I agree. I find the entire idea of "empathy" to be overplayed, ill defined, contrary, and subject to the whims of those that seem to hold it in such high regard. As a concept it seems to be nothing more than wishful thinking and projection of how a person feels about a situation themselves, and them projecting that assumption out into the world.
Sure, it is useful with people that are similar in thinking, but even in those cases, it fails when empathy runs contrary to what the people in the situation wants. So long as they are congruent in their ideas, empathy seems to work fine. However, if one person has different goals or desired outcomes for a situation, empathy falls completely flat.
I am reminded of a guy from a Middle Eastern culture talking about how he was brought up to see the world. Him against his brothers, him and his brothers against their cousins, he, his brothers and their cousins against their father and uncle’s etc. At some point he said you learn empathy for those like yourself and that’s how the clan extended and survived.
All my life I had been baffled when someone would tell me to have empathy or that they were an ‘empath’ as I could see that someone may be in a bad place and that I could understand and act upon but there wasn’t an emotional response for me.
Going back to my example, what I was getting at is that people have to learn where to direct their emotional empathy whether same sex near relatives, fictive kin in a religious group or those perceived too be worthy of it by religious leader or college professors
I'm not sure that's right. When I am around people in general I get the feeling a whole lot they are communicating in a secret language. A language that is very irrational. Experience back this up.
In Paul Blooms book on empathy he gives the example of an experiment where the participant was nastier to a person who was in a competition with a person they had empathy for. I think this kind of black and white thinking. Overidentification with ones own football team or political side, and a morality that is based on that; is very, very common.
There are a few people around with undiagnosed autism though in my opinion. I know someone who works with someone like this who communicates with customers very robotically and spends a lot of her time sewing these beautiful, intricate jumpers and quilts and things.
"Fondly fornicate with a fork" will be ringing in my ears for a long time lol. But really, this is getting old, isn't it? I see that even among people who are supposed to be the 'most highly educated' among us, the blind ignorance, abject arrogance, and ingrained biases don't relinquish their cold death grips automatically. Sigh. I'm not surprised, just disappointed.
Also, I can relate to this: "It is about leveling the playing field and teaching a lesson." But opposite of you, I unfortunately do let my emotions get involved and waste my energy. I need to learn I'm not a god, it's not my business, and I need to effin' let. it. go. more often. Life is not fair, and expecting it to be leads to unnecessary suffering. (I don't know everything anyway.)
P.S. - It was nice to see the plug about autistic people. We're often misunderstood in this respect.
As an autistic person reading your accounts of psychopathy, I am increasingly struck by the number of similarities in our experiences, despite the fact that autism is effectively a polar opposite of psychopathy.
That was my impression too when I first started reading about psychopathy. My explanation is that it is society unable to cope with differing neurologies that's at fault. I've noticed that whenever either psychopathy or autism is talked about, they always talk about, lack of empathy, lack of social skills, manipulation, lack of theory of mind, etc. traits which affect how we interact with others, are talked about first. A psychopath's chronic boredom or an autistic's sensory issues, seem to be considered secondary to the social aspects of these neurologies.
I find it fascinating that the things that are identified as "problems" are only problems when it comes to interacting with neurotypicals. It isn't a problem when I interact with another psychopath, and I would guess that the things that are labeled as problems with autism are not an issue when interaction with someone else that is also autistic. It's only a problem when it fails to meet the expectations of the group. There was a time, and I am certain of this, that these differences were understood to be required for human survival, but in recent years (as in centuries) abject conformity is now what society leans towards.
I think part of the problem is how recent civilization is in the grand scheme of human evolution. Our species has been around for 200 thousand years and agricultural civilizations have only popped up around 10 thousand years ago.
The maximum number of social relationships a person can maintain at any given time is 150. If you look at hunter gatherer societies today they range between 50 to 150 individuals. Beyond 150 you’ll start to have people who don’t know each other causing mistrust creating the need for government to keep the piece.
The reason I’m saying this is because when you live in a society where everyone knows each other, it’s a lot easier to accept odd behaviour since you’re more likely to trust them.
Odd behaviour from a stranger however, is more likely to be met with suspicion.
Oh good, another term that just muddies the waters. TIV describes narcissism. It’s just another term that sounds more palatable, particularly with reference to women narcissists. Society is fixated on the idea of women being nurturing and loving. To describe a female as a narcissist doesn’t go down well.
People imagine narcissists as the brash, loud mouth, attention seeking, arrogant somatic narcissist. That is just one flavour of narcissist. They don’t associate the passive aggressive victim mentality with narcissism. Male or female, it’s irrelevant, both can use passive aggressive behaviours to assert control. Both can play the victim card to assert control, both can threaten suicide to assert control and prevent the loss of a source of fuel / supply. These TIV behaviours are designed to assert control, narcissists need control because they need a source of supply / fuel to function in the world. Passive aggression is just another manipulation. All humans will manipulate to a degree, healthy humans know when they are manipulating. A narcissist manipulates repeatedly and most are unaware that they are doing so or even why they are doing it. They do it for control, fuel, residual benefits.
Narcissists seek revenge because they must have control over another person. Psychopaths to my knowledge don’t require control because they don’t really require people. If I was a psychopath I’d be pissed off with the repeated misrepresentation. Most behaviours attributed to psychopaths seem to me to be either those of a narcissist or those of an individual with ASPD, which in itself has a strong component of narcissism within it. I don’t see why academics misattribute in this way.
When it comes to empathy, I believe it’s on a spectrum. Demonstration of emotional empathy really relates to empathic range. A ‘normal’ person exhibits a high degree of emotional empathy for family, close friends, some work colleagues, a neighbour perhaps. Someone with higher emotional empathy, or a ‘empath’ just has a broader empathic range that will include strangers, someone begging on the street. An advert for a charity organisation might move them to tears. Emotional empathy, just broad range. So again, I agree normal people will exhibit emotional empathy towards one person but not another depending on empathic range and no where is this illustrated more effectively than on social media. Normal people will pile on because the person online falls outside of the range of empathy, they would never behave in that way in real life, with friends, family or colleagues.
If TIV is caused by the way a person is raised this again suggested narcissism to me. Narcissism requires a ‘Lack Of Control Environment’ to form. I honestly think that TIV refers to a specific form of narcissism rather than anything else.
Oh yes, very much so, and this is true regardless of what ideology a person belongs to. I have never cared. What I care about is does this person know what they are talking about or are they just repeating talking points that they have no understanding of.
