An excellent question that I doubt we will ever have an answer to. They believe that they know what they are talking about and, so far, seem to take it poorly when they are challenged.
yes. Challenges their authority and credential to monetize their shtick. (Frankly?) In honor of your post, I am going to say "frankly" until someone calls me out on it!! Haha
I'm am willing to pay the price. An associate wrote me just now saying something similar. Blunt and direct and concise speech- Much easier for the writer, saves times, creates a healthy place. Don't hold back anything for my sake.
Exactly!! At this point, it has to be about marketing and sales. There is no real effort:
Imagine getting paid for writing this:
"But when a narcissist does a bad thing, they feel a fair amount of guilt and shame. More shame than guilt, frankly, because they're concerned about how other people view them."
Even if you wrote this yourself, if you re-read a month later, you would burst into laughter!
But I do love the placement of 'frankly'!! It is like she is paid by the word.
I wish she would stop trying to give information about the supposed diagnosis of anyone with a “personality disorder” or neurodivergent. If she stuck to helping out people who are suffering from having been in a bad relationship, I would be fine with that.
However, I think clinicians who lack any real training in an area, should first get trained before they decide to publicly make dubious pronouncements.
I agree with everything you said. For me, it is like nails on a blackboard to hear her repeat the stupid party line that anti-social PD exists.
As you well know, it is a meaningless diagnosis that confuses a willingness to break laws + stupidity (person got caught) with a psychological diagnosis or some form of “neurodiverse” brain structure or wiring.
I wrote a book I haven’t yet published for people who believe they were/are in a romantic or marital relationship with someone with NPD. As Rumani had a book out now for that group, I held off.
I think I probably should publish it. My book is an edited collection of articles that after publishing on Quora, I retooled as more polished and published for my psychology today blog “Understanding Narcissism.”
Thanks for your kind words about my viewpoint. You were the one that convinced me to clean up my act and clearly differentiate between sociopathy (acquired) and psychopathy (born with).
Of course, I could already differentiate between NPD and everything else—for the most part.
I think you should publish it, I agree. There are so many out there that parrot this sort of information. It would be better to have a modicum of truth to combat the nonsense.
I was asked to write about why NPD and psychopathy can't coexist, and I will be using your work for the basis of that post, with all due credit, of course.
I agree, but I would imagine that would mean, to her, anyway, a reduction in her authority. It is also possible that she assumes that her degree means that she is an expert in all things tangentially related. It would be like a GP stepping in to do a complex neurosurgery, because, hey, they went to medical school, right?
That assumption about arrogance might follow this line of thinking "if omeone doesn't care about social pressure and approval and stuff and do not seem to doubt thmselves at all, they MUST think the are better than others around them, therefore arrogant".
There is this conversation based on previous research that determined that there are a bunch of psychopaths in special forces, surgery, big companies' leadership and other similar position where emotions would be an obstacle and where there is a need to have control over every detail.
Athena I prefer your other posts. The posts where you criticise people is getting boring. We get it, people don’t understand what psychopathy is. It’s like a reaction video.
Btw still love this blog and have been following for a long time. Just my feedback.
I like it. Whilst Athena pulls apart what people are falsely stating, we are getting a good description and better understanding of the differences between the disorders. I'd actually like more of this. It would be really good if Athena could talk more about those she knows with NPD and Sociopathy and their crimes and what they thought about the things they did. Also more about how to spot one and avoid or get away from one in a relationship etc.
I can do my best with those topics, but I have to be clear that I am not an expert in either. For NPD, I would reference Elinor Greenberg, as I consider her approach and ability to dissect NPD to be quite impressive.
Yes, absolutely this! Those of us with emotions can easily become victims, I'd like to hear how Athena deals with people with NPD and sociopathic disorders etc. Now that would be a fascinating post, and may even help a few people out there who have to deal unwillingly with one.
Definitely not Athena but my 2 cents. If you can't just walk away, narcissists have an ego that wants to be fed. You can make them dance but the effort is not worth it most of the time.
I find that walking away is very effective, but it may be due to how I handle those sorts of things. When I am done dealing with a person, they don't feel that they have an in to be bothering me in the future. I make sure of that.
Wait- Natasha!! You wish to get away??? oh no!! hehehe.
How do you react to "love bombing"? Has it happened to you? Perhaps Athena will comment on this: But to me, recognizing when it starts, and NOT letting it happen, is more effective than "after the fact" rescue or intervention or the like.
IF we experience that, and allow ourselves to believe it? We did it to ourselves right? A person who enters a relationship, or tries to right? by love bombing is a deception. They really aren't that into you but seek to manipulate you. Right?
The idea is to "hook you" and then play with you on the line, that is to say: "their line" at your expense.
this is how you spot it BEFORE it goes to relationship status. If I said this right, we agree it is all about you, not them. You spot it so you don't fall into it from go.
Respectfully, I suggest you can't. Not woman, preyed upon by the man.
If these men are toxic? And the WOMAN leads them on? You risk violence.
Again. Respectfully to you.
I can't know for sure. I do not think it is safe to play with fire.
A love bomber is by definition "fire".
For a man, it is business as usual. Of course, you are correct. Our encounters with women are as the most powerful, and dangerous. It is us who scare them.
Possibly I am just full of shit. Have a great day.
I totally agree with that. Prevention is better than cure. However, I used to think that those around me, were like me. If I shower someone with love and affection, then I absolutely mean it. No hidden agenda, no trickery. So trust me when I say I learned the hard way. This is why I think it would be so good for Athena to talk about how she deals work these con artists... I'm guessing, she just doesn't... but it would be really interesting and encouraging to see it from her perspective, without being lead by any emotion or trust, as she doesn't feel those things.
I don't now, but when I was younger, it wasn't difficult to get those that were overly fixated on me to do things for me, and I would take advantage of that. The problems arose when they didn't prefer my indifference to their existence, and caused me annoyances that I could live very well without.
