Quality over quantity has always been my moto when it comes to friends. I don't consider that I have many actual 'friends' over acquaintances. I spent much of my youth moving almost yearly; I ran away at 16, and when I could travel without threat of being dragged back to foster care/juvie, I spent the next three years bopping around the country homeless. It has made it hard for me to form attachments with people. I will say that I learned a lot about the nature of people from living on the streets and traveling to so many different places, and I'm actually an extreme empath able to pick up on emotions and intentions having been noted to be able to read people well. That said, I think that like anything else, empathy isn't just feelings but also a developed skill. I honed it from sitting back and observing others. I've always learned more from listening than from speaking, the adage from Gandhi comes to mind, "Speak only if it improves upon the silence." When I ran away, I became a chameleon to blend in with anyone who I happened to be around taking parts of myself that was relatable to those around me and exemplifying it be amicable to those around me. It reminds me very much of the mask you speak of. As an introvert, it was mentally exhausting, but it was a survival mechanism that I needed to develop to get by.
Your depiction of arguing with a petty person seems like a game of chess moving in to checkmate. Amusing in a calculated way. I rarely get into arguments with anyone other than my SO since most people's opinions don't effect me on an emotional level. I feel others emotions more than my own on average (which might sound strange, but I think I spend so much energy taking in the environment around me that I am often too depleted to feel them for myself.) Your maskless side sounds like a relief. I would prefer it. I know that we don't 'know' each other over a few internet exchanges and the articles I've interacted with, but I enjoy your reflection and intelligence. You're a person that I would consider
a worthy candidate to be a friend. Friends to me, as your SO stated, are those who you can rely on when you need them and who you would be willing to do the same for. Having something stimulating to share and reflect upon is a given, but moreover honesty and as you stated loyalty are key. I'm rather blunt and unapologetic, and I like that trait in others. Life's too short for drama, so being laid back is also a given requirement 😅
I took on a higher awareness in that state, and where I never regret the knowledge and experiences I gained, it was rather draining to have to be on edge all the time.
Taking in emotions and processing them like a conduit has left me both exhilarated and spent. Feeling another's emotions leaves mine kind of deadened if the emotions are really raw and intense.
It's often said that women hate other women. Gross over-generalization aside, I heard an interesting discussion a few years back about it, from people who study evolutionary forces on humans.* Their premise was that early men, as hunters, had greater reason to develop cooperative abilities than women; the teamwork aspect of hunting large animals meant that the strength of another man went from being a personal threat to a personal advantage. The activities that early women participated in, while often group-based, still required less in the way of teamwork: the individual abilities of another woman were less likely to create personal benefits for the group, and more likely to mean fewer resources for the women without those abilities. According to the discussion, this stage of human development explained why women tended to compete with each other rather than cooperating.
I found the discussion very interesting, because, well, I don't really like other women, and I REALLY don't like working with them. There are a whole bunch of different reasons, which I won't bother to list, but which can generally be sorted into two categories: I've always had much more stereotypically male interests and thought patterns, and the other women I've known are indeed worse at teamwork than men.
But as I was thinking about it, I noticed something: the less another woman is like me, the more likely it is that I'll like her. Most of my female friends are either a generation older than me, or share very few of my natural talents, skillset, and personality traits. I like myself just fine, but not if I meet myself in doppelganger form.
Turns out that the closer a woman is to filling the same niche I fill, the less I like her. Evolutionarily speaking, she is 100% threat, and 0% asset. If the two of us are the same, then my knee-jerk reaction does indeed wind up being that SHE is unnecessary.
* Can't remember exactly who now, but probably either Jordan Peterson, Gad Saad, or Eric (oops! I mean Bret) Weinstein was involved.
Yes, I agree with a fair amount with what you said. I have listened to Peterson, Saad, and Weinstein, and like all of them. When it comes to this topic agree with what Peterson said about it. It makes the most sense to me.
Females, no matter how much they want to deny this, are attracted to strength and power. A place where we divide from our more primal ancestors. Looking at the dominance hierarchy of chimpanzees and humans, chimpanzee females are promiscuous maters. This means that they will mate with any male available, and it is the dominant males that chase off the competition to ensure their genes are passed on.
Human females however do not follow this strategy. Instead we peel off the top of the dominance hierarchy. The higher up on the stratosphere of the dominance hierarchy, the more appealing of a mate that male is to females.
This means that females are in direct competition with one another. There is no way around this. If a woman wants the male at the top of the dominance hierarchy she has to do whatever she can to place herself as the most favorable view of that male has to get rid of the competition. This means that females are hardwired to see each other as the competition, not allies.
I don't like dealing with many women either. I find them rather petty, underhanded, and self obsessed. I don't really have the patience to deal with any of that.
Yup. And, having secured that mate, she must continue to compete, to ensure that the mate will continue to provide resources only to her and their children, rather than splitting them between her and other mates/children.
Also, I find discussions about the best makeup brands really boring.
There is a spectrum in regards to that, with some people being extremely disloyal, to somewhere in the middle, and then loyal to a fault is on the other end. All humans fall somewhere along this spectrum.
