Many times after something has gone very badly and I'm doing an analysis of what went wrong...it was bloody minded strong willed stubbornness on my part
If you ever get the inclination, take the top 5 times stubborness caused you a bad outcome and write them down. I would love to read and learn from this. Is it just me or this is a VERY interesting topic and character trait?
I can think about it and try to come up with more that I am willing to share, but I am also very private, so there are definitely things that I wouldn't relay due to that.
Yes. Your posts are so revealing and personal. Your writing and content is so very impressive, like startling: NTs don't go where you do. No. They can't.
Your very attributes, stubborn and fearless, overwhelm your privacy and reserve. As your audience increases, you MAY become more guarded: Meaning we, who are with you now, are VIP special level right now.
Hi Invisigoth. I wonder whether the assessment of things having gone “very badly” is at all time bound. At the time, the assessment is things went very badly due to supreme stubbornness but actually years later and with the benefit of hindsight, maybe stubbornness serves a purpose more often than you perhaps first thought.
I’m stubborn, neurotypical stubborn and whilst I might view this stubbornness as having caused problems at the time, often when I look back I’ll think “Actually, you were right there.” There was a genuine reason the stubbornness activated that I couldn’t fully point to at the time.
I do think stubbornness is survival related, I think that’s its overall purpose, it’s just not quite as necessary as it once was. A bit like fear. It was necessary as part of survival for many, fear isn’t as necessary today yet it still activates.
Yes, here and when you wrote about your ballet and yoga, your stubbornness works against you demonstrably. It is there for a reason though and I hope that you also get to benefit from it as well as having to ‘manage’ it.
If we looked at how humans evolved, the dangers and hardships faced when we lived in tribes. I can’t help but think that that stubbornness would actually save lives more often than endangering them.
In the event of a subway tunnel collapse for example, it would be you stubbornly digging your way out with bare hands, while many of us froze in panic. It ties in to survival in my view, that particular trait just doesn’t get called upon as often for most people in this day and age.
I have to say I found this tale amusing. I enjoy reading about your interactions with your SO. I’m aware that psychopaths don’t trust emotionally, though they can trust cognitively and I think this post is a great example of that in action.
I do find it interesting that with your SO, you are able to accept that the additional information he might provide to doctors doesn’t translate to you as an invasion of privacy, a kind of overstepping of the mark. You clearly want things done in a specific way yet there is an allowance made for the well being of your SO and an acceptance of the fact that on occasion, in this context he might be a better judge of what is best for you than you are.
I find this particularly interesting, without the emotional connection it’s not how I would imagine a psychopath to behave. That just demonstrates my own misconceptions and my underestimation of cognitive empathy coupled with the conscious effort to take into consideration the needs of someone who matters to you.
I wonder which is the greater motivation. Self preservation? You view your SO as more competent than yourself in this specific context so the self preservation function is outsourced to him. Or, it’s simply a case of wanting to protect your SO from unnecessary worry, so the deal or agreed framework of the relationship motivates a handing over of medical decision making (to a degree) meaning that it is preservation of his well-being that is the driver. Both maybe.
I recognize that I tend to channel things how I want them to be, not necessarily how they need to be. He is that insistence of reason that I have to accept
Thanks Tim. I’m always trying to figure out the core motivations for why people behave as they do or make the decisions they make.
In some ways, it does appear very much like emotional love, largely due to that element of trust that’s involved. However, given Athena is a psychopath I have to rule that out and look for a more self serving motivation. Self serving is often perceived negatively but I don’t see it as a bad thing necessarily, particularly when placed in context of consciously taking another’s needs into account. I don’t see Athena’s relationship as ‘ less than’ a relationship between two people with emotional empathy. I don’t see it as ‘more than’ either. I just see it as ‘different than’. It works for both parties and it’s lovely that it does.
In English we love pizza (Yes, I would love another slice, please) just as we love our grandmother as we contemplate her death (I loved her even MORE than pizza but less than downhilll skiing).
Certainly, we agree Athena does not "feel" love, (I confess I do not either - even to my own children) she nevertheless can and does "express" love. Grant me this please. To her SO.
I appreciate Athena's actions towards her SO as "love" - more than I experienced in mine. I don't feel jealousy but I know what it is.
Can you imagine what her SO must feel toward her? It has to be like a large active volcano! Now imagine Athena gave that to you. What would your reaction be?
Her actions seem "love", not as a feeling but the result of conscience: determined, difficult choice and will.
She causes me both to respect her and to be challenged to do better in my life especially with my children. I don't particularly like them or want them around me. Yet, like Athena, I have a responsibility to love them whether I feel it or not.
Best wishes always!!!
I considered very carefully before posting. I don't try to offend you (or anyone else) If I did, it is not my intent. I am certainly the least insightful and less likely to be on the right track.