She deals with them professionally and at arms length. If she was single and was "love bombed"- the dealing would be instant. She would reject that man as a suitor.
Which is exactly how you could be? should be?
You are "dealing with it" when you should be saying: "hey F*ckF*ce. Get the F*** away from me". You have to mean it- BEFORE he has a claim on you.
And no sex with these assholes.
Is this what you mean "dealing with"? Holy Fuck. You mean you have to deal with this? Because you fucked them before you knew they were trouble in the bad way of trouble?
What i mean is, these types do this daily just to survive, they are skilled liars and con artists and they are very good at it. If you're not used to people being fake and are not this way yourself, then how is it so easy to spot? Quora and other platforms are FULL of stories of how they were cheated on or treated so badly, this is not unusual.
Agree Natasha, I have been stung by them too. There are lots of articles online that talk about spotting red flags early but when you are caught up in the emotion of it, we sometimes see the red flags but either explain them away as something else, or even choose to ignore them as narcissists feel so good to some of us. Often that’s to do with narcissists having played a part in our formative years. There’s a familiarity and a desire to chase the storm.
The best advice I saw was recently in an interview with Chase Hughes. He explained that if when you meet someone and spend time with them, once you leave, if you have a feeling that you NEED to see this person again, if it feels more like you are craving to see them, this is a dopamine crash. Healthy relationships don’t cause such sharp dopamine spikes. Other bonding chemicals are released instead that would give you a relaxed easy kind of a buzz.
From my own experience I would say this is true. Narcissists make me feel high. I have a need to interact not a steady “Yeah, I’d quite like to see him again” response. Checking yourself rather than trying to spot red flags is more effective in my view. If you have that ‘high’ feeling, recognise it, name it, be honest with yourself that it’s there, THEN replay the interaction and see if there are red flags.
This works far better and is pretty failsafe. Know yourself and your own responses and trust what your own body is telling you.
If it seems to good to be true it often is. A real relationship takes time and isn't going to happen overnight. Moving too fast should set off an alarm. Doesn't mean it can't be legit but should atleast open your eyes to ulterior motive potential.
It always amazes me that PhDs dont have a clue about this stuff. My daughter in law is getting a PhD in clinical psychology. I am going to tell her about you and hopefully she will read your content. I will make for some awesome conversations
I keep thinking about how you're not a psychopath, because according to DSM 5, where psychopathy appears under the ASP disorder, you'd be having a tendency to break social rules, cheat, being impulsive, irritable and aggressive, not care about yours or other people's safety and being irresponsible. This is what psychopathy is. The only thing that you have in common is the lack of remorse and empathy.
Maybe there should be a new term for people who can't feel these prosocial feelings, but don't feel the antisocial impulses.
Someone suggested anaffective as a term for psychopathy. That is, having reduced or absent affect. That could be a better term, I suppose, but it seems that the best way to deal with it is to call those in prison that are actually psychopathic, "antisocial psychopaths", and study them as their own group. Leave the rest of us out of it, and redefine the term accurately.
Absolutely agree with you here. For my money, the descriptions of psychopaths that we hear most about relate most to antisocial psychopaths. Within that group there would be both high functioning and low functioning antisocial psychopaths, drill down further into traits and as Kevin Dutton describes, some traits would be dialled up, some dialled down.
The starting point has to be the brain structure. What the individual is essentially born with. Then the next point would be environment. Did the psychopath experience a supportive / loving environment when growing up? (prosocial psychopath) Or was the psychopath raised in an abusive or uncaring environment? (antisocial psychopath)
Both groups of individuals are psychopaths, they might be high or low functioning with varying trait strength, but one grouping would be antisocial and one grouping prosocial.
Currently, all the emphasis is on the antisocial grouping, any consideration for prosocial is extremely limited.
That’s how it looks to my untrained eye. A further complication is that the term psychopath is used to describe any behaviour that is perceived as being cruel or shocking. A catch all term for neurotypicals who can’t even conceive of the fact that they too could execute wholly shocking behaviours if the circumstances are right.
If in doubt, psychopath, definitely! We see similar with narcissism. If the guy’s an asshole then he’s a narcissist. No, some people are just assholes.
I do think the conversation about what psychopathy actually is is opening up, but formalising new ideas and frameworks is likely to be a painfully slow process.
I hadn't listened to her prior to this, and didn't have any sort of opinion going in, but she pretty well blew it immediately, and it just kept getting worse.
Somewhat off topic question: Why does everyone use the term amygdala (singular) not amygdalae (plural)? I looked it up a couple of years ago and found there are actually two, one on each side of brain. Do you have better information?
I actually don't know. I knew that there were two, but in every reading I have done, they refer to it in the singular, so that is how I write as well. It does seem to be confusing almost to the point of disinformation, however.
Not quite. It is more like referring to our “ear” when we have two different ears, one on each side. I am focusing on singular noun vs plural noun. Plus, I was shocked to find amygdalae not a single amygdala.
The amygdala is often referred to in the singular in writings because the term historically emphasizes its functional role as a unified component of the limbic system, rather than its anatomical duality. Scientific literature tends to discuss the amygdala as a single brain structure or system involved in processes like emotion, fear, and memory, glossing over the fact that there are two (one in each hemisphere). This is partly for simplicity and because the two amygdalae work in close coordination, often studied as a collective entity. The singular usage also aligns with early anatomical naming conventions, where structures were sometimes labeled singularly despite being paired (e.g., "hippocampus"). However, more precise or technical writings, especially in neuroscience, do use the plural "amygdalae" when discussing their distinct roles or hemispheric differences. The choice often depends on context—functional unity versus anatomical specificity—and audience familiarity with technical terms.
It's interesting, even my spell check doesn't like the plural version of the word either.