Far too many times I have conversations with people that are very very passionate about some political issue, but when it comes down to even the most simple of conversation, or slightest disagreement, they show that they really don't know the bare basics, let alone have any depth of knowledge that would warrant such a dedication to the cause. I would disagree with anyone being vehement in beliefs without the ability to question even if they were very informed, but when there is nothing backing up what they think it is far more vexing.
I dislike people that need to be told what to think and then want to download that unexamined set of beliefs into others.
Alicia, any topic that is off limits at a dinner party is off limits for a reason haha!
I wonder if topics such as politics and religion cause empathy reduction because they relate to a group / tribe rather than just the individual? In the case of politics people argue about what is best for the country rather than necessarily what they feel is best for themselves. Is this an instinct to protect the tribe as a whole? Therefore emotional empathy dims and traits such as anger and defiance light up to do this more assertively?
That's an excellent perspective I really didn't consider that! Yet look at the violence behind these tribal issues 🤔 Lol, you're right about the dinner party thing but in these woke social inclusive bs times [insert any word salads] people do not have any manners and have asked me about my personal choices/preferences (politics, religion, medical choices)! 🙄😂
Yep, very fair point about violence behind tribal issues. I don’t have the answer. There can be so many factors in play I think.
A researcher at the London war museum has studied the holocaust in detail and is shortly releasing a book about his findings. His name escapes me. We like to think that those atrocities were committed by a small percentage of very evil people. This researcher has found unmarked mass graves all over Europe. So many, that it is impossible for these executions to have been carried out by a small percentage of people. Many, many people were involved. Are we to believe that all of them lacked emotional empathy? Statistically, no. So other factors must feed in. The charismatic true believer sits at the top and slowly takes control, finds societal weak spots and presents a common enemy, enforces an ideology through fear, threat and propaganda and suddenly ordinary people, people with families, children they love are mindlessly committing horrific acts.
Cults work similarly. Place enough psychological pressure on someone and they break, emotional empathy becomes suspended and they adopt the hive mind of the cult.
Emotional empathy is most definitely fallible, I’m not sure if cognitive empathy would be similarly suspended in these specific circumstances, I assume there would be similar diminution also?
Hahaha! That’s it, never attending a dinner party again. That’s another great point, the wokerati do seem to have very limited boundary recognition. Personal choice and preferences are exactly that, personal. If people share that information, that’s entirely up to them but I wouldn’t dream of putting someone in a position where they felt obligated to share it. It makes me cringe just thinking about it! Woke is just highly suspect full stop.
Tribalism is hardwired. It ensured human survival for all of human existence. Society has advanced quickly, and the human desire to be comfortable makes accepting these changes easier. However, that does nothing to change that hard wiring. The problem in that tribes have shifted dramatically in construction, and aren't defined as a group of people that know and trust one another, to a group of people that share a set of beliefs, many of which have an emotional basis.
Being able to manipulate emotions plays directly into creating a tribe and activating the blind tribalistic behavior that has kept humans alive for so long. People that understand this can easily manipulate others to follow without question. I am thinking of writing a post on watching this process in others.
It's actually kind of scary how these people can believe that their political/religious beliefs are the only truth on a planet of approx. 8 billion. 🤦♀️🤔
Hi Savannah, I agree. Western society seems to have lost the ability to debate politics and find a middle ground. The left going too far left and being entirely unfettered is a bad idea. We know what happens when the right goes too far right. There seems to be no willingness to listen or consider an opposing view.
Woke is used like a suit of armour. “ I am right for I am the righteous woke and am inclusive of all. I am the epitome of kindness and acceptance.” ( until you disagree with me, then I shall smear you as a racist, a misogynist or a TERF.) It’s insidious, and an excellent way of controlling the narrative. Agree, or you will be cancelled, your career will be in tatters and you will be the outcast. Scary times.
You have a very reasonable view of your interaction with your professor. You have personal insight as to how you may have contributed, and walked away from it without assigning motivation to that professor that wasn't indicated in the exchange.
If you see this person’s behaviour as inappropriate then it’s inappropriate to you. This is what matters. I think fair minded people often question themselves. Is it me? Am I over reacting? Did I misinterpret what was meant?
If something makes you feel uncomfortable, you raise it and ask the individual to please not behave in that manner around you, then a reasonable person should respect that and correct the behaviour once pointed out. If they continue with the behaviour, then to me this suggests a lack of consideration for your boundaries and the person becomes problematic.
I do see a lot of hypocrisy in play with the woke ideology. It does seem to attract questionable personalities more often than not. Do the actions match the words? That’s often a good indicator. If not, that’s the time I start to distance myself.
I agree with you, we often do feel like we can’t say anything any more. Say the wrong thing and we risk being unfairly labelled. This concerns me. Sadly racism does exist but it’s a problem that cannot be resolved if people are too afraid to talk to each other for fear of making a faux pas. Terminology is another stick to beat people with. I worry that people in general will soon avoid talking to those from different cultures , ethnic backgrounds or sexual orientation for fear of using incorrect terminology. It will get to a point where it feels like too much of a risk. Easier just to stay quiet, safe within our own little groups. Where is the unity in that? How do we move forward from there? It bothers me, it really bothers me.
The world we live in today is vastly different from that of just 20 years ago . It is my observation this change permeates even the solidest of foundational belief systems and the accompanying moral compasses attatched to each . There is a time tested measuring stick that speaks volumes to a societies condition
“Weak men create Hard times , Hard times create Strong men , strong men create Good times ….good times create weak men . …….
The cycle repeats itself …. It applies everywhere you find a breakdown or a decay in how a society interacts smoothly …..where suddenly it’s necessary to rewrite things to suit a distinct minority or cater to a manipulated new norm that is suddenly enforced furiously whereas prior it was simply ignored as the nonsense it is. Wherever accountability and transparency is sacrificed in the name of colorful new buzzwords never before given any consideration. Where the intentional obfuscation of proven fact takes priority at the cost of human suffering or the Equal application of Law regardless of cultural differences . When it becomes a matter of one’s personal safety being at risk to exercise basic freedom of speech pursuit of happiness , to protect the individual and the people thru a well regulated militia ….. when we experience infringement when it is constitutionally clear that these inalienable rights “ SHALl NOT BE infringed…..,. Make no mistake in your observations Athena …..psychopath or not …… We as a collective are experiencing what Weak men have to offer ….in time it will spur a generation of strong men that will do whatever is necessary to bring about good times , logical thought processes and the preservation of such . In the meantime buckle up the beta brigade of situation empathizers with no moral compass to point true north is in control of thought , law an censorship . On that note have a wonderful weekend.