Omg your comment about pizza and downhill skiing literally had me laughing out loud! I don't think you'll offend anyone, you choose your words carefully and you're coming from a good place. Most people will make allowances for almost anything if those two things are true.
No I’m not offended at all and I think you’re exactly right when you point out that someone can express love without necessarily feeling it. I can’t remember which article it was but it included a part about Athena going to get Chinese takeaway. I remember pondering the effort it must take when someone doesn’t naturally think about another person, isn’t prompted to do things for another person in the same way that my emotional empathy prompts me. I concluded that that’s a huge amount of effort and self reminding to meet the needs of another person in the way that Athena does every day. It takes more thought and more consistent effort for Athena to show consideration and affection than it does for me. I actually found that quite romantic. So the effort involved to express love, in a non hearts and flowers narcissistic way, I think is really quite something.
So no, not offended at all. For me, I see Athena’s effort as different to my effort but on balance, neither better nor worse. We are all different with different emotional needs, so it makes sense to me that the expression of love or affection will also look and feel different to different people.
To clarify, when I state that it takes effort to express love in a non hearts and flowers narcissistic way, what I mean there is that Athena expresses affection / love for her SO in a realistic genuine way, not in the hearts and flowers way that a narcissist would utilise to create the impression of love or affection.
When reading my comment back, that wasn’t clear. Now I am content!
Yes, I agree on the potentially positive element of the stubbornness. In Groundhogs, there has been research that has determined that a groundhog will sacrifice itself to a predator if the other groundhogs nearby make up the genetic material of half it's offspring.
I do believe there are also non positive forces that upset these genetic processes. Rather like how a tyranny with it's own agenda can upset the smooth working pattern of a team.
I have mentioned here that I have an illness, one that is quite severe. When I was young I used to do things similar to this. I used to be like, when phoned by a friend... 'Oh yeah, there is a problem with my metabolism and I'm probably going to die', in far less direct terms, not explicitly saying I would die I don't think, but then I put the phone down. The friend then phoned my mother. I cannot recall the outcome. It might have been one of the times I went to hospital.
With a lot of repetition of this kind of thing, I have pushed against an apparent lack of ability to take care of my own health, with ongoing consequences, currently I am at risk of sudden death at least as I understand it (bloodwork is off). But now I am researching I know a lot about health and this will very likely positively influence everyone around me going forward. I have a technical thinking ability that while people have it, they don't have my endurance in that area. So rather like the groundhog example it ultimately serves the tribe.
It reminds me of my beloved animals, how they hide their illness until it's impossible - and even then, the vet is the last place they want to go.
They never connect the vet with being the place that made them feel better, either. No appreciation at all, lol
I am very glad you're still here, Athena. I remember you telling the story, but I had no idea you never went to the hospital! I'm glad your SO has a plan and the authority to save you despite your objections now.
I can see why people in real life might assume it was driven by fear (of hospitals or whatever), but online, where you're open about your psychopathy, it actually seems like the exact opposite - it sounds like it's the lack of fear that's stopping you from recognising your own fallibility. It's weird cos you clearly recognise the limits of your own knowledge/skills etc cognitively, but I guess you don't act on it, because you don't feel any fear in the moment, so you kind of forget you're not immortal or a superhero?
One of the reasons I love your writing on psychopathy is because it helps me understand myself better - it makes me realise that emotions in neurotypicals, especially fear, are alot less logical and rational than they seem to be subjectively. When I'm scared it almost always feels extremely rational and logical to me - it feels like a simple chain of cause and effect, like 'situation x is dangerous/threatening, therefore I could get hurt, therefore I'm afraid'. I feel like the fear is caused by the thing I'm scared of directly, in a very simple straightforward way. But I'm beginning to realise that fear is way more emotionally driven than that, it's not just a logical response. I was in a situation recently that used to terrify me, but as a result of therapy my background anxiety levels have massively reduced over the last few years, and I found myself in a situation that I know used to scare the hell out of me, but wasn't able to access or feel the fear at all. I actually stood there forcing myself to think all the same thoughts I used to think, consciously go over the 'logic' of the fear, willing myself to feel it, and it just wasn't there. The situation hadn't changed, the level of threat hadn't changed (it was almost non-existent in the first place, but was very real to me), but I just couldn't feel the fear to anywhere near the same degree. Because the fear was never coming directly from the situation itself, it was coming from my sky high anxiety levels about life in general, which were making me see danger everywhere, even in situations that seem ridiculous to me now. It was a very strange experience to realise that my fear was never logical in the first place, even though it felt like it was. I had believed all my life that my thoughts were causing my fear, only to find that if anything my fear was actually causing my thoughts!