The two amygdalae in the brain, one in each hemisphere, don't function as a single unit but work closely together, with some degree of specialization. They communicate via neural connections, like the anterior commissure, to coordinate emotional processing, fear responses, and memory. The right amygdala tends to handle rapid, automatic emotional reactions (e.g., fear or threat detection), while the left often deals with more specific, sustained emotional responses and cognitive aspects, like evaluating stimuli. This division isn't absolute, and they integrate their functions for a cohesive response. Damage to one can disrupt certain emotional processes, but the other may compensate to some extent, showing they're not fully redundant. Their cooperation depends on the task, context, and individual brain differences.
There is really a lot in this post: I really like it. I do miss our pedophile killer from the past few weeks and I would like to do his legal work, but you cover 'a lot' in this material.
From above:
***
Kyle:
And so they pull over, they get the ticket and they don't...care?
Dr. Durvasul:
No, they don't care.
True. We don’t care.
***
All three, including you, use "don't care". But "caring" isn't really the context:
She said: ...if we ran through a red light-- our heart starts racing, we sweat, our pupils get wide, we look around because we're afraid of the consequence. A psychopath doesn't have that same kind of arousal. That's why they're able to lie on lie-detector tests.
We don't care in the - no physical reaction sense. I certain don't want to pay a USA ticket bc it is a boat full of money that is wasted. I care in that sense.
But, a lie detector test? Bring it on. I pass them with no sweating, pupils, etc.
At accident scenes, I am the one calming other people down. Doubtless, you are too Athena.
If someone is overcome with fear, we help them bc we have the mental resources available for our use. It appears we help them for reasons of our own. Certainly not from guilt. Or shame.
Materials Idea: You mention your family nursing long term grudges against you. And expressing them. Could you make a post or two about this? Do I have this right: They basically hate you or loathe you for things you did when you were a little girl? Things that happened many years ago?
Despite their limited brain capacity (my best guess) they remember with great clarity exactly and precisely your actions that cause them so much shame or guilt? So much that YOUR miscues, of history long past, justify the cold blackness of their hearts today (again, my guess- you didn't say this)
No, nothing like that. They felt... rejected by me... I guess would be the way I put it. They love me very much, I am just not a great example of the attentive daughter. The lack of need for them when I was young still leaves them feeling a bit sad, it seems. Neurotypicals require emotional investment that I did not understand as a child.
wow. I don't have the tools needed to understand this, I don't think.
For certain, I have never said "they (meaning anyone) love me very much".
I would say this is outside my frame of reference.
Conversely, I have children, wives, girlfriends, partners, associates, dogs, other pets, enjoy sex, but I have never thought I loved them very much. Even my youngest son, I have to remind myself to be nice to him.
Perhaps you might enjoy creating a primer on "Emotional Investment"? Yes! I hope you may give that some thought!! Emotional Investment for NTs!!! -Original Concept by Tim!! hahaha
Love is demonstrated to me through action, and their actions make it clear that they have deep feelings for me. I imagine, being an adopted child, that my lack of need of affection might have made them feel like it was a result of me not being biologically theirs, but it wouldn't have been any different for me regardless.
You define love & make me admire you. I really appreciate this about you. Not that I can do it myself, but it is a way forward.
Your words past "I imagine"- I know they are words and mean something and that you fully understand them. However, the concepts seem past my understanding or maybe really complex.
Then you came back and I understand: "it wouldn't have been any different", and I smile and enjoy it with you. You had a happy home. And even now, you have people who care about you. That is alot.
And you understand Love even if you don't experience the feeling of love. It is pretty amazing and makes me smile to write.
Given we are far enough down the path, that one more comment will not be noticed by anyone else, I want to offer my thoughts on the girl who asked you about dealing with Narcissist in a relationship, a sexual and love relationship.
If that is okay: You can be blunt, frank even!!
I focus on girls, young ladies, bc they are the ones most affected. Certainly can happen to anyone, yet girls seem most affected.
I am a simpleton: The problem is the two individuals want different things from the relationship!! hehehe. See? I am stupid!!
I mean going into the relationship, they went out to a dance, used a dating ap, bumped into each other: Doesn't matter: They proceeded into a relationship.
It turns out, it is a whirlwind. Cards letters gifts dinners etc
The Girl is so happy: Why? Bc she wants a relationship.
If she didn't want an outgoing, she would have enjoyed an evening of nice sex and gone home without giving her phone or address. Right? We all seen this (boys and girls) on the prowl for some good healthy boom boom.
But this girl is not that: She is going for a relationship ...
AND the partner gives her every IMPRESSION he does too!
BUT...and this is a big butt...and the point of writing...
He does want a relationship, but not for the same reasons...
She wants a nice relationship and have it continue to white fence or take home to meet the parents or whatever. She wants to build and continue, you might say "in love" to grow.
His purpose is different. Once he establishes: This woman WANTS a relationship with ME (him) he shifts. Yes, he enjoyed the sex. But he no longer wants the girl or to build love with her.
Likely there are a world of reasons for this (even I can write all those!) but a switch is flipped and the outrageous behavior begins.
And the girl says: "how do you deal with this?"
The girl can only get away, get rid of the guy.
Every bit of fights and breakups and makeup sex? It is great, the best possible for the guy. All those gifts and expensive dinners? That was the lead up for the guy to where he can torment her. Do outrageous things to see if she will continue: All the while, he thinks she is an idiot.
Opps: Athena this is what everyone caught in this knows: The guy at that point thinks she is a idiot to continue. He doesn't "love her" bc he isn't trying to love her. He gets his jollies a different way: I will leave it to others to determine if it is abusive or not.
I would certainly beat someone who did this to my daughters. (Ex wifes, nawh)
for girls with narcissists, it isn't the sex acts that gets them in trouble: It is the sex and the resulting "feeling" of love and attachment.
Much of the time, I am just full of shit. If you read this be frank. You don't need my permission. And I know where frank leads.
I was headed to work location and drove right through a speed trap. The cop pulled right out and came up behind me.