Ah yes, censorship is such a 21st century thing, that’s why the original English release of Sailor Moon totally didn’t change a lesbian couple into to cousins.
as laughable as emotional empathy may look in a wider perspective, i got an idea it plays a big role in evolution. empathy defines who's worthy staying in our inner circle. those who are not understood are eventually hounded out.
such evaluation can be done on a cognitive basis just as well but it takes some effort, doesn't it? emotional empathy appears to be an idiot proof shortcut.
Yes, I agree with it having value, I think it has too much power in people's minds because of what they believe it to be. It is definitely not foolproof, and in fact, has a large number of problems.
Cognitive empathy is really good to have, but yes, it takes a lot of time to develop.
An idiot, a fool... just another term for sbd, that was not blessed w/ cognitive empathy or an access to it, respectively. w/ a slight pinch of a negative connotation.
The more I journey on and learn about myself the more I seriously distrust all the hoopla about emotional empathy, and of course 🙄 this info comes from so-called professionals and/or "empaths" or NT's. So many like to point their fingers and judge my cluster b, and the victim game just becomes louder and an incessant cacophony. My theory is that they are mostly highly narcissistic people.
People who make a show out of emotional empathy imo are dangerous people. They rely on their emotional thinking in such a way that when real problems arise you really can't trust their reactions. Same can be said for those who have neither emotional or cognitive empathy, but I tend to put my faith in those with high cognition. I've been actually dealing with these same issues recently with people in my life and it's ironic how much "NT's" and narcissists truly mirror because it's so highly manipulative. I am so grateful I now have the clarity to see it. 💯💯
“People who make a show out of emotional empathy imo are dangerous people.”
Fully agree. If you want to volunteer your time in a soup kitchen, go and volunteer your time. It’s the volunteering part that comes from a genuine place. However, if you volunteer at a soup kitchen, tell everyone you can think of that you have done it, post pictures of yourself on Instagram and Facebook, take a photographer and journalist from your local paper to broadcast your ‘good deed’ to the world then I have to question your motive for volunteering! Similarly announcing “I am an empath” ( you should be more like me) is also questionable in my view. If you are one, then you know you are and there’s no need to announce yourself. Announcing implies attempted grandiosity, superiority and a desire for some form of applause or recognition.
I think the term empath has been commandeered by the crazies on the internet and turned into an almost mystical representation of something ‘ desirable. ‘The reality is likely more along the lines of the fact that somebody has to sit at one end of the emotional empathy scale, someone else at the other end, nothing more complicated than that.
In terms of emotional empathy itself, I wouldn’t be without mine but I also agree that it has its limitations and is best used alongside cognitive empathy.
There's value in both giving for self-interest and giving for generosities sake. After all, I donate to cancer research and spend a crapload at a gala for self-promotion and interest- It will help me make more money! However, there is a net benefit outcome and I couldn't care less about whether or not people care that I'm a good guy or bad guy. At the same time, I’ll turn a blind eye to the starving guy on the subway asking for food because I just don't carry cash or apples in my pocket and do not care about his fate in the least bit. I may post while volunteering on my social media though, not because I want people to know how nice I am, but rather that I find the time to be nice and that mentality helps to perpetuate those “look at me Im soooo like good” people whom I was trying to influence. I genuinely find joy in helping people solve their problems for nothing in return when I can though and can care less about what people think about my empathy. Time is more valuable than any income for me. I understand your point, about fake empathy, and agree with it 100%, but social engineering isn't the problem, stupid self-absorption and aimless shallowness.
"likely that they do not recognize themselves in the people across from them. I imagine that it is pretty difficult to recognize yourself in people that you consider the aggressor, and yourself the victim, so of course, it doesn’t fire."
I admit that my so called hyper emotional empathy (lol) is only present in a limited number of situations. In others, I have 0 idea of what it feels like. It's a very weird phenomenon... I could be moved by certain details or stories, yet I don't recall ever feeling emotional over someone's death. It's not something I'm necessarily proud of, it's just the way my brain functions in that situation.
I am capable of theoretically "recognizing myself as the aggressor when I'm the victim". I do this when I want to have the best chance of understanding what is happening, but normally it ends up as just a horror mental trip involving toxic levels of unwarranted narcissism, will to cause damage, and evidently lack of care about it. It's always the same outcome because I never actively saught to bother anyone in the first place and I take reasonable measures of indirect effects. I believe that this is a very telling sign of your character, whether or not you're capable of seeing and want to see beyond your perspective... I do it for my personal growth, and I want my actions and thoughts to be based on the truth, not what I just want to believe. However, it was a disadvantage when I dealed with someone who's only goal was to have my leg on their dinner plate and didn't care to entertain the chance that perhaps their premises were not completely right - and thus shouldn't seek my leg. I meet many people who hold onto wrong premises and refuse to self check, it was my experience that people fear having their notions shaked, and I could tell that if it were to happen it would automatically shake them mentally too. It is "easier" to pull this under the rug and keep going, I guess it takes a certain level of mental strength...
In his book "Against Empathy: The Case for Rational Compassion”, author Paul Bloom draws a distinction between empathy (the ability to feel other people’s pain) and compassion (desiring others’ well-being); according to Bloom, society needs less of the former and more of the latter...
Hi, first time posting here! I am enjoying your posts a lot, it make me feel less lonely knowing that other people think similar about some matters that I never felt comfortable talking about.
Agreed with Soren, it is disappointing to see stereotypes beat even the most educated. Worse even, the masses consuming these 10-point definitions without further informing themselves. It is tiring to read these definitions of anything "female" that seem inspired in Fatal Attraction.
To me, empathy has always been like the "maternal instinct", it is a unicorn that requires a level of connection that can be seen only when highly identifying with the other party. There is support, encouragement, help, loyalty, even hormones lots of things that can drive us to connect and somewhat empathize with the counterpart can do but... "putting ourselves in the shoes of the other" or "feeling for the other"? What the hell does that even mean?
Thanks for writing about TIV, sounds very interesting and will follow-up on it.
ASPD has nothing to do with a different brain structure. ASPD is a behavioral diagnosis only and can be applied to anyone that behaves to the criteria of the diagnosis.
Anyone can be diagnosed with ASPD.
Psychopaths can have ASPD.
Most psychopaths do not have ASPD.
Most people with ASPD are neurotypicals. This is due to their dominance in the percentage of population. Most people that are antisocial have completely normal brains.