I can see how this might be broadly true, but it doesn't ring true for me. So can we say that since everything is on a spectrum, some of us just don't feel that? I understand it, because as an adolescent, although I was not involved in much bitchy drama, I witnessed it, and I was myself extremely, painfully envious of other girls and their advantages and better qualities. But this feeling dissipated over time.
As an adult I have never had any particular attraction for alpha males (nor particularly the reverse, I just like whoever), I couldn't give a toss about strength or power (though I am definitely a gender-conventional straight woman), and I genuinely feel a deep sisterhood with other females. It took me a while to realise that complimenting other women's beauty or character when describing them was received as odd, even though it came freely to me. Now, I am not super confident, I dislike much of my physical self, I would love great hair, I have not been madly admired in life, but truly, the bond with other females, of all ages, is much stronger than any of that competitive stuff. Yes, put me in a position of being in love with someone who preferred a woman more appealing than me, and I would suffer and feel bitter. But as a part of everyday life? No way!
High status males just look like a lot of trouble! I am happy to have a mix of male and female friends. I am not unattractive, nor amazing, just a regular woman with all the usual self doubts and self criticism. Fortunately I have only rarely been in situations of direct rivalry.
The term "peacocking" can be applied to both men and women. Both sexes will put on a display in an effort to attract mates who may be considered "out of their league"
There's an odd thing about how men handle the situations. A primarily monogamous man will devote a lot of time and effort into mate guarding and he's generally pickier about his mate. The more polygamous a man is curiously the less picky he is, quantity over quality I suppose. A rapist will be completely indiscriminate in victim selection. His action are completely the opposite of the old victim blaming routine..
Intelligence is in the same realm as power. The more intelligent a person is, the better they are at solving abstract problems that can give them a very real advantage.
Good grief, here's something new to me. I have always seen knowledge and intelligence as useful power for myself in my own life, but never thought of intelligence in others as something that made them attractive because it meant power. Maybe I know too many smart but unpowerful nerds who are not high flyers!
Well since that would be two qualities that are themselves by definition rare, it's not surprising. I knew someone who was both, but they were severely let down by their character.
I am thinking of a female friend who married someone vastly less physically attractive, but I don't wonder why, as he was a good friend of mine beforehand, so I get it!
That's an interesting study and makes sense why women may see other women more as competition from a societal learned behavior. Your use here to exemplify your personal discomfort towards other women that you feel as threatening is also interesting. Do you think that the threat arises also from a sense of insecurities that if they are too much like you that you will be passed over? Please know, I love psychology, so I'm asking out of curiosity to understand more of your thought process not to antagonize you. Whenever I've heard of or witnessed this sort of behavioral response, it's typically stemmed from jealousy or a feeling of inadequacy, and I gather in a tribal setting internal competition between females could mean the difference between being chosen as a mate or dying by being ostracized. Women and men bring a lot of different qualities to the table in a relationship. What traits would you say define being like you verse not like you that you would deem unnecessary that you would not deem unnecessary in a male counterpart?
Hrm. I think you're interpreting my use of the word 'threat' differently than I meant it--I should have been clearer. I was making a callback to evolutionary development and the illustration of men hunting a large, prehistoric animal as a team; let me try to draw the connection a little more clearly this time.
Let's say man A and man B are both on the mammoth-hunting team. Man A is stronger than man B. In some contexts, this makes man A a threat to man B: what if man B has something man A wants? In that context, man A is 100% threat to man B. However, in the context of the mammoth-hunting team, man A's strength helps the team kill the mammoth safely; in this context, man A's strength is 100% asset to man B.
Now let's take woman C and woman D, who are both berry gatherers. Each keeps only what they gather themselves. Woman C has really great eyesight, and can spot and gather 10x as many berries as woman D. Woman C therefore gets 10x the resources, and can feed herself and her family better. Since there are a limited number of berries in the territory, in this context, woman C is 100% threat to woman D: woman C's abilities directly limit woman D's access to food. Unlike with men A & B, women C & D aren't team mates; there is no shared success, and so woman C's ability do not in any way benefit woman D: woman C is 0% asset to woman D.
What I'm getting at here is that, at a very basic, evolutionary level, my lizard brain self does not look at other women who are after the same resources I am, and say, "Ah hah! You're after this as well, therefore you are a potential team mate! Our combined abilities will increase our chances of success!" No, my lizard brain says, "Hands off, lady, that's mine!"
In spite of what the Twitler Youth of today would have us all believe, men and women are, in fact, very different, and our brains work differently on a very fundamental level. This is one of them. Men are better at cooperating with men who fill the same role than women are.
However, that doesn't mean that I--or you, or anyone else--necessarily must allow these ancient building blocks of our brains to dictate how we behave towards others. I don't _treat_ other women as a threat; I'm just self-aware enough to realize that yeah, huh, now that I think about it, this is one of those interesting psychological factors that probably goes into why I might get along with woman E better than I get along with woman F. (Probably has a lot to do with why I tend to have far more male friends than female ones, as well: I can team up with them.)