As soon as he was behind me, I pulled over. When he came to the window, I handed him my license, reg and insurance.
He was bewildered. He asked me why I pulled over, if I was surrendering. He went to his car, then returned saying my behavior was unusual. He wished me a good day and did not issue a ticket.
On being aware of others feelings
Last Tuesday, through my neglect, a person was injured.
Over the weekend, he went to ICU and died Sunday night.
I experienced something that can only be described as "feelings". I talked to a couple friends about it and they agree it is not my fault (they weren't there and are wrong), I shouldn't feel "guilty".
It was my fault. I was in neglect. I failed to protect the man.
Whatever it was, it passed and I no longer "feel" anything about it. It lasted about 4 or 5 hours.
Apparently in USA, it is common to continue driving and allow the cop to turn on his lights to signal to pull over.
It seems their citizens are supposed to hope he doesn't pull them over.
AND this is a big one: They engage in some sort of cultural ritual where the cop "determines" in his discretion whether to make a citation or not!! LOL
I happen to be reading couple of books authored by Love Fraud and Psychopath Free. Their arguments have merits. Let's take Donna Andersen for example, she seems to almost get everything right about Psychopathy (Lack of emotional receptors, especially Oxytocin, mimic behavior, feedback loop, etc) surely not when it comes that they are predators looking for the next prey or wanna feel power and control. I think the confusion is coming from when she mentions the word Sociopath, she is grouping everybody who has a personality disorder.
I know most of her audience are people who just came out of a failed relationship and trying to understand what went wrong or if there's such people but something that caught my interest is (which can mean very different things) how those partners said that something "switched off" or that their partner "changed," "lacked the sweet phase." This reminded me of the mask that you always speak of. Sure, some are exhibiting traits of NPD who suck out people and casually throw them away but there's some stories when I read, it didn't feel like anything was wrong or should be interpreted as being cruel or psycho, but because the partners literally "Switched off" or showed boredom in the relationship and thus the "victim" came online to look for answers.
Now, what I wanted to get some insights on, is how you often say that many psychologists are not equipped to identify Psychopathy or know anything about it. Cause they are relying on Robert Hare's tools, how were you then clinically diagnosed as a Psychopath if there are no correct tools for it? Why not a different label, why Psychopathy if the entire argument is starting from the one who developed the tool to study the prisoners? Especially when you said that Psychopaths can lie to psychologists. This is not meant to challenge your diagnosis or anything but it popped up as I was reading your article.
Love Fraud and Psychopath Free are about as accurate as using a cook book to build a freeway overpass. I do not lend any credibility to a woman that claims to have lived over two hundred times and her ex, assuming the man actually exists, which I doubt very much he does, found her in every single life, and assaulted, raped, or took advantage of her in all of them. That is not the hallmark of a well woman, nor one that should be listened to about anything, let alone psychopathy. The same can be said, with different circumstances, for Psychopath Free. Neither of those people have a clue about either one. That is evident in their writing. I have written in detail specifically about Anderson.
The people that diagnosed me actually took the time to learn about psychopathy in depth, understand what it was, and what it wasn't, and applied that information to their clients. Psychopathy can be studied accurately if the person doing so seeks out detailed information, has a critical mind, and doesn't fall in line. An excellent example of someone who does this, not with psychopathy, but NPD BPD, and schizoid PD, is Elinor Greenberg. There is a ton of misinformation about these things in the world, and most clinicians know as much about them as they do about psychopathy. There are even those that are so misinformed, they refuse to work with clients because of those myths. However, if you read her work, you can find that, while it takes someone very well-trained outside of the mainstream nonsense, there are those out there that are far better trained, and apparently far more intelligent.
Something I have often wondered as I follow your posts dissecting and rebutting the literature of authors like Dr Ramani, is why you painstakingly do this? We understand that the literature on psychopathy is skewed, and the authors either set out to sensationalize their channels (click-bait) or they write from a position of ignorance. I far prefer the articles you post where you offer your take on events or stories, giving us insights into the world as you see it. You are the only author I have been able to identify who is a). a diagnosed Psychopath and b). interested in writing about the subject. I thoroughly enjoyed your series on Robert Maudsely. Or, another example, your post "what happens when I lose my patience". Your point by point rebuttals of sensationalist authors who all offer the same mishmash of psychocopathy = narcissistic personality disorder, seem rather a waste of your resources and effort.
I don't understand why psychopaths seem to be endlessly fascinating to people who willfully refuse to understand them.
An excellent question that I doubt we will ever have an answer to. They believe that they know what they are talking about and, so far, seem to take it poorly when they are challenged.
yes. Challenges their authority and credential to monetize their shtick. (Frankly?) In honor of your post, I am going to say "frankly" until someone calls me out on it!! Haha
I use frankly when I am about to be blunt about something
You do? It is like a warning shot of what is to come?
It would be an interesting question of your friend and SO of times they remember you frankly-ing.
I am going to use "frankly" every time I speak English until people tell me to stop!!
Indeed. Pretty much, this is my unfiltered opinion, and you may not care for it.
I'm am willing to pay the price. An associate wrote me just now saying something similar. Blunt and direct and concise speech- Much easier for the writer, saves times, creates a healthy place. Don't hold back anything for my sake.
Exactly!! At this point, it has to be about marketing and sales. There is no real effort:
Imagine getting paid for writing this:
"But when a narcissist does a bad thing, they feel a fair amount of guilt and shame. More shame than guilt, frankly, because they're concerned about how other people view them."
Even if you wrote this yourself, if you re-read a month later, you would burst into laughter!
But I do love the placement of 'frankly'!! It is like she is paid by the word.
Indeed
I wish she would stop trying to give information about the supposed diagnosis of anyone with a “personality disorder” or neurodivergent. If she stuck to helping out people who are suffering from having been in a bad relationship, I would be fine with that.
