I’m skeptical as to whether Dutton himself would agree with the article in its entirety, or with some or all of the paraphrasing. It would be informative and productive if he could consider your thoughts. Have you considered contacting him anonymously (if that were possible), or is that not something you would consider worthwhile?
Hm, how would I handle a psychopath's methods. Don't be emotional and don't assume you know what they're thinking is the main thing I guess, then you're operating peer-to-peer. In my experiences assuming things about the other person's thoughts works maybe 60%-80% of the time with normies and 0% of the time with psychopaths - they might even literally tell me what they're thinking and I don't believe them because I don't read it off the 'ol empathy.
Re: "A psychopath’s motto: “Just do it!”'
I think a better analogy is that a psychopath lives their personal life the way I pilot a video game character. When I'm Super Mario I bust open boxes in search for golden coins all day, stomp on turtles and go for the kiss on the princess without a single emotional twitch except maybe cortisol and dopamine for excitement and frustration. It literally doesn't occur to me that there's some bricklayer I will never see who's mad or that the goomba might be sad I crushed him, in fact the question doesn't even make sense to me. It's also why impersonal advice is so effectively psychopathic: when a friend tells you to just go up and ask for the raise or ask the girl out it's true but he can recommend it because telling you to do it doesn't trigger his own emotions.
One direct question: do you notice that normies project their own emotional state onto you very consistently? With my psychopath best friend we've gathered that rather than having an empathetic connection (where a normie reads your thoughts and feelings) they instead have their own state reflected back at them and then assume the psychopath is actually feeling those things. So if you, Athena, are talking to someone who is getting angrier and angrier they assume YOU are getting angrier and angrier at them even if you're just standing there. And if they're super hyped about a topic they assume you are hyped about the topic. I call it 'reflection' and it is the source of both many "I'm not mad, YOU'RE mad! *he says madly*" arguments and many "this guy is cool he's totally on my wavelength *actually you don't care*" social credits.
Conversely if a normie who is getting angry talks to me and I am not angry, they never assume I am getting angrier since I am also a normie.
Good lord, yes. So often, especially in my writing, I am told there is X, Y, Z, or any other emotion that they insist is there. I am told what I feel, but in reality, it is only them projecting their emotions onto me. They also get very mad at me when I point this out. It's a vexing habit.
The article asks: "How do I see through a psychopath’s methods?"
My answer is: the same way I see through neurotypical's methods.
The difference, in my opinion, is that the neurotypicals somehow think they are entitled to what they are aiming for, based on their feelings and their idea of social rank. The consequence of this is that the neurotypicals, unconsciously, are limited in what they try to gain from the manipulation.
I like the just do it part and when I’m speaking with someone, I am not thinking about whether they are psychopathic or typical. I might walk away wondering what the hell was that person thinking but I’d never think oh they must be psychopathic.
I’m curious, what do you think of the gender ratio of psychopathy? Currently men get diagnosed six times more than women. I highly suspect that the ratio is affected by societal and research bias.
Research bias, in that studies on psychopathy tend to be done on male inmates. Thus the models that researchers base their studies on are based on that population.
Societal bias in that there are differences in how boys and girls are raised, and in how men and women are perceived. Selfishness is a lot more tolerated in men than in women, and women are expected to be more pro-social. A young psychopathic child is going to learn how to mask based on what is expected of them.
Clinicians who do the evaluations also have their own societal bias that they may bring with them when looking at a client, and psychopathic women are going to be better at masking their more ruthless traits as compared to men.
If the subject interests you, then I would love to see you do a deeper dive into the relationship between psychopathy and gender.
It's very convoluted, but the current estimate is between 10:1 to 20:1 male to female. However, the same people saying this is the case, are often the same that claim the BPD is female psychopathy, so I don't think that there is a lot to go on there.
How they came to the conclusion that psychopathy would literally be the opposite in presentation if it is in females absolutely stymies me. It tells me that they don't have a consistent model, and that much of what they have to say not only can be disregarded, but really should be. Scientific models of things should be consistent and repeatable, but for some reason psychopathy is apparently separate from this scientific ideal. It's ridiculous.
It would be difficult to do any sort of evaluation of it, male versus female, because I only know one other psychopath who is male, and I know no females other than myself, so it would largely be conjecture. I could speak to where I could see clear delineations between myself and neurotypical females, however.
Both psychopathy and BPD symptoms on the surface look like gender stereotypes. What I hear when people say BPD is female psychopathy, is sexism.
BPD is over diagnosed in women. I know at least for autistic women, we’re more likely to be wrongly diagnosed with BPD or bipolar disorder before clinicians will consider an autism diagnosis. Our meltdowns get mistaken for emotional dysfunction, and our social difficulties get mistaken for manipulation. In some regards BPD is modern day hysteria.
I’m not surprised at the ratio of diagnoses between the genders; I am however baffled by the people who take it at face value. The studies on psychopathy are mainly done on male participants, so why should we be surprised when it’s mainly men who get diagnosed.
I’m skeptical as to whether Dutton himself would agree with the article in its entirety, or with some or all of the paraphrasing. It would be informative and productive if he could consider your thoughts. Have you considered contacting him anonymously (if that were possible), or is that not something you would consider worthwhile?
