious violence in the past, this temper nevertheless generally takes a verbal rather than physical form and consists of menace, threats, stalking, harassment, terrorizing and intimidation.
The suspect takes little or no responsibility for his actions and blames others for everything. He attacks others and then claims to be acting in self-defense.
The suspect is a pathological liar. Truth is mixed in with lies and fabrications to the point where he believes his own lies and even gets caught in them. Reactions when caught in his pathological lying are temper tantrums, rage, ranting, and veiled threats via angry and menacing language.
In his court cases, the suspect engaged in shameless, pathological, defensive lying and blaming of others.
The suspect has the following life themes: You can’t win, They’ve got it in for me, Life is a game, I’m fooling them.
Suspect – Verbal Style
The suspect has a versatile verbal style and can seem sentimental, poetic, moving and even philosophical. He is capable of fooling people into thinking he is a person who cares deeply about life’s small and kind wonders.
Verbal defenses are denial, rage, rants, and especially redirection. Other defenses include an excellent ability at distracting people and directing attention away from what is important. For this, he utilizes red herrings, irrelevancies, redirection, minor details, fussing, wrong turns, wrong directions, wrong way streets, and misdirection.
The suspect is also a storyteller and likes to tell long, rambling, colorful, Mark Twain-style stories that tell it like it is about what seem to be ordinary people and communities but in fact are anything but. He can be entertaining in this role. He turns off some who find him a quasi-literate blowhard, but others find him endearing, as his stories could be seen as charming.
The motivation for this crime is hard to figure out, but we suspect it may be similar to many serial killers. Although there is no evidence yet that the Bridge Man has killed other people beyond this crime, he certainly may have. Hence we believe the suspect is a “serial killer type” instead of a serial killer. In that case, the motivation for the crime is that of a sexually sadistic psychopathic serial type killer.
Suspect – Appearance, Lifestyle, Habits, Beliefs and Opinions
The suspect has one large tattoo on his upper right front shoulder. We do not know what this is a tattoo of.
The suspect has some sort of gang ties with the Aryan Brotherhood (AB), possibly as a result of his incarceration. We have photographs of the suspect throwing Aryan Brotherhood gang signs. Nevertheless, we have little evidence that he is a White Supremacist, and on his social mediapages, he comes across as an anti-racist, even a coastal liberal variety. He may have only joined the AB for protection in prison.
The suspect appears to be a carefree practical joker who lives a playful, laid back, easy-going lifestyle where most things are jokes, and little is to be taken seriously. He is the life of the party.
The suspect is a regular drug user. He mostly uses marijuana, which he enjoys a lot.
The suspect was formerly a very heavy drinker, and many problems, especially legal ones, resulted from this. We believe he may now be sober.
Beliefs and Opinions
The suspect’s philosophical outlook can be summed up as a cynical one that humans are lowly animals who are corrupt at their core and are driven by low, base interests. He accuses LE and small town government people in the local area of being incorrigibly corrupt. His reaction to the picture he paints of Tobacco Road sleaze in the underbelly of Mayberry RFD small town White America is offended, cynical, fatalistic and somewhat disgusted – the good citizen outraged by omnipresent sleazy corruption.
The suspect has a very low opinion of LE in Delphi and the surrounding area, as he claims that they ran him out of town as a habitual drunk driving offender. He has a grudge against local LE.
The suspect’s political beliefs are quite liberal. He comes across as an aging hippie type, unusual for Indiana.
Suspect – Role in the Investigation
The suspect has inserted himself deeply in the investigation to an almost unprecedented degree. He is now one of the most well-known people who are “trying to find the killer.” In part this is being done to try to divert attention away from himself, but another factor seems to be narcissism, possibly even Malignant Narcissism, which means he can’t help himself. He loves the limelight and the sound of his own voice, is something of a publicity hound, likes the idea that he is hiding right under the noses of everyone and getting away with it, and thinks this is all some sort of a joke.