However, I think clinicians who lack any real training in an area, should first get trained before they decide to publicly make dubious pronouncements.
I agree with everything you said. For me, it is like nails on a blackboard to hear her repeat the stupid party line that anti-social PD exists.
As you well know, it is a meaningless diagnosis that confuses a willingness to break laws + stupidity (person got caught) with a psychological diagnosis or some form of “neurodiverse” brain structure or wiring.
I wrote a book I haven’t yet published for people who believe they were/are in a romantic or marital relationship with someone with NPD. As Rumani had a book out now for that group, I held off.
I think I probably should publish it. My book is an edited collection of articles that after publishing on Quora, I retooled as more polished and published for my psychology today blog “Understanding Narcissism.”
Thanks for your kind words about my viewpoint. You were the one that convinced me to clean up my act and clearly differentiate between sociopathy (acquired) and psychopathy (born with).
Of course, I could already differentiate between NPD and everything else—for the most part.
I think you should publish it, I agree. There are so many out there that parrot this sort of information. It would be better to have a modicum of truth to combat the nonsense.
I was asked to write about why NPD and psychopathy can't coexist, and I will be using your work for the basis of that post, with all due credit, of course.
Valid point on the clinicians but if the trainers are not willing or capable and just regurgitate the same nonsense that might be difficult to find.
Indeed
Very true. But I wish they would qualify it. She could do so easily by saying something like:
“Diagnosing NPD is not my area of expertise. I am basing my definitions on the DSM5.”
I agree, but I would imagine that would mean, to her, anyway, a reduction in her authority. It is also possible that she assumes that her degree means that she is an expert in all things tangentially related. It would be like a GP stepping in to do a complex neurosurgery, because, hey, they went to medical school, right?
That assumption about arrogance might follow this line of thinking "if omeone doesn't care about social pressure and approval and stuff and do not seem to doubt thmselves at all, they MUST think the are better than others around them, therefore arrogant".
That's a good explanation. I agree that is very possible
I threw the question in AI and it got a lot closer.
"Psychopaths are cold, calculated, and adaptive—they may thrive in high-stakes professions.
Sociopaths are hot-headed, unstable, and shaped by environment—more likely to spiral into criminal behavior.
Narcissists are ego-driven and need praise, whereas psychopaths/sociopaths may not care about others’ approval."
That is actually a pretty fair breakdown. A bit general, but way better than most. Which llms was that from?
I pulled it out of Deepseek. I primed it by asking if it was familiar with Kevin Dutton, then asked.
Nice
Closer than Ramani got!!
So Marines are Psychopaths. Good to know. Want to be safe? Get a bunch of Marines around you.
Yet, the AI, though much closer, still only presents characteristics, traits, not fundamental character. Thanks for insightful post.
There is this conversation based on previous research that determined that there are a bunch of psychopaths in special forces, surgery, big companies' leadership and other similar position where emotions would be an obstacle and where there is a need to have control over every detail.
Athena I prefer your other posts. The posts where you criticise people is getting boring. We get it, people don’t understand what psychopathy is. It’s like a reaction video.
Btw still love this blog and have been following for a long time. Just my feedback.
This was a request from a reader.
I like it. Whilst Athena pulls apart what people are falsely stating, we are getting a good description and better understanding of the differences between the disorders. I'd actually like more of this. It would be really good if Athena could talk more about those she knows with NPD and Sociopathy and their crimes and what they thought about the things they did. Also more about how to spot one and avoid or get away from one in a relationship etc.
I can do my best with those topics, but I have to be clear that I am not an expert in either. For NPD, I would reference Elinor Greenberg, as I consider her approach and ability to dissect NPD to be quite impressive.
I would be curious about the way you have been dealing with people with difficult personalities and people with personality disorders.
Yes, absolutely this! Those of us with emotions can easily become victims, I'd like to hear how Athena deals with people with NPD and sociopathic disorders etc. Now that would be a fascinating post, and may even help a few people out there who have to deal unwillingly with one.
I will write that up, then
Definitely not Athena but my 2 cents. If you can't just walk away, narcissists have an ego that wants to be fed. You can make them dance but the effort is not worth it most of the time.
I find that walking away is very effective, but it may be due to how I handle those sorts of things. When I am done dealing with a person, they don't feel that they have an in to be bothering me in the future. I make sure of that.
True, they can get quite nasty about it, in their eyes they have wasted their time and effort, and for them thats a big effort to he nice lol.
Me too
Wait- Natasha!! You wish to get away??? oh no!! hehehe.
How do you react to "love bombing"? Has it happened to you? Perhaps Athena will comment on this: But to me, recognizing when it starts, and NOT letting it happen, is more effective than "after the fact" rescue or intervention or the like.
IF we experience that, and allow ourselves to believe it? We did it to ourselves right? A person who enters a relationship, or tries to right? by love bombing is a deception. They really aren't that into you but seek to manipulate you. Right?
The idea is to "hook you" and then play with you on the line, that is to say: "their line" at your expense.
this is how you spot it BEFORE it goes to relationship status. If I said this right, we agree it is all about you, not them. You spot it so you don't fall into it from go.
When people try that technique on me, it makes me less interested in being around them. I don't want anything to do with it.
You can just enjoy the love bombing til you get tired of it.
I do not prefer that behavior. I find people like that clingy and annoying.
Respectfully, I suggest you can't. Not woman, preyed upon by the man.
If these men are toxic? And the WOMAN leads them on? You risk violence.
Again. Respectfully to you.
I can't know for sure. I do not think it is safe to play with fire.
A love bomber is by definition "fire".
For a man, it is business as usual. Of course, you are correct. Our encounters with women are as the most powerful, and dangerous. It is us who scare them.
Possibly I am just full of shit. Have a great day.