So, no, I don't have any deep-seated feelings of insecurity or inadequacy playing out here, just increasing self-awareness as I age and introspect. I'm 45, and am fact reveling in one of the most fun stages of a woman's life: I know pretty well who I am, I've got a pretty good grasp on my strengths and weaknesses and how to work within them, and I value my own opinions far more than I do any external opinion. I'm still young and energetic enough to do all the things I consider fun, but old enough not to give a shit if someone catches me, for example, rapping along to an old favorite at the top of my lungs while driving.
Tag Team, back again, check it to wreck it, let's begin...
Er, ahem, sorry about that. Wait, nah, disregard that sorry, I don't give a shit. :) Party on, party people, let me hear some noise, DC's in the house, jump, jump, rejoice!
Cheers to knowing one's self! I stopped caring what most people thought of me a long time ago too (43 going on 44 here.) Personally, I have had more male close friends than female mostly due to lack of common interests growing up. I grew up a Tom boy and could never understand the obsession with makeup and other preening type activities, so I didn't enjoy activities centered around beautification and shopping for cute accessories where boys tended to lead with action and held interests that felt deeper and less superficial. Later in life I found some very down to Earth women who challenged my outlook to see women in a different light to appreciate both genders for their unique attributes and contributions. Men and women are fundamentally different of course, but I also believe that we are farther removed from our prehistoric ancestors enough that it doesn't have to be on a philosophical level. Experience and culture will contour social behavior to a degree, but a person is more than their gender. I was mostly curious on what were qualities that you deemed to be too like yourself that caused you to avoid said women. Keep rocking on 💕
As far as I know, women gatherers pooled the resources back at camp. Sure, some may have scoffed a nest of eggs or some berries surreptitiously in the field, but I thought that gathered materials were mostly communal? And many gathered items required further processing- grass seeds to be ground and baked, poisonous roots pulped, soaked and detoxified, mushrooms cooked, bugs and small critters roasted, molluscs opened.
I think my emergency lizard brain is very active, and I am a good potential gatherer as I can spot a raspberry in a hedgerow driving past at 50mph 😉 but I am just not that competitive in everyday life. Takes all types.
Although, caveat. I become more competitive when I am deeply afraid. And maybe living life on the edge made one perpetually afraid. So maybe what you say is all true after all😊.
Your post reminds me of a work situation in my past. One of the women was all feminist, sisterhood, etc. and ALL of the other women hated her. They didn't dislike the girl who did attempt to use her 'charms' nearly as much as the hated the one preaching sisterhood.
I can only speculate about friendship with a psycopath, but I think lot comes down to something I have long called the person's 'Weirdness Threshold'. It's a very conspicuous difference between people who have let their life narrowly and those who have struck out wildly. As kids, every tiny difference in dress, mannerisms, ability etc. was noticeable, laughable, frightening, and judged. With time and experience, so much that is really not important fortunately goes genuinely unnoticed. If someone is familiar with different cultures, disabilities, worldviews, lifestyles, whatever, then hopefully psycopathy would be no impediment to friendship, as despite the vast difference in everyday mental experience, their values and conduct may well be similar.
I wonder about myself though. Years ago, I was so uncontrollably emotional that no, it would not have worked at all. Fundamentally though I am a "just give it a go" person when I like someone, so I hope that I nowdays could be friends with any neurotype. In fact, the more I learn about people in my life, the more I realise that I already have been!
I very much look forward to writings by your friend.
You said once that multitasking is BS. How can you listen to somebody and write, cook, etc. at the same time? I would find it difficult to do one properly.
Not as such, he was not vain, but a great raw intelligence completely untrained and a life lived completely unexamined. Terrible brash combination of arrogance and ignorance, which then leads easily to ugliness. A proudly self-made fool.
Depends on what you mean by self sacrificial. Do you mean giving up what I want to do and do what they want? Sure, I will do that. Or, do you mean that I give up my life for them? Nope, not doing that.
I will write few things that came to my mind while reading (probably a bit off from main topic though):
1)
you have mentioned few times that you lack oxytocin (and thus - emotions). Isn't it like nearly sure test (or at least strong indicator that if positive it might sugest more verification) if someone is psychopath? Is it possible to test presence of oxytocin? (quick google search leads to something else about pregnancy and oxytocin so not related)
2)
i have discussed some of the information i have read here on your blog with my friends/collegues. This will reveal why i asked nr 1) - after that discussion we have strong suspicion that one of them might have some psychopatic traits (including him thinking this too of course). I have recomended him to go check your site but (as expected) he bluntly said he will have no time/interest at his moment (slim chances) but if i find any other interesting information i can draw the essence and share with him.
What was my intention here: from what i understand - beeing aware that someone is psychopath can make life much easier both for the psychopath and everyone around them (there is probably some drawback too that as i can gladly see you are actively fighting it here - stereotypes combined with herd mentality that might lead to "burn the witch" incidents in one way or another...).
