Victims of abuse tend to come from abusive homes. They are groomed from an early age to accept abuse, to think that abuse is love, to think that it's all their fault and they just need to do better, to believe that their god will punish them for daring to think that they don't deserve it. By the time these people get into an abusive relationship, they've already been hurt and gaslighted into believing that they can't trust themselves or their instincts. It's just not as simple as 'trust your instincts.' They don't know how. Many people get out of abusive situations only to get into another one. They have a string of abusive relationships.
Abusers also tend to come from abusive homes. They see the power grab. They learn how to manipulate, how to control. They believe that their ability to control defines them. Control or be controlled. Abuse or be abused. They perpetually see themselves as the victim. When the abused finally gathers the courage to leave, the abuser's world shatters. That's the point they need to destroy the person that destroyed them.
From a brain chemistry perspective. Very relevant to this article. Is that when people get abused they send the same "signal" to the part of the brain responsible for getting them out of the situation. If they are powerless to stop whatever it is, the brain goes to a deeper level of trauma and also linked, if it happens repeatedly then it just becomes "noise" and the brain knocks off those warning signs within itself. Because there is no reason for the warning signal if it is not producing a result.
So when the target enters the next relationships they don't have the warning signs going off in their brain. So when the perpetrator crosses a boundary, they don't get the pushback they would with a healthy person.
Indeed, it’s basically developing a default “freeze” reaction when one spends a prolonged time in a situation when “fight” backfires and “flight” doesn’t seem like a realistic option. It may be “protecting” the person at the time in extreme situations, but once the situation changes, it becomes maladaptive.
This is all my best understanding at this point, with this complexity of information. I have not closely researched and confirmed this.
Yeah, there is a lot to learn from this I believe. I stopped reading that book though. Partly because I have about five books now referencing brain chemistry and I wanted to really understand that before I read any further. I now have a book on the brain. Which is a slow read. I make notes on every single page.
The way I understand it to work is that the first layer of "alarm" in our brain is when we communicate via our facial expressions. There is a lot to be said here about the way psychopaths/ autists/ physiological illness and various others might be out of sync with others at this level. If those expressions of distress are not noticed and acted upon by others it is escalated.
(Previously I had physiological problems and I looked unwell and people did not know what to do. So this causes alarm in others with no way to solve it. It might be why, for most people, observing another being bullied is as bad for the brain as being bullied themselves.)
The second is actual alarm. Like fight or flight. Where we subtly or overtly scream for help, or hit back and run away.
The third is when that doesn't work and for some reason our brain temporarily severs our contact with our higher brain functions thus... PTSD. So if someone is restrained while being raped / in a car crash/ at war etc. In an MRI this is amazing, people reliving intense PTSD of the more catatonic variety, the entire brain just shuts down.
If you are stuck somewhere between one and three for a long time, without solving the issue. The part of your brain that broadcasts the call to action, and the part that is actually meant to do the actions. Severs. Thus C- PTSD.
I never got to the part of the book where it talks about how you actually solve these problems once the brain is damaged like that. The title of the book suggests some sort of physical therapy. But I imagine with meditation regrowing synapses and proper nutition. Obviously a safe environment these alarm systems can be re- initialised.
The brain is a truly fascinating piece of biological machinery and we're nowhere near completely reverse engineering it. Regarding your last paragraph, I recommend looking into EMDR (Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing) if you haven't
If you are stuck somewhere between one and three for a long time, without solving the issue. The part of your brain that broadcasts the call to action, and the part that is actually meant to do the actions. Severs. Thus C- PTSD.
I never got to the part of the book where it talks about how you actually solve these problems once the brain is damaged like that. The title of the book suggests some sort of physical therapy. But I imagine with meditation regrowing synapses and proper nutition. Obviously a safe environment these alarm systems can be re- initialised.
A small but informative psychological point: the terms "instincts" and "intuition" are often used to describe different types of non-deliberative decision-making processes.
1. Origin:
- Instincts: These are innate, biologically hard-wired responses that have evolved over time because they offer some survival or reproductive advantage. For example, the fight-or-flight response to a perceived threat is an instinctual reaction.
- Intuition: Intuition is often thought of as a "gut feeling" or immediate understanding without conscious reasoning. While it might be influenced by evolutionary factors, it's also shaped by personal experiences, knowledge, and cultural background.
2. Development:
- Instincts: They are typically present from birth. For instance, babies have a sucking reflex, which is an instinct that helps them feed.
- Intuition: It develops over time based on experiences, learning, and socialization. For example, a seasoned chess player might intuitively know the best move without consciously analyzing every possibility.
3. Function:
- Instincts: They serve a clear biological purpose, often related to survival, reproduction, or both. For example, the instinct to pull one's hand away from a hot surface helps prevent burns.
- Intuition: It can help in decision-making when there's limited time for analysis or when the situation is ambiguous. It's not always correct, but it's based on rapid, subconscious processing of available information.
4. Flexibility:
- Instincts: They are relatively fixed and consistent across individuals of the same species. While they can be modulated by learning and experience to some extent, their basic patterns are largely predetermined.
- Intuition: It's more flexible and can vary widely between individuals based on their unique experiences, knowledge, and cognitive processes.
5. Conscious Awareness:
- Instincts: These reactions often occur without conscious thought. They're automatic responses to specific stimuli.
- Intuition: While it doesn't involve deliberate reasoning, people are usually aware of their intuitive feelings or judgments. They might say, "I have a hunch" or "Something doesn't feel right."
In summary, while both instincts and intuition bypass detailed analytical processing, instincts are innate, biologically-driven responses, whereas intuition is a more flexible, experience-based form of rapid judgment.
"In summary" is quite common in formal writing. The post in question looks like the author is used to that writing style.
Even if you rarely see "in summary", this doesn't mean it's rare. Even if it were, that still wouldn't mean it's a chatbot. Chatbots use the most common expressions.
Do you know of any publicly available resources that can be used to help people distinguish between real and faked emotions? I have several autistic family members who could benefit from more explicit instruction on what sorts of things to look for (since "go with your gut feeling" isn't advice that really works for them).