I totally agree with that. Prevention is better than cure. However, I used to think that those around me, were like me. If I shower someone with love and affection, then I absolutely mean it. No hidden agenda, no trickery. So trust me when I say I learned the hard way. This is why I think it would be so good for Athena to talk about how she deals work these con artists... I'm guessing, she just doesn't... but it would be really interesting and encouraging to see it from her perspective, without being lead by any emotion or trust, as she doesn't feel those things.
I don't now, but when I was younger, it wasn't difficult to get those that were overly fixated on me to do things for me, and I would take advantage of that. The problems arose when they didn't prefer my indifference to their existence, and caused me annoyances that I could live very well without.
That's why it's a short term deal but when I was young it was handy.
Very true, if you don't have to deal with fallout
Let me take the first swing, can I?
She deals with them professionally and at arms length. If she was single and was "love bombed"- the dealing would be instant. She would reject that man as a suitor.
Which is exactly how you could be? should be?
You are "dealing with it" when you should be saying: "hey F*ckF*ce. Get the F*** away from me". You have to mean it- BEFORE he has a claim on you.
And no sex with these assholes.
Is this what you mean "dealing with"? Holy Fuck. You mean you have to deal with this? Because you fucked them before you knew they were trouble in the bad way of trouble?
You are a NT New Testament Girl.
What i mean is, these types do this daily just to survive, they are skilled liars and con artists and they are very good at it. If you're not used to people being fake and are not this way yourself, then how is it so easy to spot? Quora and other platforms are FULL of stories of how they were cheated on or treated so badly, this is not unusual.
Agree Natasha, I have been stung by them too. There are lots of articles online that talk about spotting red flags early but when you are caught up in the emotion of it, we sometimes see the red flags but either explain them away as something else, or even choose to ignore them as narcissists feel so good to some of us. Often that’s to do with narcissists having played a part in our formative years. There’s a familiarity and a desire to chase the storm.
The best advice I saw was recently in an interview with Chase Hughes. He explained that if when you meet someone and spend time with them, once you leave, if you have a feeling that you NEED to see this person again, if it feels more like you are craving to see them, this is a dopamine crash. Healthy relationships don’t cause such sharp dopamine spikes. Other bonding chemicals are released instead that would give you a relaxed easy kind of a buzz.
From my own experience I would say this is true. Narcissists make me feel high. I have a need to interact not a steady “Yeah, I’d quite like to see him again” response. Checking yourself rather than trying to spot red flags is more effective in my view. If you have that ‘high’ feeling, recognise it, name it, be honest with yourself that it’s there, THEN replay the interaction and see if there are red flags.
This works far better and is pretty failsafe. Know yourself and your own responses and trust what your own body is telling you.
If it seems to good to be true it often is. A real relationship takes time and isn't going to happen overnight. Moving too fast should set off an alarm. Doesn't mean it can't be legit but should atleast open your eyes to ulterior motive potential.
It always amazes me that PhDs dont have a clue about this stuff. My daughter in law is getting a PhD in clinical psychology. I am going to tell her about you and hopefully she will read your content. I will make for some awesome conversations
That is the problem with our whole educational system. It pushes recall skills over critical thinking and asking why or how.
Agreed
That will certainly be interesting
I keep thinking about how you're not a psychopath, because according to DSM 5, where psychopathy appears under the ASP disorder, you'd be having a tendency to break social rules, cheat, being impulsive, irritable and aggressive, not care about yours or other people's safety and being irresponsible. This is what psychopathy is. The only thing that you have in common is the lack of remorse and empathy.
Maybe there should be a new term for people who can't feel these prosocial feelings, but don't feel the antisocial impulses.
Someone suggested anaffective as a term for psychopathy. That is, having reduced or absent affect. That could be a better term, I suppose, but it seems that the best way to deal with it is to call those in prison that are actually psychopathic, "antisocial psychopaths", and study them as their own group. Leave the rest of us out of it, and redefine the term accurately.
Absolutely agree with you here. For my money, the descriptions of psychopaths that we hear most about relate most to antisocial psychopaths. Within that group there would be both high functioning and low functioning antisocial psychopaths, drill down further into traits and as Kevin Dutton describes, some traits would be dialled up, some dialled down.
The starting point has to be the brain structure. What the individual is essentially born with. Then the next point would be environment. Did the psychopath experience a supportive / loving environment when growing up? (prosocial psychopath) Or was the psychopath raised in an abusive or uncaring environment? (antisocial psychopath)
Both groups of individuals are psychopaths, they might be high or low functioning with varying trait strength, but one grouping would be antisocial and one grouping prosocial.
Currently, all the emphasis is on the antisocial grouping, any consideration for prosocial is extremely limited.
That’s how it looks to my untrained eye. A further complication is that the term psychopath is used to describe any behaviour that is perceived as being cruel or shocking. A catch all term for neurotypicals who can’t even conceive of the fact that they too could execute wholly shocking behaviours if the circumstances are right.
If in doubt, psychopath, definitely! We see similar with narcissism. If the guy’s an asshole then he’s a narcissist. No, some people are just assholes.
I do think the conversation about what psychopathy actually is is opening up, but formalising new ideas and frameworks is likely to be a painfully slow process.
a friend sent a ramani video to me once and i facepalmed the whole time. like tell me you don't know what you're talking about without telling me.
I hadn't listened to her prior to this, and didn't have any sort of opinion going in, but she pretty well blew it immediately, and it just kept getting worse.
Honestly, Ramani sounds very proficient in word salad and not much else.
I agree, and yet, people really like her
Frankly, I like her too. Frankly, who doesn't like a good comedy writer?
Somewhat off topic question: Why does everyone use the term amygdala (singular) not amygdalae (plural)? I looked it up a couple of years ago and found there are actually two, one on each side of brain. Do you have better information?
I actually don't know. I knew that there were two, but in every reading I have done, they refer to it in the singular, so that is how I write as well. It does seem to be confusing almost to the point of disinformation, however.
Would it be the same as referring to "the" brain eventhough there are 2 sides?