Good example what i mean here is this - understanding situation and predictable behaviors. I have asked mentioned friend if i understand corectly (based on what i was reading here) what would happen in this hypothetical scenario:
- zombie appocalypse breaks out. For him to "team up" with me and increase chances of survival i would have to prove usefull in some way or another (i.e. i have a gun and know how to use it or i am good at hacking and there is a chance i can get us in otherwise unavailable places or i can make some good food). Otherwise he will just ditch me at first possible occasion - is that right? His answer was short: "yes".
Simple and genuine - and now i know what to do when zombie appocalypse breaks out if i want to stay on the team :).
3)
When i found out your blog (thank you for beeing active on Quora) i was wondering if i might be psychopath too but soon enough dismissed the thought. Most likely i am highly functioning autistic and i think there are some similarities but with different genesis/source:
- i am not fond of physical interactions (but not liking something is different than beeing indifferent to it or not needing it)
- i have strong conscious cognitive empathy (which kind of might look like lack of empathy but it is just different type i think) - really usefull for lie detecting.
- i very rarely worry about what others think or speak of me (unless it is straight up lie that intends to criple me in some way - then i just try to expose it).
- i put on weird masks around people (unconsciously mimicking their state of emotions so in a different way than you mention it). What is really worth underlining here - around that friend i mentioned who might be psychopatch - i feel... neutral (if that makes sense). My state is basicly the same if i am alone or he is around.
Why i mention this here: i used search on your blog for "autistic" and the word appears few times too so you might have some knowledge (had no time to read those articles yet but will get there in time probably). What i was thinking is this: there are few categories marked as "disorders" (psychopatic, narcissistic, autistic, ...). I am not exactly sure why it is called disorder though... like... sure - mind is wired differently that is clear (and knowing how it is different can be really usefull). But dissorder means something is not right or needs fixing. From what i can tell there is nothing to fix.
1. Psychopaths do not lack oxytocin. We have a mutated oxytocin receptor that it will not bind to. It is present in the system, it is not processed.
2. Psychopaths do not lack emotions. We lack some, the rest are muted. The idea that psychopaths have no emotions is a myth.
3. I can understand his lack of interest in reading it for himself. It's a lot of investment, and if it doesn't have a strong draw for him, it is easier to have you filter it to him. I am the same way.
4. They are called disorders because they do not line up with neurotypicals. As they have the largest numbers in the population, they have decided that anyone that doesn't function like they do is disordered. It is very egotistical thinking in my mind. I have done some writing on autism, but only insofar as to demonstrate how it is different than psychopathy, and also how I relate to people that have autism.
Desperate, clingy people are often very badly damaged, and this is NOT incompatible with self respect (a concept which is too narrowly defined, sadly). The clingy conduct can occur independently of a sense of self and self worth. Indeed, this apparent contradiction in the person's mind can just make matters worse.
Perhaps you are expecting change for yourself on an unrealistic timeframe. Change can occur with jumps and pauses, not just incrementally. It in no way means you are a caricature of a person, you are too reflective for that to be the case. You are not one of those people doomed to be set in aspic.
The issue of diversity of opinion has become difficult and muddied lately. What is legitimate diversity of opinion and what is just plain ugly toxicity which you really need not consider? You will work it out and become receptive to the diversity that can cause you to grow. But new foods, come on! That's one of life's unequivocal joys, get with it! 😊
I totally get it about having the upper hand in relationships, because I never have had it. All the stuff you imagine they are feeling, and it turns out they are not. It's NOT about wanting them to suffer, it's about the shock of realising how much you felt that they had no idea about, and how much their conduct did not take those feelings into account.
Getting emotional in an argument, yeah. Me and my female friends, we discuss how hard we try not to, so as to maintain credibility, because we don't want our good words and good ideas discredited. The lip biting, nose pinching, open blinking, thinking of kittens, going to the bathroom and then drying your eyes and pretending you are fierce, and then after hours of struggling for control, the lip wobbles and the tears flow, and the other person says, 'Hey, there you go, turning on the water works trying to manipulate me'. Sigh. It's beyond galling. I hope humans can reach some communicative clarity around this soon.
Interesting about your possibly psycopathic friend. Maybe it's like with cats, we just have to accept people like that on their own terms, or not be around them!
Your friend sounds very similar to a psychopath. Of course, I am not saying that she is, but that is very similar to how many of my relationships play out from the other person's perspective.
Quality over quantity has always been my moto when it comes to friends. I don't consider that I have many actual 'friends' over acquaintances. I spent much of my youth moving almost yearly; I ran away at 16, and when I could travel without threat of being dragged back to foster care/juvie, I spent the next three years bopping around the country homeless. It has made it hard for me to form attachments with people. I will say that I learned a lot about the nature of people from living on the streets and traveling to so many different places, and I'm actually an extreme empath able to pick up on emotions and intentions having been noted to be able to read people well. That said, I think that like anything else, empathy isn't just feelings but also a developed skill. I honed it from sitting back and observing others. I've always learned more from listening than from speaking, the adage from Gandhi comes to mind, "Speak only if it improves upon the silence." When I ran away, I became a chameleon to blend in with anyone who I happened to be around taking parts of myself that was relatable to those around me and exemplifying it be amicable to those around me. It reminds me very much of the mask you speak of. As an introvert, it was mentally exhausting, but it was a survival mechanism that I needed to develop to get by.