I know that there are YouTube channels that address autism and emotions, but exactly what topics they cover I'm not sure. I believe I recall someone mentioning that some are about recognizing some emotions.
This doesn't precisely address your question, but while books on body language tend to be garbage, Joe Navarro is one author who is a little bit more down to earth. He's a former FBI interrogator who discusses analysis of body language. I haven't come across anything on the topic of body language that I'd call great, but his book "What Every Body Is Saying" was at least worth my time.
Also, as regards helpful search terms, you could look for writing on duchenne smiles, or real vs fake smiles and likely find some useful info there.
Bombards body language was my favourite. Good humoured although the stuff she puts out publicly is politically charge. If you get the membership, you get instruction videos. I have used these to my advantage noticing peoples eye movements and such.
She talks a lot about how body language is a very fluid thing. Like, when people are not lying (and are basically NT so have a normal baseline) their body "flows" with them and such.
The Behavior Panel on Youtube. It's a group of four experts on body language, interrogation, and applied psychology. Between the four of them, they have extensive experience in work with the military, law enforcement, as well as the corporate world and politicians. They specialize in deception and counter-deception.
They do deep dives on interviews and video footage of various problematic individuals. I think their visual-heavy format is much better for that topic than books.
They do. Scott is the most egregious offender. However, he has worked with law enforcement and his views are shaped by this. Greg, on the other hand, is up there in psychopathic traits.
On a side note, it is a rarity to encounter a more modern attitude towards psychopathy even in psychologists, and the Behavior Panel do want to engage a wide audience. People have too much bias towards that word. I have recommended the book The Wisdom of Psychopaths to a number of people who seem interested in psychology and open-minded and the only predictable outcome is that they start to avoid me and act awkward.
I occasionally recommend the book and the other person doesn't run away, which means we are going to get along very well. I've started to appreciate that filter. If an acquaintance is being annoyingly friendly and I want them to leave me alone, I just recommend The Wisdom of Psychopaths to them. Works wonders.
I understand what you mean, but I think actual coaching is more productive because it is the context and appropriatness of the response which is key, rather than trying to fake an emotion that isn't actually felt which could be highly counter productive. Faking emotions just adds to the burden and frustration of masking. I find most neurotypical people are quite understanding if you preface with something like "i'm not good with emotions and feelings, but here is what a context appropriate response would look like according to me".
I went to college/conservatory in the Midwest. At this school, there is laboratory for vocal studies. A person can sign up and use various recording software and hookups or rigs for recording physiological responses and audio. Turned out some of us were very good at detecting issues or phonation pathology. So, I spent a lot of time listening to vocalists and reviewing tests results. Yup. I could tell this person has very weak intercostal muscle support when transitioning from low to middle-low registers, particularly when executing closed vowels, etc. How could some of us hear this? Hypervigilance is part of it. Vocal technicians get pretty damn good at the subtleties and intricacies of voices. When you have a baseline of how folks sing or speak, you are sensitive to that instrument and any wear or tear, breathing or support concerns, or anything.
This is what I think is happening in these situations. When we know we are being hoodwinked or lies to. It isn't about magic or spiritual anything. A mother knows when her child is lying to her like a good voice technician knows that Czech soprano must have smoked or worked in fumey conditions for a good period of time, etc.
One more thing. I sang in a masterclass once and was told to put my coat in and sing again. We were all like wtf?! I did as the great, wise and observant soprano told me to do. Lol. I sand the first three lines of the aria and people started clapping. I felt it too. The visiting maestra said, "See! Men can be vain and insecure, yes? He was not really breathing without the coat. That's his business, but learn from this. We feel how the singer is using his body to make sound. We feel it in our bodies like sound mirrors. We know things are balanced and going to be ok or we get very nervous for the performer. It's because we feel how they make that sound."
From my limited experience in this topic here are some thoughts:
Emotions normally bring a biologic reaction in your body. For example, fear is likely to raise your body temperature, tense your muscles, make you be in a state of hyper alert... this all occurs involuntarily, without you even noticing that it's happening. Fury, love, hatred... when strong enough will induce involuntary body responses that will affect your pupils, voice vibration, muscle relaxation, facial micro expressions, that are picked up by people. This would work as a first barrier. The second one is context, do the reactions make sense? Is this likely? If we just had a fight and you're happily inviting me to smth shady... no, it doesn't make sense. There was a problem and now you act like nothing when I know it bothered you... and the first barrier is what you know of that person, or don't know. How likely that this person is really honest from what you know or don't know?
It all works cohesively to give you a gut feeling. You can fake emotions as good as you will, context and the nature of your persona can expose hidden intentions. Ultimately when we recognize authentic emotions, they also have an impact on us...
When you feel love signs, hate, rage... they all have an impact on you of making you feel relaxed, vigilant... etc. So your brain when picking up those signs will behave as such.
Our cels are capable of sensing all type of signals. When you have a cut, your cels sense it and act by themselves to heal the wound. You don't need to order them, you cannot suppress them either. They are natural, involuntary biological responses.
When you feel emotions, I guess it could be hypothesized that it changes your body signaling leading to cels behaving an specific way that gives away your real state even if you were to cognitively fake it.
Oh! An opportunity to share a story that is sorta related! With my motivations laid bare here's the story.
A few months ago I just finished college, got a job in a new city, and I needed to find a place to live. I found a place online that was in a rural area on a small farm. The person who was renting out a room there was an older man who I assumed to be in his 60's. He seemed nice and the property was nice so I told him I was interesting in living there. He told me that he only rented to women because he was use to living with women. He told me about how he had trouble with renters in the past, using a girl who treated the place like a party house as an example. By the end of the tour he said he wanted to talk to my Mom, because he does that with all young women who are interested in living there. I agreed even though I was suspicious because I was an adult, and someone asking for my parent felt patronizing. My Mom was suspicious as well when I asked her. Mom talked to him on the phone and she didn't see a problem with him.
Turns out he figured out I was autistic right away and later I unfortunately learned that he thought I was more dependent and vulnerable than I actually was. He saw me as a "girl who needed help". For context he lived in that house as well and the only thing I needed was a place to live.