Not quite. It is more like referring to our “ear” when we have two different ears, one on each side. I am focusing on singular noun vs plural noun. Plus, I was shocked to find amygdalae not a single amygdala.
So, I asked Grok, and the response was:
The amygdala is often referred to in the singular in writings because the term historically emphasizes its functional role as a unified component of the limbic system, rather than its anatomical duality. Scientific literature tends to discuss the amygdala as a single brain structure or system involved in processes like emotion, fear, and memory, glossing over the fact that there are two (one in each hemisphere). This is partly for simplicity and because the two amygdalae work in close coordination, often studied as a collective entity. The singular usage also aligns with early anatomical naming conventions, where structures were sometimes labeled singularly despite being paired (e.g., "hippocampus"). However, more precise or technical writings, especially in neuroscience, do use the plural "amygdalae" when discussing their distinct roles or hemispheric differences. The choice often depends on context—functional unity versus anatomical specificity—and audience familiarity with technical terms.
It's interesting, even my spell check doesn't like the plural version of the word either.
It's been one of those weird things that I haven't found the reasoning for either
Do both parts function as one or do they have separate responsibilities similar to the brains left side for logic and the right side for art?
The two amygdalae in the brain, one in each hemisphere, don't function as a single unit but work closely together, with some degree of specialization. They communicate via neural connections, like the anterior commissure, to coordinate emotional processing, fear responses, and memory. The right amygdala tends to handle rapid, automatic emotional reactions (e.g., fear or threat detection), while the left often deals with more specific, sustained emotional responses and cognitive aspects, like evaluating stimuli. This division isn't absolute, and they integrate their functions for a cohesive response. Damage to one can disrupt certain emotional processes, but the other may compensate to some extent, showing they're not fully redundant. Their cooperation depends on the task, context, and individual brain differences.
There is really a lot in this post: I really like it. I do miss our pedophile killer from the past few weeks and I would like to do his legal work, but you cover 'a lot' in this material.
From above:
***
Kyle:
And so they pull over, they get the ticket and they don't...care?
Dr. Durvasul:
No, they don't care.
True. We don’t care.
***
All three, including you, use "don't care". But "caring" isn't really the context:
She said: ...if we ran through a red light-- our heart starts racing, we sweat, our pupils get wide, we look around because we're afraid of the consequence. A psychopath doesn't have that same kind of arousal. That's why they're able to lie on lie-detector tests.
We don't care in the - no physical reaction sense. I certain don't want to pay a USA ticket bc it is a boat full of money that is wasted. I care in that sense.
But, a lie detector test? Bring it on. I pass them with no sweating, pupils, etc.
At accident scenes, I am the one calming other people down. Doubtless, you are too Athena.
If someone is overcome with fear, we help them bc we have the mental resources available for our use. It appears we help them for reasons of our own. Certainly not from guilt. Or shame.
Materials Idea: You mention your family nursing long term grudges against you. And expressing them. Could you make a post or two about this? Do I have this right: They basically hate you or loathe you for things you did when you were a little girl? Things that happened many years ago?
Despite their limited brain capacity (my best guess) they remember with great clarity exactly and precisely your actions that cause them so much shame or guilt? So much that YOUR miscues, of history long past, justify the cold blackness of their hearts today (again, my guess- you didn't say this)
No, nothing like that. They felt... rejected by me... I guess would be the way I put it. They love me very much, I am just not a great example of the attentive daughter. The lack of need for them when I was young still leaves them feeling a bit sad, it seems. Neurotypicals require emotional investment that I did not understand as a child.
wow. I don't have the tools needed to understand this, I don't think.
For certain, I have never said "they (meaning anyone) love me very much".
I would say this is outside my frame of reference.
Conversely, I have children, wives, girlfriends, partners, associates, dogs, other pets, enjoy sex, but I have never thought I loved them very much. Even my youngest son, I have to remind myself to be nice to him.
Perhaps you might enjoy creating a primer on "Emotional Investment"? Yes! I hope you may give that some thought!! Emotional Investment for NTs!!! -Original Concept by Tim!! hahaha
Love is demonstrated to me through action, and their actions make it clear that they have deep feelings for me. I imagine, being an adopted child, that my lack of need of affection might have made them feel like it was a result of me not being biologically theirs, but it wouldn't have been any different for me regardless.
You define love & make me admire you. I really appreciate this about you. Not that I can do it myself, but it is a way forward.
Your words past "I imagine"- I know they are words and mean something and that you fully understand them. However, the concepts seem past my understanding or maybe really complex.
Then you came back and I understand: "it wouldn't have been any different", and I smile and enjoy it with you. You had a happy home. And even now, you have people who care about you. That is alot.
It appears you have a very good life.
Indeed I do
And you understand Love even if you don't experience the feeling of love. It is pretty amazing and makes me smile to write.
Given we are far enough down the path, that one more comment will not be noticed by anyone else, I want to offer my thoughts on the girl who asked you about dealing with Narcissist in a relationship, a sexual and love relationship.
If that is okay: You can be blunt, frank even!!
I focus on girls, young ladies, bc they are the ones most affected. Certainly can happen to anyone, yet girls seem most affected.
I am a simpleton: The problem is the two individuals want different things from the relationship!! hehehe. See? I am stupid!!
I mean going into the relationship, they went out to a dance, used a dating ap, bumped into each other: Doesn't matter: They proceeded into a relationship.
It turns out, it is a whirlwind. Cards letters gifts dinners etc
The Girl is so happy: Why? Bc she wants a relationship.
If she didn't want an outgoing, she would have enjoyed an evening of nice sex and gone home without giving her phone or address. Right? We all seen this (boys and girls) on the prowl for some good healthy boom boom.
But this girl is not that: She is going for a relationship ...
AND the partner gives her every IMPRESSION he does too!
BUT...and this is a big butt...and the point of writing...
He does want a relationship, but not for the same reasons...