My confusion arose due to people using ASPD and the term psychopath almost interchangeably. I fundamentally disagreed with that due to my own reading and time here on your blog. So I separated the two terms out but wasn’t sure if psychopathy was a pre requisite for ASPD.
Your explanation makes perfect sense. Thank you for answering.
But couldnt be made the argument that a specific brain structure is required in order to engage in antisocial behaviour regularly?
Can I technically behave to the criteria of ASPD? Yes. Now, whether or not my brain structure is capable of feeling guilt, shame, remorse by the behaviours and thus lead me to cease or actually further engage is a different thing.
It would seem to me that while everybody theoretically can follow a conduct if they want to, not everybody has the brain structure for it. So technically, I can see a point in thinking that people with ASPD can share a certain number of brain structure similarities that would enable them to choose to engage in the act multiple times and be unaffected by it. As I likely doubt someone who has ASPD feels particularly negatively about it...
Actually, you would be incorrect about that. Most people that have ASPD are neurotypical, and are wired for guilt and remorse. They either experience those things regarding what they do, but not enough for it to change what they do, or they are very good at justifying their behavior to themselves. Emotions are not the super-governors of behavior that many people assume them to be. Most of the heinous actions committed in the world are done so by perfectly neurotypical, but act in spite of, or because of, those emotions.
I wish I could engage more deeply but I lack knowledge and research to do so.
Perhaps I have been incorrect about trying to label the huge number of people who commit heinous actions with an etiquette of "something has to be wrong with them neurologically even if I can't point out what". Perhaps I'm struggling to accept a potential aspect of human nature that I myself might have.
Ikr?! And I'm just a disordered twat for not. It's unbelievable how many "empaths" whose relationship ended with a cluster b individual play the victims and make us out to be the evil villain while still crying over the breakup. I get a lot of that shaming when discussing openly my disorder on Quora. Ugh 🤦♀️
Oh yes, that is a real problem. No self-insight, and nothing but blame. There also seems to be no reasoning with them either. I have had a few that seem to come around and stop being so vitriolic, but then something must happen, because they do an about-face, go back to screaming in my comments section.
I'm so sorry Athena. You don't deserve that. You have been very forthright and articulate in your writing in trying to educate these fools. I appreciate that bc we are not alone and honestly so not trying to spread toxicity. ❤
Yes. The notion of the psychopath=mean girl bully genuinely comes across to me as such a desperate need for explanation, but a lack of ability to understand how humans function. If the person that is bullied cannot comprehend why this person was mean to them, it must be that they are incomprehensible and evil, and that is what psychopaths are in their minds.
"A lot of women prefer male friends because of the simplicity of the friendships."
I'm one of those women. I moved to a place where it's clear that I'm not a native. I'm like an alien, and the women here are very tribal, and I don't really care to fit in. The men are the only people interested in me. I'm originally from New Orleans, and I have a lot of female friends from that area, and others, but not where I currently live. It is what it is, I guess.
I have a partner, and feel comfortable with most people. But, one example was when we moved to a resort type area with mostly older people. The women might have been threatened because I was younger. I was the only one that didn't attend church services. I was the only college educated female. All of that could have made me suspect, but I think not being a church member was the dominant reason that I was snubbed by these women. When we would go to a party, the men and women would divide into same sex groups to socialize, which was really odd to me. Catty and sometimes outright rude remarks were common enough from the women's clique for me to gravitate towards the men, who were always friendly, and enjoyed talking to me. Women probably got jealous when I talked to their husbands, but if the women had been friendly, I would have been talking to them instead.
Back home, I had pleasant friendships with all ages, religions, worldviews, cultures, races, etc. I find most people interesting. I guess you could say that the NOLA vibe suits me better. When I didn't fit in with those particular ladies, I was surprised by how territorial, threatened and mean they were. It was all very silly, as far as I was concerned, and I didn't really care. I'm an introvert, and enjoy my own company. We moved to a different neighborhood, everyone is much younger than we are. We get along better, too. I'm content alone, or with the company of my partner, and our cat. But, I have male and female friends from all over.
I could write an entire book about mystifying, but isolated encounters I've had with female aggression. The instance I just described was the only time I had a "mean girls" group experience. But, I think Athena is right about this. ALL humans are capable of aggression, and it's quite common in both sexes.
Females have a very specific way of interacting with one another. I wrote about this in a previous post. I think that there is an age cutoff for this. Once females advance past breeding ages, this seems to die off quite a bit. No longer being in competition with one another seems to do the trick.
Athena, you might be surprised. I'm a former nurse, and when I started school, the first place a student nurse worked was in a nursing home. We were warned to be very careful not to be overly friendly with the males, because many female patients had crushes, and if you seemed flirtatious, they would make things very difficult for you! So, even when mating season is clearly over, cupid can misbehave!
In the situation I described, the men were relaxed, and easy going. I didn't see any competition. None were flirtatious with me. In fact, I really enjoy talking to older men because romance is not usually in the equation, especially since they were all married. I knew a lot of older women in NOLA, and they were great, too. It all depends, I guess.
I really think that in parts of the Bible Belt, women who don't go to church are an anomaly. Everyone I know here does. When we moved here, one man asked us what church we were going to join. When my partner told him that we weren't religious, he said,"Well, you won't have any social life then", which we found hilarious, but his wife elbowed him, annoyed!
The downside is how exhausting jobs are that involve a lot of engagement. Extroverts are stimulated by them, and can go out and socialize afterwards. I would just want to be alone with a book, or on the computer in my own world. There's only so much social energy.
It occurs to me that lacking emotional empathy is so common as to be rather useless as a diagnostic criteria
I agree. I find the entire idea of "empathy" to be overplayed, ill defined, contrary, and subject to the whims of those that seem to hold it in such high regard. As a concept it seems to be nothing more than wishful thinking and projection of how a person feels about a situation themselves, and them projecting that assumption out into the world.
Sure, it is useful with people that are similar in thinking, but even in those cases, it fails when empathy runs contrary to what the people in the situation wants. So long as they are congruent in their ideas, empathy seems to work fine. However, if one person has different goals or desired outcomes for a situation, empathy falls completely flat.
I am reminded of a guy from a Middle Eastern culture talking about how he was brought up to see the world. Him against his brothers, him and his brothers against their cousins, he, his brothers and their cousins against their father and uncle’s etc. At some point he said you learn empathy for those like yourself and that’s how the clan extended and survived.