When moving day came, my mom and brother where there with me. It was my Mom who first started noticing the red flags. He complained about how the young women in the past expected him to take care of them, then he offered to drive me to the store to get groceries; I had my own car. He told them about a mother and daughter pair that came before, met him once, then left and never returned. He talked about how his wife left him for another man a few years ago and that their teenage daughter lived with her. The final straw was the fact that, he didn't have any sort of contract or lease and wanted to get away with not giving me a receipt. My mom made him write up a receipt. My mom ended up taking a photo of him and called him out on his sketchy behaviour. When my mom and brother left I started settling in.
The time I spent living there I was afraid. He would often badger me about forgetting to clean up a mess. Which admittedly was on me, but the other stuff was not. He ended up hating my mother and made up lies about her. Comparing her to a cult leader and saying that she told him that she thought he would rape me in my sleep. I talked to Mom about it and she was confused because she didn't remember making those claims. The thing that made my instincts go off was whenever he tried to get me to socialize with him. He made an accurate observation that I was afraid of him, and yet he still tried to force me to be social with him. Every fibre of my being was telling me "don't become friends with him, he wants to try something". He would go into my room without my permission. Accused me of smoking in my room, which I wasn't doing. He in general acted as if I was horrible to him, when really a lot of the stuff he complained about was either minor or assumed motives that I didn't have. He wanted to help often and essentially treated me like I was a teenager living there for free, instead of a rent paying adult just wanting to live her life.
To not get kicked out, I played the role of nice polite girl while also making a plan with my family to get me out of there. Since he hated my mother it was my father who came on moving day so that he wouldn't try anything. The move went smoothly.
This man misread me, so when he made accusations that me and my mom were trying to deceive him from the very beginning about my intention on living there, my internal response was, 'yeah okay. You keep believing that' instead of defending myself. I know what abuse looks like, and I had a support network. His attempts to manipulate me just made me go "wow... this guy's an idiot." I will admit, I don't usually trust my instincts, but I am getting better. The thing is my instincts went off as soon as I saw his ad, but I choose to ignore it since I thought I was just being prejudice against old people. What was his motivation behind all of this? I don't know. I hope the next woman he lures into his house doesn't have to find out either.
Yeah, he was obnoxious. Looks like I've joined the long list of female tenants that he'll demonize to future female tenants. There's definitely something wrong when you rent out a room with the express intention of forming a relationship.
No, if the mask can be seen through by anyone, the mask is a failure. A psychopath is no more skilled at spotting a psychopath than anyone else, which is to say, it isn't possible.
I can tell you why NTs cannot pickup fake emotions due to tenor. Since your feelings are mostly muted, it leaves a lot of your mental faculties free to notice these things.NTs are constantly thinking or feeling about something. Our brains are simply not free enough to notice these subtleties. That is not to say it is impossible. I think that is what meditation does to our brains. It teaches us to quiet our minds so that we are left with more mental bandwidth to observe things clearly. The only difference is that you naturally have a quiet mind. Don't you think this is why you get so bored constantly? Because you are not dwelling on anything. You simply don't pay mind to an event after it has passed.
That was a great article Athena, maybe one of your best. Thank you for putting this out there, these things are important to talk about.
You are very spot on about people being attuned to the emotions and micro-expressions of others they spend a lot of time around, hence being able to tell when something is off through subconscious pattern recognition. Same reason why polygraph examiners start with asking boring irrelevant questions to which they know the answers, in order to establish a baseline (arguably a way of “fast-tracking” this type of thing). In a way it’s pretty similar to how machine learning / AI algorithms work, which Cassie Kozyrkov from Google cleverly coined as “automating the ineffable”.
I also found it quite interesting what you mentioned about being able to detect bullshit better than NTs. It would make sense, assuming you only account for the raw information you receive, without being biased by how you feel about it or how you’re “expected” to react.
Unfortunately, women seems to be particularly prone to overcorrecting for their gut feeling due to not wanting to be perceived as “dramatic”, which, according to society, can be literally anything that isn’t agreeable, compliant or “nice”. But people in general are prone to assume by default that others are saying the truth, regardless of whether they know them or not. Malcolm Gladwell’s “Talking to Strangers: What We Should Know about the People We Don't Know” is a pretty good book about that phenomenon, with some historical case studies of its potential devastating consequences, as well as evolutionary reasons for why it might be the case.
I think that women should care far less about appearances when it comes to their safety. Who cares what someone else, or even a crowd of people might think. If the end result is she goes home unscathed, then that is the preferred outcome.
Off topic, have you taken the Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test and, if you have, how do you score on it? There was a study which found Factor 1 psychopathic traits to be positively associated with discriminating neural mental states but not positive or negative ones, while Factor 2 to be negatively associated with both, which I found to be a pretty interesting result.
Sandvik AM, Hansen AL, Johnsen BH, Laberg JC. Psychopathy and the ability to read the "language of the eyes": divergence in the psychopathy construct. Scand J Psychol. 2014 Dec;55(6):585-92. doi: 10.1111/sjop.12138. Epub 2014 Jun 20. PMID: 24954681; PMCID: PMC4282377.
Indeed, I agree, which is why I hope the point you’re making reaches more people. For many it would take undoing years of conditioning that has started very early in their lives but the first step is becoming aware of it. Hell, it’s not even just wishful thinking about one’s exes, some have ended up dead due to going on hikes for a first date.. I almost wish they sold psychopathy pills as a cure to female socialization (saying as a woman that had to instead do it the hard way through self-reflection and therapy) :D
I just checked that Malcolm Gladwell book on my bookshelf and I still have it. Might give it a re read.
The point on women being easily intimidated and manipulated. I do not know whether the knowledge of what they should or shouldn't do changes much. There is a multi billion dollar corporate- government machine to make sure they do in fact stay like that. Every part of our society seems designed to drag us down.
For instance, I have noticed women that are very anxious and insecure often talk about their fathers a lot and didn't have a good relationship with him. Single mother households have grown from something like 5% in the 1950's to 35% now, and if a girl isn't made safe by her "daddy", plus absorbs all the stress of a single mother it is unlikely she will live a life where she can assert herself.