She wants a nice relationship and have it continue to white fence or take home to meet the parents or whatever. She wants to build and continue, you might say "in love" to grow.
His purpose is different. Once he establishes: This woman WANTS a relationship with ME (him) he shifts. Yes, he enjoyed the sex. But he no longer wants the girl or to build love with her.
Likely there are a world of reasons for this (even I can write all those!) but a switch is flipped and the outrageous behavior begins.
And the girl says: "how do you deal with this?"
The girl can only get away, get rid of the guy.
Every bit of fights and breakups and makeup sex? It is great, the best possible for the guy. All those gifts and expensive dinners? That was the lead up for the guy to where he can torment her. Do outrageous things to see if she will continue: All the while, he thinks she is an idiot.
Opps: Athena this is what everyone caught in this knows: The guy at that point thinks she is a idiot to continue. He doesn't "love her" bc he isn't trying to love her. He gets his jollies a different way: I will leave it to others to determine if it is abusive or not.
I would certainly beat someone who did this to my daughters. (Ex wifes, nawh)
for girls with narcissists, it isn't the sex acts that gets them in trouble: It is the sex and the resulting "feeling" of love and attachment.
Much of the time, I am just full of shit. If you read this be frank. You don't need my permission. And I know where frank leads.
On Being Pulled over for a ticket:
I was headed to work location and drove right through a speed trap. The cop pulled right out and came up behind me.
As soon as he was behind me, I pulled over. When he came to the window, I handed him my license, reg and insurance.
He was bewildered. He asked me why I pulled over, if I was surrendering. He went to his car, then returned saying my behavior was unusual. He wished me a good day and did not issue a ticket.
On being aware of others feelings
Last Tuesday, through my neglect, a person was injured.
Over the weekend, he went to ICU and died Sunday night.
I experienced something that can only be described as "feelings". I talked to a couple friends about it and they agree it is not my fault (they weren't there and are wrong), I shouldn't feel "guilty".
It was my fault. I was in neglect. I failed to protect the man.
Whatever it was, it passed and I no longer "feel" anything about it. It lasted about 4 or 5 hours.
What did the cop think you were going to do? Run? How would that be beneficial to you?
Hahaha!
Apparently in USA, it is common to continue driving and allow the cop to turn on his lights to signal to pull over.
It seems their citizens are supposed to hope he doesn't pull them over.
AND this is a big one: They engage in some sort of cultural ritual where the cop "determines" in his discretion whether to make a citation or not!! LOL
If the cop pulls out behind you, they're going to pull you. It’s better to just deal with the outcome
Athena,
I happen to be reading couple of books authored by Love Fraud and Psychopath Free. Their arguments have merits. Let's take Donna Andersen for example, she seems to almost get everything right about Psychopathy (Lack of emotional receptors, especially Oxytocin, mimic behavior, feedback loop, etc) surely not when it comes that they are predators looking for the next prey or wanna feel power and control. I think the confusion is coming from when she mentions the word Sociopath, she is grouping everybody who has a personality disorder.
I know most of her audience are people who just came out of a failed relationship and trying to understand what went wrong or if there's such people but something that caught my interest is (which can mean very different things) how those partners said that something "switched off" or that their partner "changed," "lacked the sweet phase." This reminded me of the mask that you always speak of. Sure, some are exhibiting traits of NPD who suck out people and casually throw them away but there's some stories when I read, it didn't feel like anything was wrong or should be interpreted as being cruel or psycho, but because the partners literally "Switched off" or showed boredom in the relationship and thus the "victim" came online to look for answers.
Now, what I wanted to get some insights on, is how you often say that many psychologists are not equipped to identify Psychopathy or know anything about it. Cause they are relying on Robert Hare's tools, how were you then clinically diagnosed as a Psychopath if there are no correct tools for it? Why not a different label, why Psychopathy if the entire argument is starting from the one who developed the tool to study the prisoners? Especially when you said that Psychopaths can lie to psychologists. This is not meant to challenge your diagnosis or anything but it popped up as I was reading your article.
Love Fraud and Psychopath Free are about as accurate as using a cook book to build a freeway overpass. I do not lend any credibility to a woman that claims to have lived over two hundred times and her ex, assuming the man actually exists, which I doubt very much he does, found her in every single life, and assaulted, raped, or took advantage of her in all of them. That is not the hallmark of a well woman, nor one that should be listened to about anything, let alone psychopathy. The same can be said, with different circumstances, for Psychopath Free. Neither of those people have a clue about either one. That is evident in their writing. I have written in detail specifically about Anderson.
The people that diagnosed me actually took the time to learn about psychopathy in depth, understand what it was, and what it wasn't, and applied that information to their clients. Psychopathy can be studied accurately if the person doing so seeks out detailed information, has a critical mind, and doesn't fall in line. An excellent example of someone who does this, not with psychopathy, but NPD BPD, and schizoid PD, is Elinor Greenberg. There is a ton of misinformation about these things in the world, and most clinicians know as much about them as they do about psychopathy. There are even those that are so misinformed, they refuse to work with clients because of those myths. However, if you read her work, you can find that, while it takes someone very well-trained outside of the mainstream nonsense, there are those out there that are far better trained, and apparently far more intelligent.
Something I have often wondered as I follow your posts dissecting and rebutting the literature of authors like Dr Ramani, is why you painstakingly do this? We understand that the literature on psychopathy is skewed, and the authors either set out to sensationalize their channels (click-bait) or they write from a position of ignorance. I far prefer the articles you post where you offer your take on events or stories, giving us insights into the world as you see it. You are the only author I have been able to identify who is a). a diagnosed Psychopath and b). interested in writing about the subject. I thoroughly enjoyed your series on Robert Maudsely. Or, another example, your post "what happens when I lose my patience". Your point by point rebuttals of sensationalist authors who all offer the same mishmash of psychocopathy = narcissistic personality disorder, seem rather a waste of your resources and effort.