The suspect’s attitude towards the investigation is hard to figure. We believe he is nervous and fearful of being caught but also sees the whole thing as a hilarious game of cat and mouse. He’s fooling LE and all of society, getting away with murder, and hiding right under their noses. He also seems to be playing a game of, “Neener neener. I’m the killer, and you’ll never catch me ha ha!” In this sense he resembles the Zodiac Killer and the BTK Killer.
The suspect sought out LE (FBI) early in the investigation in order to leave a tip. We have a video of him calling in this phone tip.
We believe he did this as part of a plan to frame an innocent man. We believe he was originally going to commit this crime and then lay low, but that changed after he was photographed and recorded on audio. Over the next month we believe he then formulated an elaborate case to try to frame an innocent man, a former workmate who he had had a falling out with. This consisted of a very long and elaborate theory which did not make much sense on examination. Further, the man he attempted to frame did not seem like the type to do such a crime. The suspect also included a number of videos as part of this plan. He then went out on the Internet and tried to promulgate this theory on a number of websites and on Facebook and Youtube. He was fairly successful at this until some people started catching on to his scheme.
Question from Quora:
Some people are utterly unfixable or even improvable, but they are quite rare.
There are clients who are just too far gone, and they cannot be helped at all. It is as if the person were a ceramic bowl that was dropped on a hard floor. The bowl is now in 100 pieces, and the person who dropped it is on the ground looking at the pieces and throwing up their hands. “Where do I start?” he asks in exasperation.
All sociopaths and psychopaths are unfixable by their very nature. We can’t cure the sociopathy and psychopathy because they don’t want to get better. They enjoy being antisocial, and they do not wish to change. However, we can get them to change their behavior. For instance, a homicidal sociopath may show up in the office. A good therapist may be able to convince this sociopath that acting on their homicidal fantasies would be one of the stupidest things that they could ever do. This sociopath may then be able to go through life without killing an innocent person. So we can’t fix sociopaths, but we can change their behavior somewhat, tone it down, or reduce the amount of damage they do to society.
All paraphilias are unfixable by their very nature. The paraphilia quite literally will not and cannot go away. It’s etched in stone.
Schizophrenia is largely unfixable. They need a great deal of medication, and even then in most cases, they are repeatedly hospitalized. A few can go on to lead somewhat normal or even successful lives, but these people still need continuous medication and regular psychotherapy. In addition, they need frequent interventions to stay out of the hospital.
Many illnesses such as OCD, Bipolar Disorder and Chronic Major Depression are unfixable by psychotherapy. Most of these people will need medication for the rest of their lives. However, psychotherapy can improve their conditions a lot at least in the first and last cases.
Long-term suicidality is very hard to fix. It tends to become chronic with repeated attempts over the years. The suicidal person is typically defiant and is furious with you for challenging their suicidality. You are expected to sympathize with their condition, which is actually a very bad idea. Most suicidal people are what I would call “defiantly suicidal.”
Personality disorders are generally incurable. Theoretically, they could be fixed, but these people almost never present for therapy, and when they do, it is often at the behest of others, and they do not really wish to be there or get anything done. People with personality disorders, like sociopaths, literally do not want to get better. They like their personality disorder, and they are incredibly resistant to change. There are some case reports of cures of personality disorders, but in general the prognosis is grave.
I have never been able to fix long term low self esteem, and I have tried with a few people. There is something about that condition that hammers itself into the brain as if into concrete. I do not know why, but long-term low self-esteem seems to be one of the hardest psychological problems to fix. Why this is, I have no idea. Perhaps someone else can offer some ideas.
In many cases, long-term mental disorders simply cannot be fixed or cured. However, with psychotherapy and drugs, people can often get much better than they were before. We need to stop thinking in terms of cures and start thinking in terms of amelioration.
I realize that many clinicians insist that most people can be fixed or cured of long-term conditions, but I think they are lying. They are probably trying to drum up business. Many clinicians fear that if word got out that a lot of long-term mentally ill people cannot be fixed or cured, people would stop coming in for therapy. There goes their paycheck. Therapists are a lot more money-oriented than most people believe, and don’t let anyone tell you otherwise. I know this field very well.