After feminism the corporate world is filled with female workers that are fundamentally docile. If you screw over a bunch of guys for a long time they unionise and pushback. If you screw over a bunch of women for a long time they grumble and vent but they essentially go along with it, and they don't ever unionise or pushback.
In this environment, women don't stand up for themselves because they fear if they did, then they would be bullied by other women and their employers; and they are right.
In a way I have to admire the majesty with which the controllers have pulled this off.
> The point on women being easily intimidated and manipulated. I do not know whether the knowledge of what they should or shouldn't do changes much.
You might have a point here, though I doubt it would make it worse the very least.
> In a way I have to admire the majesty with which the controllers have pulled this off.
While I agree that there's a systematic problem, I doubt that it's a deliberate plot, rather a side effect of biology x game theory. However, I don't make the common inferential leap of "natural" -> "morally good and a normative imperative". I'm actually drawing from the second wave feminist writer Shulamith Firestone, who argued that women's oppression is a consequence of the cycle of pregnancy, childbirth and child-rearing, which puts women in a vulnerable and dependent position - something easy for men to take advantage of. She was way ahead of her time, talking about things like arificiall wombs as potential solutions as early as the 60s, technically making her also an early transhumanist. As you implied, modern feminism often ends up creating the opposite result to its original intention, but some of the earlier feminist writers are pretty interesting.
Yeah, I thought second wave feminism had interesting points. It often strikes me wrong that womens natural inclinations towards caring tend to lend them to the lowest paid occupations. Care work is a LOT of emotional labour for minimum pay.
Third wave feminism and second wave feminism are in conflict though in my view, since third wave feminism doesn't work in line with womens natural instincts but tries to subvert them to make them into men. It does not have to be by design that pretty much everything third wave feminism says is in line with the corporate agenda. They say something and then corporates decide that it works and then everyone's like... "Let's go with that".
Once politics is involved though the conversation starts to get too many moving parts to really accurately talk about often.
The way society is in my view is that this all just has to play out until it's conclusion. There is no pulling back the societal patterns that are in play now.
I think the reason why many of us as suspectible to manipulation is indeed that we don't pay close enough attention to our own inner tune (our emotions), and we sometimes - for the sake of keeping the figurative band playing - collaborately make up for gaps in other people's tunes that would otherwise be as jarring as nails on chalkboard. I think meditation can help a lot with that, altough there are notable complexities involves that are besides the point, here.
I imagine that in a mature and psychologically healthy person, the clarity and presence of their instincts would be strong enough to outright suspend all emotional functions and engage the situation from a purely rational perspective, in order to discern exactly what is causing the disharmony, whenever such an alarming sound is detected.
It's vital to notice that albeit it may be tempting to blame others exclusively for said dissonances, that overlooks a most crucial aspect- our own emotional contribution to a given ordeal, along with our power to detract such contribution. To be fair, one must be willing to strutinize the matter fully objectively, as though one were observing ourselves precisely like one observes any other person. Otherwise, one is either at risk of kidding ourselves, kidding others, or perhaps a bit of both. Not a good look for anyone that values maturity.
I remember a guy I used to deal with who, whenever he expressed something positive it was nice and convincing. But whenever he expressed a negative thing it was passionate and powerful. It has become clear over the decades that the negative emotions were far more correct as to his true feelings. It is more socially acceptable, especially for that individual, to share positive emotions so, I mean, the insight seems obvious here. People share their positive emotions freely, even if they are not real, and hide their negative emotions. So in most cases if someone shares a negative thing, even if it is an apparent one off. That is what is really going on with them.
Another thing I have found insightful is starting with the perspective that everyone is a manipulator and waiting for them to prove they are not. So, for instance, extreme anxiety so not a psychopath and such like that. Rather than the other way around because people are incentivised not to see the negative. This pattern seems to outsmart that Malcolm Gladwell positive assumption thing.
Also, research body language rather than assuming the positive. I saw a girl a while back had a look of disgust when she saw me. Mouth curls up to the nose. But when I saw it it was not offensive. She was blond and sweet, and it looked cute like a cat. So there was every incentive for me to NOT see it. But I recalled it and looked it up. It was a look of disgust which made sense because she was a gossip and we had a mutual female friend I had fallen out with.
This is a really important post. Your clarity is so important.
As you are saying - being in touch with instincts is not emulating emotions. Emotions are often irrational, paranoid, protective and aggressive, as the reptilian and limbic parts of the brain dictate it to be. What is it within us that has the capacity to go beyond survival and belonging, to instead protect and serve others at our own expense?
Envious hate is a good term to describe the jealousy that annihilates what it wishes to be, but believes it will never become.
I suspect that in many cases the victim of abuse missed early indications of manipulation with bad intentions because basic chemistry interfered. Oxytocin and serotonin and all that jazz throws up a smoke screen. I do wonder if murderous abusers behave in a way outside the relationship that tips other people off. I knew a biker who abused his old lady one time too many and she lit him up with a 12 gauge. Some of his brothers in his club told me that they had been expecting it and they’d warned him that he should move out and move on. The woman was acquitted BTW
Victims of abuse tend to come from abusive homes. They are groomed from an early age to accept abuse, to think that abuse is love, to think that it's all their fault and they just need to do better, to believe that their god will punish them for daring to think that they don't deserve it. By the time these people get into an abusive relationship, they've already been hurt and gaslighted into believing that they can't trust themselves or their instincts. It's just not as simple as 'trust your instincts.' They don't know how. Many people get out of abusive situations only to get into another one. They have a string of abusive relationships.
Abusers also tend to come from abusive homes. They see the power grab. They learn how to manipulate, how to control. They believe that their ability to control defines them. Control or be controlled. Abuse or be abused. They perpetually see themselves as the victim. When the abused finally gathers the courage to leave, the abuser's world shatters. That's the point they need to destroy the person that destroyed them.