All my life I had been baffled when someone would tell me to have empathy or that they were an ‘empath’ as I could see that someone may be in a bad place and that I could understand and act upon but there wasn’t an emotional response for me.
Going back to my example, what I was getting at is that people have to learn where to direct their emotional empathy whether same sex near relatives, fictive kin in a religious group or those perceived too be worthy of it by religious leader or college professors
I'm not sure that's right. When I am around people in general I get the feeling a whole lot they are communicating in a secret language. A language that is very irrational. Experience back this up.
In Paul Blooms book on empathy he gives the example of an experiment where the participant was nastier to a person who was in a competition with a person they had empathy for. I think this kind of black and white thinking. Overidentification with ones own football team or political side, and a morality that is based on that; is very, very common.
There are a few people around with undiagnosed autism though in my opinion. I know someone who works with someone like this who communicates with customers very robotically and spends a lot of her time sewing these beautiful, intricate jumpers and quilts and things.
"Fondly fornicate with a fork" will be ringing in my ears for a long time lol. But really, this is getting old, isn't it? I see that even among people who are supposed to be the 'most highly educated' among us, the blind ignorance, abject arrogance, and ingrained biases don't relinquish their cold death grips automatically. Sigh. I'm not surprised, just disappointed.
Also, I can relate to this: "It is about leveling the playing field and teaching a lesson." But opposite of you, I unfortunately do let my emotions get involved and waste my energy. I need to learn I'm not a god, it's not my business, and I need to effin' let. it. go. more often. Life is not fair, and expecting it to be leads to unnecessary suffering. (I don't know everything anyway.)
P.S. - It was nice to see the plug about autistic people. We're often misunderstood in this respect.
Hello Soren,
Your realization that you let your "emotions get involved and waste my energy..." is more powerful than you probably realize.
Best wishes, Eve
As an autistic person reading your accounts of psychopathy, I am increasingly struck by the number of similarities in our experiences, despite the fact that autism is effectively a polar opposite of psychopathy.
It is quite remarkable, I agree.
That was my impression too when I first started reading about psychopathy. My explanation is that it is society unable to cope with differing neurologies that's at fault. I've noticed that whenever either psychopathy or autism is talked about, they always talk about, lack of empathy, lack of social skills, manipulation, lack of theory of mind, etc. traits which affect how we interact with others, are talked about first. A psychopath's chronic boredom or an autistic's sensory issues, seem to be considered secondary to the social aspects of these neurologies.
I find it fascinating that the things that are identified as "problems" are only problems when it comes to interacting with neurotypicals. It isn't a problem when I interact with another psychopath, and I would guess that the things that are labeled as problems with autism are not an issue when interaction with someone else that is also autistic. It's only a problem when it fails to meet the expectations of the group. There was a time, and I am certain of this, that these differences were understood to be required for human survival, but in recent years (as in centuries) abject conformity is now what society leans towards.
I think part of the problem is how recent civilization is in the grand scheme of human evolution. Our species has been around for 200 thousand years and agricultural civilizations have only popped up around 10 thousand years ago.
The maximum number of social relationships a person can maintain at any given time is 150. If you look at hunter gatherer societies today they range between 50 to 150 individuals. Beyond 150 you’ll start to have people who don’t know each other causing mistrust creating the need for government to keep the piece.
The reason I’m saying this is because when you live in a society where everyone knows each other, it’s a lot easier to accept odd behaviour since you’re more likely to trust them.
Odd behaviour from a stranger however, is more likely to be met with suspicion.
Abject conformity! Yes, Athena, well said. 👍💪❤
That makes a lot of sense…
Theory of mind is the ability to determine the mental states of others. It’s basically cognitive empathy.
Oh good, another term that just muddies the waters. TIV describes narcissism. It’s just another term that sounds more palatable, particularly with reference to women narcissists. Society is fixated on the idea of women being nurturing and loving. To describe a female as a narcissist doesn’t go down well.
People imagine narcissists as the brash, loud mouth, attention seeking, arrogant somatic narcissist. That is just one flavour of narcissist. They don’t associate the passive aggressive victim mentality with narcissism. Male or female, it’s irrelevant, both can use passive aggressive behaviours to assert control. Both can play the victim card to assert control, both can threaten suicide to assert control and prevent the loss of a source of fuel / supply. These TIV behaviours are designed to assert control, narcissists need control because they need a source of supply / fuel to function in the world. Passive aggression is just another manipulation. All humans will manipulate to a degree, healthy humans know when they are manipulating. A narcissist manipulates repeatedly and most are unaware that they are doing so or even why they are doing it. They do it for control, fuel, residual benefits.
Narcissists seek revenge because they must have control over another person. Psychopaths to my knowledge don’t require control because they don’t really require people. If I was a psychopath I’d be pissed off with the repeated misrepresentation. Most behaviours attributed to psychopaths seem to me to be either those of a narcissist or those of an individual with ASPD, which in itself has a strong component of narcissism within it. I don’t see why academics misattribute in this way.
When it comes to empathy, I believe it’s on a spectrum. Demonstration of emotional empathy really relates to empathic range. A ‘normal’ person exhibits a high degree of emotional empathy for family, close friends, some work colleagues, a neighbour perhaps. Someone with higher emotional empathy, or a ‘empath’ just has a broader empathic range that will include strangers, someone begging on the street. An advert for a charity organisation might move them to tears. Emotional empathy, just broad range. So again, I agree normal people will exhibit emotional empathy towards one person but not another depending on empathic range and no where is this illustrated more effectively than on social media. Normal people will pile on because the person online falls outside of the range of empathy, they would never behave in that way in real life, with friends, family or colleagues.
If TIV is caused by the way a person is raised this again suggested narcissism to me. Narcissism requires a ‘Lack Of Control Environment’ to form. I honestly think that TIV refers to a specific form of narcissism rather than anything else.
Oh yes, very much so, and this is true regardless of what ideology a person belongs to. I have never cared. What I care about is does this person know what they are talking about or are they just repeating talking points that they have no understanding of.
Far too many times I have conversations with people that are very very passionate about some political issue, but when it comes down to even the most simple of conversation, or slightest disagreement, they show that they really don't know the bare basics, let alone have any depth of knowledge that would warrant such a dedication to the cause. I would disagree with anyone being vehement in beliefs without the ability to question even if they were very informed, but when there is nothing backing up what they think it is far more vexing.
I dislike people that need to be told what to think and then want to download that unexamined set of beliefs into others.
Uninformed would be the correct term. Unfortunately it lacks the shame impact that the emotionally charged words do, so it isn't what is chosen.