Clinicians have nothing to worry about. Even if a lot of conditions could only be ameliorated and not fixed, I am sure a lot of folks would show up to try to get some improvement. Some mental disorders are so painful that any improvement feels like a miracle cure to the client. A lot of people have given up on being cured anyway, just want to at least get better and are quite happy to do so.
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.
A new trick among surgeons is to take one operation and chopping it up into four smaller operations and double their money. There are actually popular seminars for surgeons showing them exactly how to do this. What a sleazy ripoff!
However, many other physicians frown on this scummy behavior. A physician who does this can lose their hospital privileges and get sued. When I worked as a paralegal, most of my time there was spent working on the defense of a sociopathic lowlife physician who did exactly that, and that was exactly what was happening to him. Local hospitals had revoked his privilege, and a number of his former patients were justifiably suing his crooked ass. And I was getting paid to legally defend this guy. It was morally trying to make a living defending slugs like this, but the money was good, and I sloughed off the guilt. Doubt if I would do it again though. Some jobs actually cause moral injury, in my opinion.
This arrogant dirtbag was suing the hospitals who had revoked his privileges! And we were helping him do that, and getting paid from his unlimited money supply in the process. The arrogance. I see narcissism, and it looks like some sociopathy too.
It’s not well known, but many physicians are controlled psychopaths. The field of surgery is full of them. And you wondered why so many surgeons have the reputation of being the worst arrogant physicians of them all. These professionals have learned to channel their sociopathy into quasi-legal avenues in order to become “legal criminals.” But these folks do a lot of damage. Look at our politicians corporate executives? Just how many are not controlled psychopaths?
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.
Zed: Most of psychology is whack bullshit considering the Jewish involvement. As many Jews are in medical field, they coin new terms to swindle money. While I am not calling entire psychology bullshit, it’s being stretched to include even normal behaviors. Lots of people are scared that normal behaviour like anger, happiness, crying would be branded as some kind of disorders. I looked up on it. There are many people I could identify as having passive aggression with its definition. It hardly matters, as they appear normal, and to brand them as some kind of mentally ill is a Jewish ploy. What have Jews called their pet groids who’re almost symbolic with destruction? Nothing!! That’s Jew psychopathy for you.
I guess I will have to disagree with you there.
If your personality seems normal to most everyone else, and if it is not ruining your life, we would say it’s not pathological. Only 14% of Americans have a personality disorder. That’s only one in seven. I work in the field though, and I have been studying psychology most via auto-didact for most of my life, and now I actually work as a psychological counselor. The more I work in this field, the more I think that in general, the field is onto something.
There is a lot of misdiagnosis around. I’ve been diagnosed psychotic a number of times by clinicians. That’s all wrong. I’ve never been psychotic a day in my life except when Trash drove me insane.
I received a diagnosis of Depression just the other day, and I think it’s wrong.
This same guy also insisted that I was either psychotic or used to be solely on the basis that I use marijuana. Last time I used it was 3 1/2 years ago, but no matter. Everyone who smokes pot is delusional according to this guy.
I was also recently diagnosed with “narcissism” but he said I did not meet criteria for Narcissistic Personality Disorder, thank God. I despise narcissists, so I contacted my favorite old therapist who I have not seen in 10+ years. He told me that I was not a narcissist. He said that instead I had something called “high self-esteem.” He said high self-esteem is often confused with narcissism, but it’s not the same thing.
In my own practice, I try very hard to avoid Diagnosis Creep. I think we should diagnose people with the absolute minimal number of disorders. A lot of times, someone will meet partial criteria for a couple of disorders, but we can’t give them full diagnosis. I have met partial criteria for GAD and Panic Disorder before, but I doubt if I meet any of those criteria now. If you want to check partial criteria, you will get a lot more people, but those are not full disorders. Diagnosing someone with a mental disorder is pretty serious business. I think we should do so as sparingly as possible.
For instance, of course passive aggression is everywhere. I have been accused of it myself. But in my entire life, I have only met one person who I felt actually met criteria for Passive Aggressive Personality Disorder. His personality is seriously screwed up by this problem, and it makes him a very annoying person to be around. He’s simply not normal. Not only is he passive aggressive, but his PA is so extreme that in my opinion it demands to be called some sort of mental disorder. I would very much object to the idea that this man’s behavior is normal or healthy at all. God forbid that it might become more common.