From a brain chemistry perspective. Very relevant to this article. Is that when people get abused they send the same "signal" to the part of the brain responsible for getting them out of the situation. If they are powerless to stop whatever it is, the brain goes to a deeper level of trauma and also linked, if it happens repeatedly then it just becomes "noise" and the brain knocks off those warning signs within itself. Because there is no reason for the warning signal if it is not producing a result.
So when the target enters the next relationships they don't have the warning signs going off in their brain. So when the perpetrator crosses a boundary, they don't get the pushback they would with a healthy person.
This was from 'The body keeps the score'.
Indeed, it’s basically developing a default “freeze” reaction when one spends a prolonged time in a situation when “fight” backfires and “flight” doesn’t seem like a realistic option. It may be “protecting” the person at the time in extreme situations, but once the situation changes, it becomes maladaptive.
This is all my best understanding at this point, with this complexity of information. I have not closely researched and confirmed this.
Yeah, there is a lot to learn from this I believe. I stopped reading that book though. Partly because I have about five books now referencing brain chemistry and I wanted to really understand that before I read any further. I now have a book on the brain. Which is a slow read. I make notes on every single page.
The way I understand it to work is that the first layer of "alarm" in our brain is when we communicate via our facial expressions. There is a lot to be said here about the way psychopaths/ autists/ physiological illness and various others might be out of sync with others at this level. If those expressions of distress are not noticed and acted upon by others it is escalated.
(Previously I had physiological problems and I looked unwell and people did not know what to do. So this causes alarm in others with no way to solve it. It might be why, for most people, observing another being bullied is as bad for the brain as being bullied themselves.)
The second is actual alarm. Like fight or flight. Where we subtly or overtly scream for help, or hit back and run away.
The third is when that doesn't work and for some reason our brain temporarily severs our contact with our higher brain functions thus... PTSD. So if someone is restrained while being raped / in a car crash/ at war etc. In an MRI this is amazing, people reliving intense PTSD of the more catatonic variety, the entire brain just shuts down.
If you are stuck somewhere between one and three for a long time, without solving the issue. The part of your brain that broadcasts the call to action, and the part that is actually meant to do the actions. Severs. Thus C- PTSD.
I never got to the part of the book where it talks about how you actually solve these problems once the brain is damaged like that. The title of the book suggests some sort of physical therapy. But I imagine with meditation regrowing synapses and proper nutition. Obviously a safe environment these alarm systems can be re- initialised.
The brain is a truly fascinating piece of biological machinery and we're nowhere near completely reverse engineering it. Regarding your last paragraph, I recommend looking into EMDR (Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing) if you haven't
Problem with Substack? Here is the rest:
If you are stuck somewhere between one and three for a long time, without solving the issue. The part of your brain that broadcasts the call to action, and the part that is actually meant to do the actions. Severs. Thus C- PTSD.
I never got to the part of the book where it talks about how you actually solve these problems once the brain is damaged like that. The title of the book suggests some sort of physical therapy. But I imagine with meditation regrowing synapses and proper nutition. Obviously a safe environment these alarm systems can be re- initialised.
A small but informative psychological point: the terms "instincts" and "intuition" are often used to describe different types of non-deliberative decision-making processes.
1. Origin:
- Instincts: These are innate, biologically hard-wired responses that have evolved over time because they offer some survival or reproductive advantage. For example, the fight-or-flight response to a perceived threat is an instinctual reaction.
- Intuition: Intuition is often thought of as a "gut feeling" or immediate understanding without conscious reasoning. While it might be influenced by evolutionary factors, it's also shaped by personal experiences, knowledge, and cultural background.
2. Development:
- Instincts: They are typically present from birth. For instance, babies have a sucking reflex, which is an instinct that helps them feed.
- Intuition: It develops over time based on experiences, learning, and socialization. For example, a seasoned chess player might intuitively know the best move without consciously analyzing every possibility.
3. Function:
- Instincts: They serve a clear biological purpose, often related to survival, reproduction, or both. For example, the instinct to pull one's hand away from a hot surface helps prevent burns.
- Intuition: It can help in decision-making when there's limited time for analysis or when the situation is ambiguous. It's not always correct, but it's based on rapid, subconscious processing of available information.
4. Flexibility:
- Instincts: They are relatively fixed and consistent across individuals of the same species. While they can be modulated by learning and experience to some extent, their basic patterns are largely predetermined.
- Intuition: It's more flexible and can vary widely between individuals based on their unique experiences, knowledge, and cognitive processes.
5. Conscious Awareness:
- Instincts: These reactions often occur without conscious thought. They're automatic responses to specific stimuli.
- Intuition: While it doesn't involve deliberate reasoning, people are usually aware of their intuitive feelings or judgments. They might say, "I have a hunch" or "Something doesn't feel right."
In summary, while both instincts and intuition bypass detailed analytical processing, instincts are innate, biologically-driven responses, whereas intuition is a more flexible, experience-based form of rapid judgment.
Interesting differentiation. Good to knnow
I wonder if it's a chatbot answer. I rarely see people writing the words "in summary." Only chatbots.
hehe, this chatbot likes your intuition.
"In summary" is quite common in formal writing. The post in question looks like the author is used to that writing style.
Even if you rarely see "in summary", this doesn't mean it's rare. Even if it were, that still wouldn't mean it's a chatbot. Chatbots use the most common expressions.
Do you know of any publicly available resources that can be used to help people distinguish between real and faked emotions? I have several autistic family members who could benefit from more explicit instruction on what sorts of things to look for (since "go with your gut feeling" isn't advice that really works for them).
I know that there are YouTube channels that address autism and emotions, but exactly what topics they cover I'm not sure. I believe I recall someone mentioning that some are about recognizing some emotions.
This doesn't precisely address your question, but while books on body language tend to be garbage, Joe Navarro is one author who is a little bit more down to earth. He's a former FBI interrogator who discusses analysis of body language. I haven't come across anything on the topic of body language that I'd call great, but his book "What Every Body Is Saying" was at least worth my time.
Also, as regards helpful search terms, you could look for writing on duchenne smiles, or real vs fake smiles and likely find some useful info there.