And religious beliefs!
Alicia, any topic that is off limits at a dinner party is off limits for a reason haha!
I wonder if topics such as politics and religion cause empathy reduction because they relate to a group / tribe rather than just the individual? In the case of politics people argue about what is best for the country rather than necessarily what they feel is best for themselves. Is this an instinct to protect the tribe as a whole? Therefore emotional empathy dims and traits such as anger and defiance light up to do this more assertively?
That's an excellent perspective I really didn't consider that! Yet look at the violence behind these tribal issues 🤔 Lol, you're right about the dinner party thing but in these woke social inclusive bs times [insert any word salads] people do not have any manners and have asked me about my personal choices/preferences (politics, religion, medical choices)! 🙄😂
Hi Alicia,
Yep, very fair point about violence behind tribal issues. I don’t have the answer. There can be so many factors in play I think.
A researcher at the London war museum has studied the holocaust in detail and is shortly releasing a book about his findings. His name escapes me. We like to think that those atrocities were committed by a small percentage of very evil people. This researcher has found unmarked mass graves all over Europe. So many, that it is impossible for these executions to have been carried out by a small percentage of people. Many, many people were involved. Are we to believe that all of them lacked emotional empathy? Statistically, no. So other factors must feed in. The charismatic true believer sits at the top and slowly takes control, finds societal weak spots and presents a common enemy, enforces an ideology through fear, threat and propaganda and suddenly ordinary people, people with families, children they love are mindlessly committing horrific acts.
Cults work similarly. Place enough psychological pressure on someone and they break, emotional empathy becomes suspended and they adopt the hive mind of the cult.
Emotional empathy is most definitely fallible, I’m not sure if cognitive empathy would be similarly suspended in these specific circumstances, I assume there would be similar diminution also?
Hahaha! That’s it, never attending a dinner party again. That’s another great point, the wokerati do seem to have very limited boundary recognition. Personal choice and preferences are exactly that, personal. If people share that information, that’s entirely up to them but I wouldn’t dream of putting someone in a position where they felt obligated to share it. It makes me cringe just thinking about it! Woke is just highly suspect full stop.
Tribalism is hardwired. It ensured human survival for all of human existence. Society has advanced quickly, and the human desire to be comfortable makes accepting these changes easier. However, that does nothing to change that hard wiring. The problem in that tribes have shifted dramatically in construction, and aren't defined as a group of people that know and trust one another, to a group of people that share a set of beliefs, many of which have an emotional basis.
Being able to manipulate emotions plays directly into creating a tribe and activating the blind tribalistic behavior that has kept humans alive for so long. People that understand this can easily manipulate others to follow without question. I am thinking of writing a post on watching this process in others.
1000% very well written thank you ❤
It's actually kind of scary how these people can believe that their political/religious beliefs are the only truth on a planet of approx. 8 billion. 🤦♀️🤔
Just... wow
Hi Savannah, I agree. Western society seems to have lost the ability to debate politics and find a middle ground. The left going too far left and being entirely unfettered is a bad idea. We know what happens when the right goes too far right. There seems to be no willingness to listen or consider an opposing view.
Woke is used like a suit of armour. “ I am right for I am the righteous woke and am inclusive of all. I am the epitome of kindness and acceptance.” ( until you disagree with me, then I shall smear you as a racist, a misogynist or a TERF.) It’s insidious, and an excellent way of controlling the narrative. Agree, or you will be cancelled, your career will be in tatters and you will be the outcast. Scary times.
Agreement does not equate safety when dealing with any extreme ideologue.
Yes, I see what you mean there.
You have a very reasonable view of your interaction with your professor. You have personal insight as to how you may have contributed, and walked away from it without assigning motivation to that professor that wasn't indicated in the exchange.
That is harassment. It isn't borderline.
Hi Savannah,
If you see this person’s behaviour as inappropriate then it’s inappropriate to you. This is what matters. I think fair minded people often question themselves. Is it me? Am I over reacting? Did I misinterpret what was meant?
If something makes you feel uncomfortable, you raise it and ask the individual to please not behave in that manner around you, then a reasonable person should respect that and correct the behaviour once pointed out. If they continue with the behaviour, then to me this suggests a lack of consideration for your boundaries and the person becomes problematic.
I do see a lot of hypocrisy in play with the woke ideology. It does seem to attract questionable personalities more often than not. Do the actions match the words? That’s often a good indicator. If not, that’s the time I start to distance myself.
I agree with you, we often do feel like we can’t say anything any more. Say the wrong thing and we risk being unfairly labelled. This concerns me. Sadly racism does exist but it’s a problem that cannot be resolved if people are too afraid to talk to each other for fear of making a faux pas. Terminology is another stick to beat people with. I worry that people in general will soon avoid talking to those from different cultures , ethnic backgrounds or sexual orientation for fear of using incorrect terminology. It will get to a point where it feels like too much of a risk. Easier just to stay quiet, safe within our own little groups. Where is the unity in that? How do we move forward from there? It bothers me, it really bothers me.
Yes and it also raises the question why it is that these people believe they are in a position to judge or to lecture.
The world we live in today is vastly different from that of just 20 years ago . It is my observation this change permeates even the solidest of foundational belief systems and the accompanying moral compasses attatched to each . There is a time tested measuring stick that speaks volumes to a societies condition
“Weak men create Hard times , Hard times create Strong men , strong men create Good times ….good times create weak men . …….
The cycle repeats itself …. It applies everywhere you find a breakdown or a decay in how a society interacts smoothly …..where suddenly it’s necessary to rewrite things to suit a distinct minority or cater to a manipulated new norm that is suddenly enforced furiously whereas prior it was simply ignored as the nonsense it is. Wherever accountability and transparency is sacrificed in the name of colorful new buzzwords never before given any consideration. Where the intentional obfuscation of proven fact takes priority at the cost of human suffering or the Equal application of Law regardless of cultural differences . When it becomes a matter of one’s personal safety being at risk to exercise basic freedom of speech pursuit of happiness , to protect the individual and the people thru a well regulated militia ….. when we experience infringement when it is constitutionally clear that these inalienable rights “ SHALl NOT BE infringed…..,. Make no mistake in your observations Athena …..psychopath or not …… We as a collective are experiencing what Weak men have to offer ….in time it will spur a generation of strong men that will do whatever is necessary to bring about good times , logical thought processes and the preservation of such . In the meantime buckle up the beta brigade of situation empathizers with no moral compass to point true north is in control of thought , law an censorship . On that note have a wonderful weekend.