I would agree with you though that overdiagnosis is a very serious problem in the biz. Sometimes I wonder how much of it is money-driven. There is a tendency of clinicians to look at people, especially clients, as being much more ill than they really are. Their limits on normal behavior are quite ridiculous in my opinion. When you walk in that room, you’re the Sick One, and they are the Healthy One or the Sane One.
As a peer counselor, I try to get away from all that. The first thing I assure my clients is that I’m nuts too! I usually point out that I’m not nearly as nuts as they are (I don’t put it that way usually), but I was at some point, and if I got this much better, they can too! When they go down the list of their symptoms, I often tell them that I have experienced such symptoms myself, but that was a long time ago, or that I used to feel that way a lot, but I worked my way out of it, as I found that that was not a healthy way to walk through life. My basic attitude is, “I’ve been there too.”
In fact I am so sick and tired of playing the Sick Role while the clinician plays the Sane Role or Healthy Role that I have not been in therapy for a few years now. I’m graduated anyway. They told me I’m well enough that they don’t need to see me anymore anyway. I was on the state’s dime, so my care can be rationed which is fine with me.
Optimus Prime: Fair enough, he’s said what he wanted to say and has repeated it a gazillion times. As you said, the man cannot control himself. Robert, apart from NPD does he suffer from OCD as well?
Sure, I actually wish Trash well honestly. He’s just not a good fit for the site.
OCD does not = constant repetition. The thoughts repeat in the brain (definitely in my case), and some of the compulsions can be repetitive, but that is because they are trying to get it right or perfect or make perfectly sure they did it right.
That’s not what is going on here. This is different. We are looking at NPD as the primary process here.
It’s like he’s not sure you heard him the first time, so he’s saying it again or shouting it to make sure you heard. Also I think he is in love with the sound of his own voice.
I will admit that Trash is a talented and even entertaining writer. He makes this cool statement or analogy and then he repeats it in the next post because he thinks it’s such a neat little bit of prose. It often is a nice sentence or phrase, but you are not supposed to repeat it no matter how damn good the image is. You say it once and move on. He’s saying it again because he thinks it is a nice image, and he is impressed with himself, so he says it again to make sure you heard him the first time, like what people do when they say something and get no response. They often repeat it because they are not sure you heard them the first time.
I do not wish to single this man out as being “Mr. Crazy.” Face it, we’re all nuts.
And as we are dealing with a personality disorder here, I would like to point out that in my opinion, we all have disordered personalities of varying degrees. I think we all have adaptive personalities to varying degrees too.
All of us have healthy and sick aspects of our personalities. It’s more or less normal to be nuts. Life takes its toll. Life wounds all heels and all of the rest of us too. I am not sure if there are any truly healthy people. If you went through 25,000 people, you might find one healthy person. I had a therapist once who told me that he had dealt with 20,000 in his career, and he hadn’t met one healthy person yet. He was of the opinion that there was no such thing. The general idea then would be to try to be least nuts and the most healthy that you can be and banish ideas such crazy, sane, unhealthy and healthy.
Sure we all have disordered personalities, but some people have personalities that are so disordered that we say they have a problem. We do not like to dole out diagnoses like candy, and there has been a strong movement nowadays to avoid pathologizing normal behavior. It’s a huge backlash against the DSMization of mental illness or the medical model as they put it. But I am a fan of the medical model. In my work, I have found that it is pretty much valid.
We call something a disorder if it making you miserable or seriously impairs your ability to function. It also may well be getting in the way with other people as others may be reacting badly to your disorder.
In the case personality disorders, these folks generally think they are fine and that there is nothing wrong with them. The problem is with everyone else.
So who says they’re nuts? Well the problem is that in the PD’s we are dealing with a personality that is so far along the disordered spectrum that even other people start thinking that there is something seriously off about this person’s personality. It has to be pretty bad as humans are tolerant folks, and most of us are aware that we’re at least a bit nuts themselves. People with PD’s are abrasive, annoying and exasperating and often cause a lot of impersonal chaos and drama. In other cases, the PD makes it very hard for the person to function socially. The person seems so strange and weird that others simply do not wish to deal with them. We think this is a problem because the PD is seriously getting into the way as far as functioning.