Bombards body language was my favourite. Good humoured although the stuff she puts out publicly is politically charge. If you get the membership, you get instruction videos. I have used these to my advantage noticing peoples eye movements and such.
She talks a lot about how body language is a very fluid thing. Like, when people are not lying (and are basically NT so have a normal baseline) their body "flows" with them and such.
The Behavior Panel on Youtube. It's a group of four experts on body language, interrogation, and applied psychology. Between the four of them, they have extensive experience in work with the military, law enforcement, as well as the corporate world and politicians. They specialize in deception and counter-deception.
They do deep dives on interviews and video footage of various problematic individuals. I think their visual-heavy format is much better for that topic than books.
They do have a tendency to misuse the term, "psychopath", however.
They do. Scott is the most egregious offender. However, he has worked with law enforcement and his views are shaped by this. Greg, on the other hand, is up there in psychopathic traits.
On a side note, it is a rarity to encounter a more modern attitude towards psychopathy even in psychologists, and the Behavior Panel do want to engage a wide audience. People have too much bias towards that word. I have recommended the book The Wisdom of Psychopaths to a number of people who seem interested in psychology and open-minded and the only predictable outcome is that they start to avoid me and act awkward.
I occasionally recommend the book and the other person doesn't run away, which means we are going to get along very well. I've started to appreciate that filter. If an acquaintance is being annoyingly friendly and I want them to leave me alone, I just recommend The Wisdom of Psychopaths to them. Works wonders.
I like that filtering system.
I understand what you mean, but I think actual coaching is more productive because it is the context and appropriatness of the response which is key, rather than trying to fake an emotion that isn't actually felt which could be highly counter productive. Faking emotions just adds to the burden and frustration of masking. I find most neurotypical people are quite understanding if you preface with something like "i'm not good with emotions and feelings, but here is what a context appropriate response would look like according to me".
I went to college/conservatory in the Midwest. At this school, there is laboratory for vocal studies. A person can sign up and use various recording software and hookups or rigs for recording physiological responses and audio. Turned out some of us were very good at detecting issues or phonation pathology. So, I spent a lot of time listening to vocalists and reviewing tests results. Yup. I could tell this person has very weak intercostal muscle support when transitioning from low to middle-low registers, particularly when executing closed vowels, etc. How could some of us hear this? Hypervigilance is part of it. Vocal technicians get pretty damn good at the subtleties and intricacies of voices. When you have a baseline of how folks sing or speak, you are sensitive to that instrument and any wear or tear, breathing or support concerns, or anything.
This is what I think is happening in these situations. When we know we are being hoodwinked or lies to. It isn't about magic or spiritual anything. A mother knows when her child is lying to her like a good voice technician knows that Czech soprano must have smoked or worked in fumey conditions for a good period of time, etc.
One more thing. I sang in a masterclass once and was told to put my coat in and sing again. We were all like wtf?! I did as the great, wise and observant soprano told me to do. Lol. I sand the first three lines of the aria and people started clapping. I felt it too. The visiting maestra said, "See! Men can be vain and insecure, yes? He was not really breathing without the coat. That's his business, but learn from this. We feel how the singer is using his body to make sound. We feel it in our bodies like sound mirrors. We know things are balanced and going to be ok or we get very nervous for the performer. It's because we feel how they make that sound."
Yup
That is a very cool and unique example of listening to the differences in vocal tone.
Marvellous read! Thanks for sharing.
From my limited experience in this topic here are some thoughts:
Emotions normally bring a biologic reaction in your body. For example, fear is likely to raise your body temperature, tense your muscles, make you be in a state of hyper alert... this all occurs involuntarily, without you even noticing that it's happening. Fury, love, hatred... when strong enough will induce involuntary body responses that will affect your pupils, voice vibration, muscle relaxation, facial micro expressions, that are picked up by people. This would work as a first barrier. The second one is context, do the reactions make sense? Is this likely? If we just had a fight and you're happily inviting me to smth shady... no, it doesn't make sense. There was a problem and now you act like nothing when I know it bothered you... and the first barrier is what you know of that person, or don't know. How likely that this person is really honest from what you know or don't know?
It all works cohesively to give you a gut feeling. You can fake emotions as good as you will, context and the nature of your persona can expose hidden intentions. Ultimately when we recognize authentic emotions, they also have an impact on us...
When you feel love signs, hate, rage... they all have an impact on you of making you feel relaxed, vigilant... etc. So your brain when picking up those signs will behave as such.
Our cels are capable of sensing all type of signals. When you have a cut, your cels sense it and act by themselves to heal the wound. You don't need to order them, you cannot suppress them either. They are natural, involuntary biological responses.
When you feel emotions, I guess it could be hypothesized that it changes your body signaling leading to cels behaving an specific way that gives away your real state even if you were to cognitively fake it.
Excellent observations
Oh! An opportunity to share a story that is sorta related! With my motivations laid bare here's the story.
A few months ago I just finished college, got a job in a new city, and I needed to find a place to live. I found a place online that was in a rural area on a small farm. The person who was renting out a room there was an older man who I assumed to be in his 60's. He seemed nice and the property was nice so I told him I was interesting in living there. He told me that he only rented to women because he was use to living with women. He told me about how he had trouble with renters in the past, using a girl who treated the place like a party house as an example. By the end of the tour he said he wanted to talk to my Mom, because he does that with all young women who are interested in living there. I agreed even though I was suspicious because I was an adult, and someone asking for my parent felt patronizing. My Mom was suspicious as well when I asked her. Mom talked to him on the phone and she didn't see a problem with him.
Turns out he figured out I was autistic right away and later I unfortunately learned that he thought I was more dependent and vulnerable than I actually was. He saw me as a "girl who needed help". For context he lived in that house as well and the only thing I needed was a place to live.
When moving day came, my mom and brother where there with me. It was my Mom who first started noticing the red flags. He complained about how the young women in the past expected him to take care of them, then he offered to drive me to the store to get groceries; I had my own car. He told them about a mother and daughter pair that came before, met him once, then left and never returned. He talked about how his wife left him for another man a few years ago and that their teenage daughter lived with her. The final straw was the fact that, he didn't have any sort of contract or lease and wanted to get away with not giving me a receipt. My mom made him write up a receipt. My mom ended up taking a photo of him and called him out on his sketchy behaviour. When my mom and brother left I started settling in.