I have always found a great deal of truth in that saying, and yes, it certainly applies to many issues that are in the world currently
Ah yes, censorship is such a 21st century thing, that’s why the original English release of Sailor Moon totally didn’t change a lesbian couple into to cousins.
as laughable as emotional empathy may look in a wider perspective, i got an idea it plays a big role in evolution. empathy defines who's worthy staying in our inner circle. those who are not understood are eventually hounded out.
such evaluation can be done on a cognitive basis just as well but it takes some effort, doesn't it? emotional empathy appears to be an idiot proof shortcut.
Yes, I agree with it having value, I think it has too much power in people's minds because of what they believe it to be. It is definitely not foolproof, and in fact, has a large number of problems.
Cognitive empathy is really good to have, but yes, it takes a lot of time to develop.
An idiot, a fool... just another term for sbd, that was not blessed w/ cognitive empathy or an access to it, respectively. w/ a slight pinch of a negative connotation.
The more I journey on and learn about myself the more I seriously distrust all the hoopla about emotional empathy, and of course 🙄 this info comes from so-called professionals and/or "empaths" or NT's. So many like to point their fingers and judge my cluster b, and the victim game just becomes louder and an incessant cacophony. My theory is that they are mostly highly narcissistic people.
People who make a show out of emotional empathy imo are dangerous people. They rely on their emotional thinking in such a way that when real problems arise you really can't trust their reactions. Same can be said for those who have neither emotional or cognitive empathy, but I tend to put my faith in those with high cognition. I've been actually dealing with these same issues recently with people in my life and it's ironic how much "NT's" and narcissists truly mirror because it's so highly manipulative. I am so grateful I now have the clarity to see it. 💯💯
I think that emotional empathy is a tool that works the best when paired with highly developed cognitive empathy.
Oh I do too! It's not imbued with people's personal biases.
“People who make a show out of emotional empathy imo are dangerous people.”
Fully agree. If you want to volunteer your time in a soup kitchen, go and volunteer your time. It’s the volunteering part that comes from a genuine place. However, if you volunteer at a soup kitchen, tell everyone you can think of that you have done it, post pictures of yourself on Instagram and Facebook, take a photographer and journalist from your local paper to broadcast your ‘good deed’ to the world then I have to question your motive for volunteering! Similarly announcing “I am an empath” ( you should be more like me) is also questionable in my view. If you are one, then you know you are and there’s no need to announce yourself. Announcing implies attempted grandiosity, superiority and a desire for some form of applause or recognition.
I think the term empath has been commandeered by the crazies on the internet and turned into an almost mystical representation of something ‘ desirable. ‘The reality is likely more along the lines of the fact that somebody has to sit at one end of the emotional empathy scale, someone else at the other end, nothing more complicated than that.
In terms of emotional empathy itself, I wouldn’t be without mine but I also agree that it has its limitations and is best used alongside cognitive empathy.
There's value in both giving for self-interest and giving for generosities sake. After all, I donate to cancer research and spend a crapload at a gala for self-promotion and interest- It will help me make more money! However, there is a net benefit outcome and I couldn't care less about whether or not people care that I'm a good guy or bad guy. At the same time, I’ll turn a blind eye to the starving guy on the subway asking for food because I just don't carry cash or apples in my pocket and do not care about his fate in the least bit. I may post while volunteering on my social media though, not because I want people to know how nice I am, but rather that I find the time to be nice and that mentality helps to perpetuate those “look at me Im soooo like good” people whom I was trying to influence. I genuinely find joy in helping people solve their problems for nothing in return when I can though and can care less about what people think about my empathy. Time is more valuable than any income for me. I understand your point, about fake empathy, and agree with it 100%, but social engineering isn't the problem, stupid self-absorption and aimless shallowness.
🤗👍💯❤
"likely that they do not recognize themselves in the people across from them. I imagine that it is pretty difficult to recognize yourself in people that you consider the aggressor, and yourself the victim, so of course, it doesn’t fire."
I admit that my so called hyper emotional empathy (lol) is only present in a limited number of situations. In others, I have 0 idea of what it feels like. It's a very weird phenomenon... I could be moved by certain details or stories, yet I don't recall ever feeling emotional over someone's death. It's not something I'm necessarily proud of, it's just the way my brain functions in that situation.
I am capable of theoretically "recognizing myself as the aggressor when I'm the victim". I do this when I want to have the best chance of understanding what is happening, but normally it ends up as just a horror mental trip involving toxic levels of unwarranted narcissism, will to cause damage, and evidently lack of care about it. It's always the same outcome because I never actively saught to bother anyone in the first place and I take reasonable measures of indirect effects. I believe that this is a very telling sign of your character, whether or not you're capable of seeing and want to see beyond your perspective... I do it for my personal growth, and I want my actions and thoughts to be based on the truth, not what I just want to believe. However, it was a disadvantage when I dealed with someone who's only goal was to have my leg on their dinner plate and didn't care to entertain the chance that perhaps their premises were not completely right - and thus shouldn't seek my leg. I meet many people who hold onto wrong premises and refuse to self check, it was my experience that people fear having their notions shaked, and I could tell that if it were to happen it would automatically shake them mentally too. It is "easier" to pull this under the rug and keep going, I guess it takes a certain level of mental strength...
Seems like sloppy research.
In his book "Against Empathy: The Case for Rational Compassion”, author Paul Bloom draws a distinction between empathy (the ability to feel other people’s pain) and compassion (desiring others’ well-being); according to Bloom, society needs less of the former and more of the latter...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Against_Empathy
Hi, first time posting here! I am enjoying your posts a lot, it make me feel less lonely knowing that other people think similar about some matters that I never felt comfortable talking about.
Agreed with Soren, it is disappointing to see stereotypes beat even the most educated. Worse even, the masses consuming these 10-point definitions without further informing themselves. It is tiring to read these definitions of anything "female" that seem inspired in Fatal Attraction.
To me, empathy has always been like the "maternal instinct", it is a unicorn that requires a level of connection that can be seen only when highly identifying with the other party. There is support, encouragement, help, loyalty, even hormones lots of things that can drive us to connect and somewhat empathize with the counterpart can do but... "putting ourselves in the shoes of the other" or "feeling for the other"? What the hell does that even mean?
Thanks for writing about TIV, sounds very interesting and will follow-up on it.
Have a good life!
Hello Noe. Thank you for reading what I write, I appreciate it
Athena,
A little off topic here. I just wanted to check my understanding please.