There continue to be arguments about the validity of some disorders.
SDPD or MPD is an interesting concept. It’s more than being a battered woman.
Ever heard of the guy at work who meekly says, “Hey, it’s Friday night at 5 PM. You all go home. It’s a weekend night, and you need to get home early to have fun for the weekend. Don’t worry that your work’s not finished. I will stay here tonight and finish up your work for you.”
His behavior is masochistic in a nonsexual sense. He’s going to suffer like Jesus for the sins of the rest of you (not finishing your work). Don’t worry. You will be saved when Work Jesus finishes your work at 11 PM and trudges out of the office bleary eyed and alone. He doesn’t deserve to party. He’s on this Earth to suffer. He’s Work Jesus.
“You all go off and have fun now. I’ll just stay here and suffer alone. Don’t let me make you feel guilty or anything like that.”
Ever known anyone like that?
This post deals with a concept called Passive Aggressive Personality Disorder that has risen, died and been resurrected a few times by the psychiatric community.
I read a recent article on Passive Aggressive PD that cheered on the fact that it was in the trash can now. The implication was that we are all passive aggressive sticks in the mud in one way or another.
Perhaps that is true, but I have met some people who are so passive-aggressive that they are frustrating, annoying, abrasive, exasperating and most of all infuriating.
You give the person a car to work on, and he says it will be done in a week. It’s not done in a week, and he had all the time in the world. He is just being a stick in the mud as usual. You keep calling him. Three weeks later, you start to get angry. He completely blows up at you, as it’s you that are the problem, not him. The fact that it has been three weeks and he hasn’t even looked at the car yet is your problem, not his! He is outraged that you are such a terrible person that you bothered him about this. He is also self-righteous, as he thinks waiting three weeks for no damn reason was completely reasonable!
You finally get the car back maybe six weeks later, and he “forgot” to fix a couple of things that he promised to fix. Whoops! He didn’t forget. He intentionally refused to fix them to get back at you for being reasonable and asking him to keep his end of the deal! We can’t have that! To this person, your concept of fairness is an outrage!
Now you look at the rest of the person’s life, and you see that passivity is the normal way of reacting with the world since a very early age. You go down the passive-aggressive checklist, and you check off at least five numbers.
This person is ill not because they are passive-aggressive. We all are, and if you ask some of my female ex’es and even current best friends, I am notorious, though I cannot see it. But the person above has become so passive aggressive that it is messing up their lives. In addition, it is starting to blow up a lot of their relationships, and as the anecdote above suggests, it’s probably getting in the way or making money. His passive aggression is turning him into a major asshole.
I would argue that this person is ill and that their personality is so disordered that we ought to diagnose it and call it Passive Aggressive Personality Disorder. I think we ought to bring back PAPD as a concept despite this dumb dimensional model that DSM-5 is forcing us to use.
Every met anyone like this?
Most of the other trashed PD’s are the same. I am certain that Depressive Personality Disorder exists. Someone very close to me is a textbook case. It’s quite rare, but it’s real. Sadistic Personality exists and so does Self-Defeating of Masochistic Personality Disorder. These two were thrown out by idiot feminist clinicians who thought that woman batterers would be labeled as ill with SPD and they would use it to try to get out of punishment.
They also thought that battered women would be prejudiciously labeled as SDPD or MPD, and this would be a blame the victim thing. Well, sometimes you need to blame the victim in sense. It takes two to tango. And many battered women would indeed qualify as SDPD.
I think you all know what Sadistic Personality Disorder looks like as most of you have probably had the misfortune of meeting one.
False memories are quite common when OCD gets bad. I have dealt with a number of people who were going round and round about false memories. They are not an extremely common symptom, but you do see them sometimes when the illness is bad. It’s generally a sign of a bad illness.