The time I spent living there I was afraid. He would often badger me about forgetting to clean up a mess. Which admittedly was on me, but the other stuff was not. He ended up hating my mother and made up lies about her. Comparing her to a cult leader and saying that she told him that she thought he would rape me in my sleep. I talked to Mom about it and she was confused because she didn't remember making those claims. The thing that made my instincts go off was whenever he tried to get me to socialize with him. He made an accurate observation that I was afraid of him, and yet he still tried to force me to be social with him. Every fibre of my being was telling me "don't become friends with him, he wants to try something". He would go into my room without my permission. Accused me of smoking in my room, which I wasn't doing. He in general acted as if I was horrible to him, when really a lot of the stuff he complained about was either minor or assumed motives that I didn't have. He wanted to help often and essentially treated me like I was a teenager living there for free, instead of a rent paying adult just wanting to live her life.
To not get kicked out, I played the role of nice polite girl while also making a plan with my family to get me out of there. Since he hated my mother it was my father who came on moving day so that he wouldn't try anything. The move went smoothly.
This man misread me, so when he made accusations that me and my mom were trying to deceive him from the very beginning about my intention on living there, my internal response was, 'yeah okay. You keep believing that' instead of defending myself. I know what abuse looks like, and I had a support network. His attempts to manipulate me just made me go "wow... this guy's an idiot." I will admit, I don't usually trust my instincts, but I am getting better. The thing is my instincts went off as soon as I saw his ad, but I choose to ignore it since I thought I was just being prejudice against old people. What was his motivation behind all of this? I don't know. I hope the next woman he lures into his house doesn't have to find out either.
It is good that his attempts fell on deaf ears for you. He sounds like a tool bag.
Yeah, he was obnoxious. Looks like I've joined the long list of female tenants that he'll demonize to future female tenants. There's definitely something wrong when you rent out a room with the express intention of forming a relationship.
Athena, if you were pretending grief during a funeral and another psychopath was there, would this person be able to point out your fake emotion?
No, if the mask can be seen through by anyone, the mask is a failure. A psychopath is no more skilled at spotting a psychopath than anyone else, which is to say, it isn't possible.
Thank you for answering my question!
Happy to. Let me know if you have any more
I always had this instinct alert with my parents LOL
Great article Athena. Really cool the way you diferenced real emotion and false emotions and the way you end them with an impacting sentance.
Thanks you for one more article
Sorry for writing wrong. I mean it’s cool the way you end article always with some effect sentence.
I can tell you why NTs cannot pickup fake emotions due to tenor. Since your feelings are mostly muted, it leaves a lot of your mental faculties free to notice these things.NTs are constantly thinking or feeling about something. Our brains are simply not free enough to notice these subtleties. That is not to say it is impossible. I think that is what meditation does to our brains. It teaches us to quiet our minds so that we are left with more mental bandwidth to observe things clearly. The only difference is that you naturally have a quiet mind. Don't you think this is why you get so bored constantly? Because you are not dwelling on anything. You simply don't pay mind to an event after it has passed.
Yes, I assume that you are correct in your assessment
That was a great article Athena, maybe one of your best. Thank you for putting this out there, these things are important to talk about.
You are very spot on about people being attuned to the emotions and micro-expressions of others they spend a lot of time around, hence being able to tell when something is off through subconscious pattern recognition. Same reason why polygraph examiners start with asking boring irrelevant questions to which they know the answers, in order to establish a baseline (arguably a way of “fast-tracking” this type of thing). In a way it’s pretty similar to how machine learning / AI algorithms work, which Cassie Kozyrkov from Google cleverly coined as “automating the ineffable”.
I also found it quite interesting what you mentioned about being able to detect bullshit better than NTs. It would make sense, assuming you only account for the raw information you receive, without being biased by how you feel about it or how you’re “expected” to react.
Unfortunately, women seems to be particularly prone to overcorrecting for their gut feeling due to not wanting to be perceived as “dramatic”, which, according to society, can be literally anything that isn’t agreeable, compliant or “nice”. But people in general are prone to assume by default that others are saying the truth, regardless of whether they know them or not. Malcolm Gladwell’s “Talking to Strangers: What We Should Know about the People We Don't Know” is a pretty good book about that phenomenon, with some historical case studies of its potential devastating consequences, as well as evolutionary reasons for why it might be the case.
I think that women should care far less about appearances when it comes to their safety. Who cares what someone else, or even a crowd of people might think. If the end result is she goes home unscathed, then that is the preferred outcome.
Off topic, have you taken the Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test and, if you have, how do you score on it? There was a study which found Factor 1 psychopathic traits to be positively associated with discriminating neural mental states but not positive or negative ones, while Factor 2 to be negatively associated with both, which I found to be a pretty interesting result.
Sandvik AM, Hansen AL, Johnsen BH, Laberg JC. Psychopathy and the ability to read the "language of the eyes": divergence in the psychopathy construct. Scand J Psychol. 2014 Dec;55(6):585-92. doi: 10.1111/sjop.12138. Epub 2014 Jun 20. PMID: 24954681; PMCID: PMC4282377.
I have not seen that one. I will look it up.
Indeed, I agree, which is why I hope the point you’re making reaches more people. For many it would take undoing years of conditioning that has started very early in their lives but the first step is becoming aware of it. Hell, it’s not even just wishful thinking about one’s exes, some have ended up dead due to going on hikes for a first date.. I almost wish they sold psychopathy pills as a cure to female socialization (saying as a woman that had to instead do it the hard way through self-reflection and therapy) :D
I just checked that Malcolm Gladwell book on my bookshelf and I still have it. Might give it a re read.
The point on women being easily intimidated and manipulated. I do not know whether the knowledge of what they should or shouldn't do changes much. There is a multi billion dollar corporate- government machine to make sure they do in fact stay like that. Every part of our society seems designed to drag us down.