Psychopathy essentially refers to a specific brain structure.
ASPD refers to a psychopathic brain structure combined with an unstable / abusive childhood environment and or disinterested / abusive parenting.
Is it possible to be diagnosed as having ASPD without having the psychopathic brain structure?
ASPD has nothing to do with a different brain structure. ASPD is a behavioral diagnosis only and can be applied to anyone that behaves to the criteria of the diagnosis.
Anyone can be diagnosed with ASPD.
Psychopaths can have ASPD.
Most psychopaths do not have ASPD.
Most people with ASPD are neurotypicals. This is due to their dominance in the percentage of population. Most people that are antisocial have completely normal brains.
Thank you Athena, another piece falls into place.
My confusion arose due to people using ASPD and the term psychopath almost interchangeably. I fundamentally disagreed with that due to my own reading and time here on your blog. So I separated the two terms out but wasn’t sure if psychopathy was a pre requisite for ASPD.
Your explanation makes perfect sense. Thank you for answering.
You are quite welcome
But couldnt be made the argument that a specific brain structure is required in order to engage in antisocial behaviour regularly?
Can I technically behave to the criteria of ASPD? Yes. Now, whether or not my brain structure is capable of feeling guilt, shame, remorse by the behaviours and thus lead me to cease or actually further engage is a different thing.
It would seem to me that while everybody theoretically can follow a conduct if they want to, not everybody has the brain structure for it. So technically, I can see a point in thinking that people with ASPD can share a certain number of brain structure similarities that would enable them to choose to engage in the act multiple times and be unaffected by it. As I likely doubt someone who has ASPD feels particularly negatively about it...
Actually, you would be incorrect about that. Most people that have ASPD are neurotypical, and are wired for guilt and remorse. They either experience those things regarding what they do, but not enough for it to change what they do, or they are very good at justifying their behavior to themselves. Emotions are not the super-governors of behavior that many people assume them to be. Most of the heinous actions committed in the world are done so by perfectly neurotypical, but act in spite of, or because of, those emotions.
Thank you for your answer!
I wish I could engage more deeply but I lack knowledge and research to do so.
Perhaps I have been incorrect about trying to label the huge number of people who commit heinous actions with an etiquette of "something has to be wrong with them neurologically even if I can't point out what". Perhaps I'm struggling to accept a potential aspect of human nature that I myself might have.
Well,
Ikr?! Talk about facade management huh?
Yeah, that is just strange to me
Ikr?! And I'm just a disordered twat for not. It's unbelievable how many "empaths" whose relationship ended with a cluster b individual play the victims and make us out to be the evil villain while still crying over the breakup. I get a lot of that shaming when discussing openly my disorder on Quora. Ugh 🤦♀️
Oh yes, that is a real problem. No self-insight, and nothing but blame. There also seems to be no reasoning with them either. I have had a few that seem to come around and stop being so vitriolic, but then something must happen, because they do an about-face, go back to screaming in my comments section.
I'm so sorry Athena. You don't deserve that. You have been very forthright and articulate in your writing in trying to educate these fools. I appreciate that bc we are not alone and honestly so not trying to spread toxicity. ❤
It's fine. I'm quite used to it. It's unfortunate. They are their own worst enemies.
Truly! ❤
Yes. The notion of the psychopath=mean girl bully genuinely comes across to me as such a desperate need for explanation, but a lack of ability to understand how humans function. If the person that is bullied cannot comprehend why this person was mean to them, it must be that they are incomprehensible and evil, and that is what psychopaths are in their minds.
Yes, I agree
"A lot of women prefer male friends because of the simplicity of the friendships."
I'm one of those women. I moved to a place where it's clear that I'm not a native. I'm like an alien, and the women here are very tribal, and I don't really care to fit in. The men are the only people interested in me. I'm originally from New Orleans, and I have a lot of female friends from that area, and others, but not where I currently live. It is what it is, I guess.
I have a partner, and feel comfortable with most people. But, one example was when we moved to a resort type area with mostly older people. The women might have been threatened because I was younger. I was the only one that didn't attend church services. I was the only college educated female. All of that could have made me suspect, but I think not being a church member was the dominant reason that I was snubbed by these women. When we would go to a party, the men and women would divide into same sex groups to socialize, which was really odd to me. Catty and sometimes outright rude remarks were common enough from the women's clique for me to gravitate towards the men, who were always friendly, and enjoyed talking to me. Women probably got jealous when I talked to their husbands, but if the women had been friendly, I would have been talking to them instead.
Back home, I had pleasant friendships with all ages, religions, worldviews, cultures, races, etc. I find most people interesting. I guess you could say that the NOLA vibe suits me better. When I didn't fit in with those particular ladies, I was surprised by how territorial, threatened and mean they were. It was all very silly, as far as I was concerned, and I didn't really care. I'm an introvert, and enjoy my own company. We moved to a different neighborhood, everyone is much younger than we are. We get along better, too. I'm content alone, or with the company of my partner, and our cat. But, I have male and female friends from all over.
I could write an entire book about mystifying, but isolated encounters I've had with female aggression. The instance I just described was the only time I had a "mean girls" group experience. But, I think Athena is right about this. ALL humans are capable of aggression, and it's quite common in both sexes.
Females have a very specific way of interacting with one another. I wrote about this in a previous post. I think that there is an age cutoff for this. Once females advance past breeding ages, this seems to die off quite a bit. No longer being in competition with one another seems to do the trick.
Athena, you might be surprised. I'm a former nurse, and when I started school, the first place a student nurse worked was in a nursing home. We were warned to be very careful not to be overly friendly with the males, because many female patients had crushes, and if you seemed flirtatious, they would make things very difficult for you! So, even when mating season is clearly over, cupid can misbehave!
That is interesting, and a bit funny
In the situation I described, the men were relaxed, and easy going. I didn't see any competition. None were flirtatious with me. In fact, I really enjoy talking to older men because romance is not usually in the equation, especially since they were all married. I knew a lot of older women in NOLA, and they were great, too. It all depends, I guess.
I really think that in parts of the Bible Belt, women who don't go to church are an anomaly. Everyone I know here does. When we moved here, one man asked us what church we were going to join. When my partner told him that we weren't religious, he said,"Well, you won't have any social life then", which we found hilarious, but his wife elbowed him, annoyed!
The downside is how exhausting jobs are that involve a lot of engagement. Extroverts are stimulated by them, and can go out and socialize afterwards. I would just want to be alone with a book, or on the computer in my own world. There's only so much social energy.