Your depiction of arguing with a petty person seems like a game of chess moving in to checkmate. Amusing in a calculated way. I rarely get into arguments with anyone other than my SO since most people's opinions don't effect me on an emotional level. I feel others emotions more than my own on average (which might sound strange, but I think I spend so much energy taking in the environment around me that I am often too depleted to feel them for myself.) Your maskless side sounds like a relief. I would prefer it. I know that we don't 'know' each other over a few internet exchanges and the articles I've interacted with, but I enjoy your reflection and intelligence. You're a person that I would consider
a worthy candidate to be a friend. Friends to me, as your SO stated, are those who you can rely on when you need them and who you would be willing to do the same for. Having something stimulating to share and reflect upon is a given, but moreover honesty and as you stated loyalty are key. I'm rather blunt and unapologetic, and I like that trait in others. Life's too short for drama, so being laid back is also a given requirement 😅
So true about being a chameleons, often it will keep you safe a d becomes instinctive.
It's interesting that you feel others emotions more than your own- this is something I had not considered.
I took on a higher awareness in that state, and where I never regret the knowledge and experiences I gained, it was rather draining to have to be on edge all the time.
Taking in emotions and processing them like a conduit has left me both exhilarated and spent. Feeling another's emotions leaves mine kind of deadened if the emotions are really raw and intense.
Okay, this starts as a digression, but isn't....
It's often said that women hate other women. Gross over-generalization aside, I heard an interesting discussion a few years back about it, from people who study evolutionary forces on humans.* Their premise was that early men, as hunters, had greater reason to develop cooperative abilities than women; the teamwork aspect of hunting large animals meant that the strength of another man went from being a personal threat to a personal advantage. The activities that early women participated in, while often group-based, still required less in the way of teamwork: the individual abilities of another woman were less likely to create personal benefits for the group, and more likely to mean fewer resources for the women without those abilities. According to the discussion, this stage of human development explained why women tended to compete with each other rather than cooperating.
I found the discussion very interesting, because, well, I don't really like other women, and I REALLY don't like working with them. There are a whole bunch of different reasons, which I won't bother to list, but which can generally be sorted into two categories: I've always had much more stereotypically male interests and thought patterns, and the other women I've known are indeed worse at teamwork than men.
But as I was thinking about it, I noticed something: the less another woman is like me, the more likely it is that I'll like her. Most of my female friends are either a generation older than me, or share very few of my natural talents, skillset, and personality traits. I like myself just fine, but not if I meet myself in doppelganger form.
Turns out that the closer a woman is to filling the same niche I fill, the less I like her. Evolutionarily speaking, she is 100% threat, and 0% asset. If the two of us are the same, then my knee-jerk reaction does indeed wind up being that SHE is unnecessary.
* Can't remember exactly who now, but probably either Jordan Peterson, Gad Saad, or Eric (oops! I mean Bret) Weinstein was involved.
Yes, I agree with a fair amount with what you said. I have listened to Peterson, Saad, and Weinstein, and like all of them. When it comes to this topic agree with what Peterson said about it. It makes the most sense to me.
Females, no matter how much they want to deny this, are attracted to strength and power. A place where we divide from our more primal ancestors. Looking at the dominance hierarchy of chimpanzees and humans, chimpanzee females are promiscuous maters. This means that they will mate with any male available, and it is the dominant males that chase off the competition to ensure their genes are passed on.
Human females however do not follow this strategy. Instead we peel off the top of the dominance hierarchy. The higher up on the stratosphere of the dominance hierarchy, the more appealing of a mate that male is to females.
This means that females are in direct competition with one another. There is no way around this. If a woman wants the male at the top of the dominance hierarchy she has to do whatever she can to place herself as the most favorable view of that male has to get rid of the competition. This means that females are hardwired to see each other as the competition, not allies.
I don't like dealing with many women either. I find them rather petty, underhanded, and self obsessed. I don't really have the patience to deal with any of that.
Yup. And, having secured that mate, she must continue to compete, to ensure that the mate will continue to provide resources only to her and their children, rather than splitting them between her and other mates/children.
Also, I find discussions about the best makeup brands really boring.
Good lord yes.
There is a spectrum in regards to that, with some people being extremely disloyal, to somewhere in the middle, and then loyal to a fault is on the other end. All humans fall somewhere along this spectrum.
I can see how this might be broadly true, but it doesn't ring true for me. So can we say that since everything is on a spectrum, some of us just don't feel that? I understand it, because as an adolescent, although I was not involved in much bitchy drama, I witnessed it, and I was myself extremely, painfully envious of other girls and their advantages and better qualities. But this feeling dissipated over time.