Not really. He seems to be busy enough. If he comes across my writing, cool. If not, also cool
Hm, how would I handle a psychopath's methods. Don't be emotional and don't assume you know what they're thinking is the main thing I guess, then you're operating peer-to-peer. In my experiences assuming things about the other person's thoughts works maybe 60%-80% of the time with normies and 0% of the time with psychopaths - they might even literally tell me what they're thinking and I don't believe them because I don't read it off the 'ol empathy.
Re: "A psychopath’s motto: “Just do it!”'
I think a better analogy is that a psychopath lives their personal life the way I pilot a video game character. When I'm Super Mario I bust open boxes in search for golden coins all day, stomp on turtles and go for the kiss on the princess without a single emotional twitch except maybe cortisol and dopamine for excitement and frustration. It literally doesn't occur to me that there's some bricklayer I will never see who's mad or that the goomba might be sad I crushed him, in fact the question doesn't even make sense to me. It's also why impersonal advice is so effectively psychopathic: when a friend tells you to just go up and ask for the raise or ask the girl out it's true but he can recommend it because telling you to do it doesn't trigger his own emotions.
One direct question: do you notice that normies project their own emotional state onto you very consistently? With my psychopath best friend we've gathered that rather than having an empathetic connection (where a normie reads your thoughts and feelings) they instead have their own state reflected back at them and then assume the psychopath is actually feeling those things. So if you, Athena, are talking to someone who is getting angrier and angrier they assume YOU are getting angrier and angrier at them even if you're just standing there. And if they're super hyped about a topic they assume you are hyped about the topic. I call it 'reflection' and it is the source of both many "I'm not mad, YOU'RE mad! *he says madly*" arguments and many "this guy is cool he's totally on my wavelength *actually you don't care*" social credits.
Conversely if a normie who is getting angry talks to me and I am not angry, they never assume I am getting angrier since I am also a normie.
Good lord, yes. So often, especially in my writing, I am told there is X, Y, Z, or any other emotion that they insist is there. I am told what I feel, but in reality, it is only them projecting their emotions onto me. They also get very mad at me when I point this out. It's a vexing habit.
The article asks: "How do I see through a psychopath’s methods?"
My answer is: the same way I see through neurotypical's methods.
The difference, in my opinion, is that the neurotypicals somehow think they are entitled to what they are aiming for, based on their feelings and their idea of social rank. The consequence of this is that the neurotypicals, unconsciously, are limited in what they try to gain from the manipulation.
I agree
I like the just do it part and when I’m speaking with someone, I am not thinking about whether they are psychopathic or typical. I might walk away wondering what the hell was that person thinking but I’d never think oh they must be psychopathic.
Agreed
For the next article, you could analyze this piece by Dutton — especially the part about the experiment. It would be very interesting: https://www.drkevindutton.com/press-articles/psychopathys-double-edge/
Thank you for finding that
I’m curious, what do you think of the gender ratio of psychopathy? Currently men get diagnosed six times more than women. I highly suspect that the ratio is affected by societal and research bias.
Research bias, in that studies on psychopathy tend to be done on male inmates. Thus the models that researchers base their studies on are based on that population.
Societal bias in that there are differences in how boys and girls are raised, and in how men and women are perceived. Selfishness is a lot more tolerated in men than in women, and women are expected to be more pro-social. A young psychopathic child is going to learn how to mask based on what is expected of them.
Clinicians who do the evaluations also have their own societal bias that they may bring with them when looking at a client, and psychopathic women are going to be better at masking their more ruthless traits as compared to men.
If the subject interests you, then I would love to see you do a deeper dive into the relationship between psychopathy and gender.
It's very convoluted, but the current estimate is between 10:1 to 20:1 male to female. However, the same people saying this is the case, are often the same that claim the BPD is female psychopathy, so I don't think that there is a lot to go on there.
How they came to the conclusion that psychopathy would literally be the opposite in presentation if it is in females absolutely stymies me. It tells me that they don't have a consistent model, and that much of what they have to say not only can be disregarded, but really should be. Scientific models of things should be consistent and repeatable, but for some reason psychopathy is apparently separate from this scientific ideal. It's ridiculous.
It would be difficult to do any sort of evaluation of it, male versus female, because I only know one other psychopath who is male, and I know no females other than myself, so it would largely be conjecture. I could speak to where I could see clear delineations between myself and neurotypical females, however.
Both psychopathy and BPD symptoms on the surface look like gender stereotypes. What I hear when people say BPD is female psychopathy, is sexism.
BPD is over diagnosed in women. I know at least for autistic women, we’re more likely to be wrongly diagnosed with BPD or bipolar disorder before clinicians will consider an autism diagnosis. Our meltdowns get mistaken for emotional dysfunction, and our social difficulties get mistaken for manipulation. In some regards BPD is modern day hysteria.
I’m not surprised at the ratio of diagnoses between the genders; I am however baffled by the people who take it at face value. The studies on psychopathy are mainly done on male participants, so why should we be surprised when it’s mainly men who get diagnosed.
Indeed. It all seems to be largely based on incorrect assumptions
Hmmm, don’t know about this one, but I read it all
I had no idea how worthless of an article it was until the end, and I write as I read. It was disappointing.