Ms. Z was periodically convinced that she killed people. She would have a conversation with someone for 5-10 minutes, then walk away ,and then suddenly think that she had killed them somehow during the conversation. Perhaps she had suddenly swung her fist out and beat them to death? Perhaps she had pulled out a knife and hacked them to death? Perhaps she had shot them with a gun? She would have all sorts of false memories of how she killed these people.
In the course of these false memories, she would become 100% certain that she had killed that person she was talking to in that store that day. In the next few days, she would ask around to people she knew if anyone got murdered or if she killed someone in the store that day. Of course she would always be told no. I’m sure her friends must have tired of answering these weird questions. As soon as she was told that no murder had occurred, immediately the firmly held belief that she had killed that person would vanish, and she would never think about it again. Until a little while later when she would be talking to someone again and then walk away and once again become convinced that she had killed that person…
Another woman, Ms. S., was a young college student. She was at a large California university that had a lot of long, winding trails with undergrowth. There were deep gullies on the sides of the paths that were overgrown with foliage. Ms. S. would be walking down the paths and as she walked, she passed all sorts of people coming her way. At some point, she would suddenly get an idea that she had grabbed one of the people coming her way and thrown them down into one of the gullies.
She had a pretty clear memory of who the person was she threw down there and exactly how she had done it. She would be overwhelmed with guilt, and she would take off down into the gully searching for the “body” of the person she had thrown down into the gulch. She did this on a pretty regular basis, and eventually the university wondered what she was doing floundering around in the gullies, and they sent the university police down there to see what she was up to. After a while, it become clear that she needed to go to the university counseling center.
In both cases, the women received a diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder in addition to OCD. This was an incorrect diagnosis, and it was based on the fact that for a short while after Ms. S was clamboring around in the gullies or after Ms. Z became convinced that she had somehow killed someone she was talking to, that both women were absolutely convinced that they had either thrown someone down into the gully or had killed the person they were talking to in the store.
The diagnosis was incorrect because as soon as the women were told that there was no one in the gully or that they had not killed the person in the store, the “delusion” completely vanished and they didn’t think of it again until next time. Delusions just don’t go away like that. It’s not a very strongly held conviction if can vanish with a mere word of reassurance.
We look at the whole process in a holistic sense. What is the nature of the process? Is this a characterological process (personality disorder), a mood process (mood disorder like Bipolar Disorder or Depression), an anxiety process (OCD, PTSD, GAD, Panic Disorder) or a psychotic process (schizophrenia, manic psychosis, psychotic depression, schizoaffective disorder)? It is important to look at things in an intuitive sense and get the “smell” or “feel” of what the basic process is that you are dealing with.
In the case above, this is an anxiety process, specifically an OCD process. It’s not a psychotic process, despite the fact that it superficially resembles a psychosis.
Some of these folks with false memories actually go to the police station and turn themselves in for crimes that they did not commit.
“Hi, I am here to report a murder.”
“Ok, what happened?”
“Well I think I killed someone last night.”
“You think you killed someone?”
“Well, where did this happen?”
“I am not sure. I think maybe the bridge over the river.”
“What time did this happen?”
“I’m not sure. Maybe midnight?”
“Who was the victim?”
“I’m not sure. I think it was a man, maybe.”
“What weapon was used?”
“I am not completely sure. I think it was a knife maybe.”
After a while the police started to get the message. He was not there to report a murder at all. He was there to find out whether or not he was a murderer!
As the conversation degenerated, the man started repeating, “How do you know if you killed someone or not?”
The police did not know what to say to that. After he left, the police were talking among themselves. “That’s so weird,” one of them said. “What does he mean, ‘How do I know if I killed someone or not?’ How could you not know something like that? That’s so weird.” The cops were shaking their heads.
As you can see, false memories are quite common in OCD when it gets very bad.
I dealt with them myself at one point in 1985 or 1986. I have to admit it was a pretty nutty way of thinking. I was so ashamed of my false memories (which I temporarily convinced myself were true) that I never told anyone except for a couple of therapists. I have not dealt with any false memory nonsense in over 30 years, and I hope I never have to deal with that again. It’s truly a crazy way to think.
The primary problem with almost all serial killers is simply ASPD, Antisocial PersonalityDisorder, 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.