As an adult I have never had any particular attraction for alpha males (nor particularly the reverse, I just like whoever), I couldn't give a toss about strength or power (though I am definitely a gender-conventional straight woman), and I genuinely feel a deep sisterhood with other females. It took me a while to realise that complimenting other women's beauty or character when describing them was received as odd, even though it came freely to me. Now, I am not super confident, I dislike much of my physical self, I would love great hair, I have not been madly admired in life, but truly, the bond with other females, of all ages, is much stronger than any of that competitive stuff. Yes, put me in a position of being in love with someone who preferred a woman more appealing than me, and I would suffer and feel bitter. But as a part of everyday life? No way!
I have always complimented a woman's beauty when it is warranted, and yes, it does appear that it strikes people as odd.
High status males just look like a lot of trouble! I am happy to have a mix of male and female friends. I am not unattractive, nor amazing, just a regular woman with all the usual self doubts and self criticism. Fortunately I have only rarely been in situations of direct rivalry.
The term "peacocking" can be applied to both men and women. Both sexes will put on a display in an effort to attract mates who may be considered "out of their league"
There's an odd thing about how men handle the situations. A primarily monogamous man will devote a lot of time and effort into mate guarding and he's generally pickier about his mate. The more polygamous a man is curiously the less picky he is, quantity over quality I suppose. A rapist will be completely indiscriminate in victim selection. His action are completely the opposite of the old victim blaming routine..
Intelligence is in the same realm as power. The more intelligent a person is, the better they are at solving abstract problems that can give them a very real advantage.
Good grief, here's something new to me. I have always seen knowledge and intelligence as useful power for myself in my own life, but never thought of intelligence in others as something that made them attractive because it meant power. Maybe I know too many smart but unpowerful nerds who are not high flyers!
Perhaps they are just more attracted to the mind, not the body.
Well since that would be two qualities that are themselves by definition rare, it's not surprising. I knew someone who was both, but they were severely let down by their character.
I am thinking of a female friend who married someone vastly less physically attractive, but I don't wonder why, as he was a good friend of mine beforehand, so I get it!
That's an interesting study and makes sense why women may see other women more as competition from a societal learned behavior. Your use here to exemplify your personal discomfort towards other women that you feel as threatening is also interesting. Do you think that the threat arises also from a sense of insecurities that if they are too much like you that you will be passed over? Please know, I love psychology, so I'm asking out of curiosity to understand more of your thought process not to antagonize you. Whenever I've heard of or witnessed this sort of behavioral response, it's typically stemmed from jealousy or a feeling of inadequacy, and I gather in a tribal setting internal competition between females could mean the difference between being chosen as a mate or dying by being ostracized. Women and men bring a lot of different qualities to the table in a relationship. What traits would you say define being like you verse not like you that you would deem unnecessary that you would not deem unnecessary in a male counterpart?
Hrm. I think you're interpreting my use of the word 'threat' differently than I meant it--I should have been clearer. I was making a callback to evolutionary development and the illustration of men hunting a large, prehistoric animal as a team; let me try to draw the connection a little more clearly this time.
Let's say man A and man B are both on the mammoth-hunting team. Man A is stronger than man B. In some contexts, this makes man A a threat to man B: what if man B has something man A wants? In that context, man A is 100% threat to man B. However, in the context of the mammoth-hunting team, man A's strength helps the team kill the mammoth safely; in this context, man A's strength is 100% asset to man B.
Now let's take woman C and woman D, who are both berry gatherers. Each keeps only what they gather themselves. Woman C has really great eyesight, and can spot and gather 10x as many berries as woman D. Woman C therefore gets 10x the resources, and can feed herself and her family better. Since there are a limited number of berries in the territory, in this context, woman C is 100% threat to woman D: woman C's abilities directly limit woman D's access to food. Unlike with men A & B, women C & D aren't team mates; there is no shared success, and so woman C's ability do not in any way benefit woman D: woman C is 0% asset to woman D.
What I'm getting at here is that, at a very basic, evolutionary level, my lizard brain self does not look at other women who are after the same resources I am, and say, "Ah hah! You're after this as well, therefore you are a potential team mate! Our combined abilities will increase our chances of success!" No, my lizard brain says, "Hands off, lady, that's mine!"
In spite of what the Twitler Youth of today would have us all believe, men and women are, in fact, very different, and our brains work differently on a very fundamental level. This is one of them. Men are better at cooperating with men who fill the same role than women are.
However, that doesn't mean that I--or you, or anyone else--necessarily must allow these ancient building blocks of our brains to dictate how we behave towards others. I don't _treat_ other women as a threat; I'm just self-aware enough to realize that yeah, huh, now that I think about it, this is one of those interesting psychological factors that probably goes into why I might get along with woman E better than I get along with woman F. (Probably has a lot to do with why I tend to have far more male friends than female ones, as well: I can team up with them.)
So, no, I don't have any deep-seated feelings of insecurity or inadequacy playing out here, just increasing self-awareness as I age and introspect. I'm 45, and am fact reveling in one of the most fun stages of a woman's life: I know pretty well who I am, I've got a pretty good grasp on my strengths and weaknesses and how to work within them, and I value my own opinions far more than I do any external opinion. I'm still young and energetic enough to do all the things I consider fun, but old enough not to give a shit if someone catches me, for example, rapping along to an old favorite at the top of my lungs while driving.