For instance, I have noticed women that are very anxious and insecure often talk about their fathers a lot and didn't have a good relationship with him. Single mother households have grown from something like 5% in the 1950's to 35% now, and if a girl isn't made safe by her "daddy", plus absorbs all the stress of a single mother it is unlikely she will live a life where she can assert herself.
After feminism the corporate world is filled with female workers that are fundamentally docile. If you screw over a bunch of guys for a long time they unionise and pushback. If you screw over a bunch of women for a long time they grumble and vent but they essentially go along with it, and they don't ever unionise or pushback.
In this environment, women don't stand up for themselves because they fear if they did, then they would be bullied by other women and their employers; and they are right.
In a way I have to admire the majesty with which the controllers have pulled this off.
> The point on women being easily intimidated and manipulated. I do not know whether the knowledge of what they should or shouldn't do changes much.
You might have a point here, though I doubt it would make it worse the very least.
> In a way I have to admire the majesty with which the controllers have pulled this off.
While I agree that there's a systematic problem, I doubt that it's a deliberate plot, rather a side effect of biology x game theory. However, I don't make the common inferential leap of "natural" -> "morally good and a normative imperative". I'm actually drawing from the second wave feminist writer Shulamith Firestone, who argued that women's oppression is a consequence of the cycle of pregnancy, childbirth and child-rearing, which puts women in a vulnerable and dependent position - something easy for men to take advantage of. She was way ahead of her time, talking about things like arificiall wombs as potential solutions as early as the 60s, technically making her also an early transhumanist. As you implied, modern feminism often ends up creating the opposite result to its original intention, but some of the earlier feminist writers are pretty interesting.
Yeah, I thought second wave feminism had interesting points. It often strikes me wrong that womens natural inclinations towards caring tend to lend them to the lowest paid occupations. Care work is a LOT of emotional labour for minimum pay.
Third wave feminism and second wave feminism are in conflict though in my view, since third wave feminism doesn't work in line with womens natural instincts but tries to subvert them to make them into men. It does not have to be by design that pretty much everything third wave feminism says is in line with the corporate agenda. They say something and then corporates decide that it works and then everyone's like... "Let's go with that".
Once politics is involved though the conversation starts to get too many moving parts to really accurately talk about often.
The way society is in my view is that this all just has to play out until it's conclusion. There is no pulling back the societal patterns that are in play now.
You know, tenor is a great choice of word here.
I think the reason why many of us as suspectible to manipulation is indeed that we don't pay close enough attention to our own inner tune (our emotions), and we sometimes - for the sake of keeping the figurative band playing - collaborately make up for gaps in other people's tunes that would otherwise be as jarring as nails on chalkboard. I think meditation can help a lot with that, altough there are notable complexities involves that are besides the point, here.
I imagine that in a mature and psychologically healthy person, the clarity and presence of their instincts would be strong enough to outright suspend all emotional functions and engage the situation from a purely rational perspective, in order to discern exactly what is causing the disharmony, whenever such an alarming sound is detected.
It's vital to notice that albeit it may be tempting to blame others exclusively for said dissonances, that overlooks a most crucial aspect- our own emotional contribution to a given ordeal, along with our power to detract such contribution. To be fair, one must be willing to strutinize the matter fully objectively, as though one were observing ourselves precisely like one observes any other person. Otherwise, one is either at risk of kidding ourselves, kidding others, or perhaps a bit of both. Not a good look for anyone that values maturity.
Interestingly, next week's post touches on this to an extent.
I'll be curiously waiting for it, then. I find your insights rather interesting and useful.
Athena do you have anything on identifying these emotions that you say in the article? What do we look for and how?
Which emotions?
Spoting emotions, generically speaking. What do you do and look for in general to spot emotions
Some ideas:
I remember a guy I used to deal with who, whenever he expressed something positive it was nice and convincing. But whenever he expressed a negative thing it was passionate and powerful. It has become clear over the decades that the negative emotions were far more correct as to his true feelings. It is more socially acceptable, especially for that individual, to share positive emotions so, I mean, the insight seems obvious here. People share their positive emotions freely, even if they are not real, and hide their negative emotions. So in most cases if someone shares a negative thing, even if it is an apparent one off. That is what is really going on with them.
Another thing I have found insightful is starting with the perspective that everyone is a manipulator and waiting for them to prove they are not. So, for instance, extreme anxiety so not a psychopath and such like that. Rather than the other way around because people are incentivised not to see the negative. This pattern seems to outsmart that Malcolm Gladwell positive assumption thing.
Also, research body language rather than assuming the positive. I saw a girl a while back had a look of disgust when she saw me. Mouth curls up to the nose. But when I saw it it was not offensive. She was blond and sweet, and it looked cute like a cat. So there was every incentive for me to NOT see it. But I recalled it and looked it up. It was a look of disgust which made sense because she was a gossip and we had a mutual female friend I had fallen out with.
JJ.W, Thank you for your time and writing this insightful comment!
What do you think of Depp and Heard? Who’s genuine and who’s fake?
I think that they were toxic for one another, but she was the abuser.
I thought the same, and the Netflix stuff made me doubt. But in her emotional moments, I never saw a true tear. I think you’re right.
This is a really important post. Your clarity is so important.
As you are saying - being in touch with instincts is not emulating emotions. Emotions are often irrational, paranoid, protective and aggressive, as the reptilian and limbic parts of the brain dictate it to be. What is it within us that has the capacity to go beyond survival and belonging, to instead protect and serve others at our own expense?
Envious hate is a good term to describe the jealousy that annihilates what it wishes to be, but believes it will never become.
I suspect that in many cases the victim of abuse missed early indications of manipulation with bad intentions because basic chemistry interfered. Oxytocin and serotonin and all that jazz throws up a smoke screen. I do wonder if murderous abusers behave in a way outside the relationship that tips other people off. I knew a biker who abused his old lady one time too many and she lit him up with a 12 gauge. Some of his brothers in his club told me that they had been expecting it and they’d warned him that he should move out and move on. The woman was acquitted BTW
Yes, I agree that this is often a problem and it makes clarity much more difficult.