Tag Team, back again, check it to wreck it, let's begin...
Er, ahem, sorry about that. Wait, nah, disregard that sorry, I don't give a shit. :) Party on, party people, let me hear some noise, DC's in the house, jump, jump, rejoice!
Cheers to knowing one's self! I stopped caring what most people thought of me a long time ago too (43 going on 44 here.) Personally, I have had more male close friends than female mostly due to lack of common interests growing up. I grew up a Tom boy and could never understand the obsession with makeup and other preening type activities, so I didn't enjoy activities centered around beautification and shopping for cute accessories where boys tended to lead with action and held interests that felt deeper and less superficial. Later in life I found some very down to Earth women who challenged my outlook to see women in a different light to appreciate both genders for their unique attributes and contributions. Men and women are fundamentally different of course, but I also believe that we are farther removed from our prehistoric ancestors enough that it doesn't have to be on a philosophical level. Experience and culture will contour social behavior to a degree, but a person is more than their gender. I was mostly curious on what were qualities that you deemed to be too like yourself that caused you to avoid said women. Keep rocking on 💕
As far as I know, women gatherers pooled the resources back at camp. Sure, some may have scoffed a nest of eggs or some berries surreptitiously in the field, but I thought that gathered materials were mostly communal? And many gathered items required further processing- grass seeds to be ground and baked, poisonous roots pulped, soaked and detoxified, mushrooms cooked, bugs and small critters roasted, molluscs opened.
I think my emergency lizard brain is very active, and I am a good potential gatherer as I can spot a raspberry in a hedgerow driving past at 50mph 😉 but I am just not that competitive in everyday life. Takes all types.
Although, caveat. I become more competitive when I am deeply afraid. And maybe living life on the edge made one perpetually afraid. So maybe what you say is all true after all😊.
That is a pretty unique talent.
I can see this applying more in a genuinely tribal setting because the circle of the world is small.
Your post reminds me of a work situation in my past. One of the women was all feminist, sisterhood, etc. and ALL of the other women hated her. They didn't dislike the girl who did attempt to use her 'charms' nearly as much as the hated the one preaching sisterhood.
Seems reasonable to me.
Not to me!
It makes them direct competition to a possible mate.
Oh definitely, not hot.
I can only speculate about friendship with a psycopath, but I think lot comes down to something I have long called the person's 'Weirdness Threshold'. It's a very conspicuous difference between people who have let their life narrowly and those who have struck out wildly. As kids, every tiny difference in dress, mannerisms, ability etc. was noticeable, laughable, frightening, and judged. With time and experience, so much that is really not important fortunately goes genuinely unnoticed. If someone is familiar with different cultures, disabilities, worldviews, lifestyles, whatever, then hopefully psycopathy would be no impediment to friendship, as despite the vast difference in everyday mental experience, their values and conduct may well be similar.
I wonder about myself though. Years ago, I was so uncontrollably emotional that no, it would not have worked at all. Fundamentally though I am a "just give it a go" person when I like someone, so I hope that I nowdays could be friends with any neurotype. In fact, the more I learn about people in my life, the more I realise that I already have been!
I very much look forward to writings by your friend.
It should be interesting.
You said once that multitasking is BS. How can you listen to somebody and write, cook, etc. at the same time? I would find it difficult to do one properly.
Where did I say that? I would need to see the context in which I said it, because I don't think that is true.
I apologise. I checked and it was not your statement but one comment I read under your Psychopath Manifesto article. I mixed it up.
Not a problem at all.
Not as such, he was not vain, but a great raw intelligence completely untrained and a life lived completely unexamined. Terrible brash combination of arrogance and ignorance, which then leads easily to ugliness. A proudly self-made fool.
I don't know either!
You mentioned that you have thrown people under the bus before. Could you recount an incident as an example?
Not without violating their privacy, no.
Ok , I understand
So you are willing to show your close ones your investment in them, but to an extent , right? You won't be self sacrificial for them, is that right?
Depends on what you mean by self sacrificial. Do you mean giving up what I want to do and do what they want? Sure, I will do that. Or, do you mean that I give up my life for them? Nope, not doing that.
I will write few things that came to my mind while reading (probably a bit off from main topic though):
1)
you have mentioned few times that you lack oxytocin (and thus - emotions). Isn't it like nearly sure test (or at least strong indicator that if positive it might sugest more verification) if someone is psychopath? Is it possible to test presence of oxytocin? (quick google search leads to something else about pregnancy and oxytocin so not related)
2)
i have discussed some of the information i have read here on your blog with my friends/collegues. This will reveal why i asked nr 1) - after that discussion we have strong suspicion that one of them might have some psychopatic traits (including him thinking this too of course). I have recomended him to go check your site but (as expected) he bluntly said he will have no time/interest at his moment (slim chances) but if i find any other interesting information i can draw the essence and share with him.
What was my intention here: from what i understand - beeing aware that someone is psychopath can make life much easier both for the psychopath and everyone around them (there is probably some drawback too that as i can gladly see you are actively fighting it here - stereotypes combined with herd mentality that might lead to "burn the witch" incidents in one way or another...).
Good example what i mean here is this - understanding situation and predictable behaviors. I have asked mentioned friend if i understand corectly (based on what i was reading here) what would happen in this hypothetical scenario:
- zombie appocalypse breaks out. For him to "team up" with me and increase chances of survival i would have to prove usefull in some way or another (i.e. i have a gun and know how to use it or i am good at hacking and there is a chance i can get us in otherwise unavailable places or i can make some good food). Otherwise he will just ditch me at first possible occasion - is that right? His answer was short: "yes".
Simple and genuine - and now i know what to do when zombie appocalypse breaks out if i want to stay on the team :).
3)
When i found out your blog (thank you for beeing active on Quora) i was wondering if i might be psychopath too but soon enough dismissed the thought. Most likely i am highly functioning autistic and i think there are some similarities but with different genesis/source:
- i am not fond of physical interactions (but not liking something is different than beeing indifferent to it or not needing it)
- i have strong conscious cognitive empathy (which kind of might look like lack of empathy but it is just different type i think) - really usefull for lie detecting.
- i very rarely worry about what others think or speak of me (unless it is straight up lie that intends to criple me in some way - then i just try to expose it).
- i put on weird masks around people (unconsciously mimicking their state of emotions so in a different way than you mention it). What is really worth underlining here - around that friend i mentioned who might be psychopatch - i feel... neutral (if that makes sense). My state is basicly the same if i am alone or he is around.
Why i mention this here: i used search on your blog for "autistic" and the word appears few times too so you might have some knowledge (had no time to read those articles yet but will get there in time probably). What i was thinking is this: there are few categories marked as "disorders" (psychopatic, narcissistic, autistic, ...). I am not exactly sure why it is called disorder though... like... sure - mind is wired differently that is clear (and knowing how it is different can be really usefull). But dissorder means something is not right or needs fixing. From what i can tell there is nothing to fix.
1. Psychopaths do not lack oxytocin. We have a mutated oxytocin receptor that it will not bind to. It is present in the system, it is not processed.
2. Psychopaths do not lack emotions. We lack some, the rest are muted. The idea that psychopaths have no emotions is a myth.
3. I can understand his lack of interest in reading it for himself. It's a lot of investment, and if it doesn't have a strong draw for him, it is easier to have you filter it to him. I am the same way.
4. They are called disorders because they do not line up with neurotypicals. As they have the largest numbers in the population, they have decided that anyone that doesn't function like they do is disordered. It is very egotistical thinking in my mind. I have done some writing on autism, but only insofar as to demonstrate how it is different than psychopathy, and also how I relate to people that have autism.
Thank you for reply and clarification about points 1 and 2 (will understand it better now - i think).
You are quite welcome
Desperate, clingy people are often very badly damaged, and this is NOT incompatible with self respect (a concept which is too narrowly defined, sadly). The clingy conduct can occur independently of a sense of self and self worth. Indeed, this apparent contradiction in the person's mind can just make matters worse.
Perhaps you are expecting change for yourself on an unrealistic timeframe. Change can occur with jumps and pauses, not just incrementally. It in no way means you are a caricature of a person, you are too reflective for that to be the case. You are not one of those people doomed to be set in aspic.
The issue of diversity of opinion has become difficult and muddied lately. What is legitimate diversity of opinion and what is just plain ugly toxicity which you really need not consider? You will work it out and become receptive to the diversity that can cause you to grow. But new foods, come on! That's one of life's unequivocal joys, get with it! 😊
I totally get it about having the upper hand in relationships, because I never have had it. All the stuff you imagine they are feeling, and it turns out they are not. It's NOT about wanting them to suffer, it's about the shock of realising how much you felt that they had no idea about, and how much their conduct did not take those feelings into account.
Getting emotional in an argument, yeah. Me and my female friends, we discuss how hard we try not to, so as to maintain credibility, because we don't want our good words and good ideas discredited. The lip biting, nose pinching, open blinking, thinking of kittens, going to the bathroom and then drying your eyes and pretending you are fierce, and then after hours of struggling for control, the lip wobbles and the tears flow, and the other person says, 'Hey, there you go, turning on the water works trying to manipulate me'. Sigh. It's beyond galling. I hope humans can reach some communicative clarity around this soon.
Interesting about your possibly psycopathic friend. Maybe it's like with cats, we just have to accept people like that on their own terms, or not be around them!
Your friend sounds very similar to a psychopath. Of course, I am not saying that she is, but that is very similar to how many of my relationships play out from the other person's perspective.
What an interesting portrait, thanks for sharing.
If she was like me, the tears were absolutely BS, but they work.
The envy part isn't correct for a psychopath though, and adding the childhood abuse, she may well fall more on the sociopathic side, than psychopathy.
Even more interesting. And a bit scary....