This post is a really good demonstration of the fact that fear is not a logical response - because your ability to recognise logically/cognitively that certain situations are dangerous seems to be functioning pretty normally, and yet because you can't feel the fear, you don't act on it, and end up putting yourself at risk. Thank goodness you have your SO to look out for you!
You are correct. This is a lack of fear coupled with stubbornness that I reach these decisions through. It would likely be better if I was more reasonable when it comes to my health and other things that might put me at risk.
Agreed, rationally it would likely be better for you, but believe me from the NT point of view a total lack of fear seems like quite an attractive proposition sometimes - as you've said before fear stops alot of people doing alot of things that would otherwise be quite cool/fun/enjoyable, so the idea of being immune to fear is quite a seductive one for us. Just goes to show what a contradictory love/hate relationship NTs have with our emotions - on the one had they can make us feel totally horrific and want to die, on the other hand they protect us, or drive us to protect ourselves, which is pretty damn important.
There is one thing I'm really curious about though Athena, I've been wondering about it for a while - I know you've said before that if there was ever a cure for psychopathy you wouldn't want anything to do with it (I don't mean just pumping you full of oxytocin, I know that wouldn't make any difference, I mean a genuine cure using some kind of gene therapy to fix the underlying genetic mutation that stops your brain from being able to process oxytocin, so probably few decades away at least). I can totally understand that having spent your whole life painstakingly working out how to get by in an NT world that doesn't make any sense to you, now that you've mostly got there the idea of waking up one morning as a neurotypical is probably not at all appealing - it would be like going back to square one, back to nothing making sense, and alot of the strategies you've developed over the years might suddenly become useless or even problematic. But I'm curious as to whether, if someone could offer you the chance to be neurotypical just for a single day, and then go back to normal (your own psychopathic normal) whether you would do it? I would definitely do it the other way around, I would love to know firsthand what the psychopathic experience is like (although admittedly would be terrified that they wouldn't be able to put me back to normal after) - I guess what I'm asking is, do you have some level of curiosity about what the NT experience is like, how it feels to have normal intensity emotions etc, or are you really quite indifferent and not intrigued in the slightest?
The thing that I have found about healing is that it is a very slow process. It is peoples lack of awareness of psychology that means this isn't well known enough. But peoples belief systems and biology are so incredibly fragile that even the tiniest change can send them into a complete meltdown. I believe this is a big part of the reason why things work as they do in our society.
For instance, this has happened to me. I have had to bring a body that was not in a good place to better health and learned how difficult and slow this has to be. As I talked about before the mind needs to keep up with hormonal changes changing ones perspective. I believe a lot of things we apparently 'think' we assign to our own motivations in order to remain sane. But they are completely outside our control.
The reason I am saying this is because, I believe, if Athena was to go through a major change, the process would be excruciatingly slow. One of the reasons is as she said so she is allowed to feel like herself as she notices the changes. There are also spiritual rules surrounding this.
I am a bit off the wall in my belief system and I don't put a lot of stock in the mainstream idea that so much of our problems can't be cured. For instance, the idea that autism comes from vaccines came from a guy who claimed he found MMR vaccine in the digestive system, he published this in the Lancet. The opposition he then faced was serious enough that he was then run out of the country.
The point to me is that I don't know whether psychopathy is a legitimate part of the personality or an abberation that will be fixed with the nutrition and such. But if there were a cure I think it would be both excruciatingly slow. It would be slow digestive changes and insights leading to changed behaviour. And it would not be opposable. Not if it linked to societal changes i.e. some toxic substance being taken out of the food, or some other change.
It is neither. It is a genetically coded difference. There is no reason to fix what has been there for the entirety of human history and is beneficial to the human race. There is nothing wrong with psychopaths. We do not want, nor need to be fixed.
I did not say that you needed to be fixed. My last paragraph made it very clear I was talking in generalities. I would consider it the height of arrogance to assume I knew for sure on such matters. So for me, I will not consider whether any particular thing is fixed or part of our environment hence subject to change.
Another point I want to mention though is that it considers Darwiniism i.e. evolutionary psychology sacrosanct. I do not think it is and see a good deal of what is said in that area simply creating convenient stories to justify preferences. Some thoughts, certainly not an exhaustive list but I am not sure how to phrase the argument properly yet:
A) Male lions kill the young of a female they want to mate with, this is explained by evolutionary psychology. Female foxes will shack up with other mothers and look after off spring that is not there own. This seems to me a good example of opposing behaviour both explained as evolutionary and darwiniism, is this kind of belief in the ways it is applied falsifiable? Does it have some condition that disproves it?
B) There are simply not enough skeletons to justify Darwins hypothesis of animal husbandry applied to humans. If it were real there would be ape, 3/4 ape, 1/2 ape 1/2 human, 3/4 human then human. But none of this exists. Rather like the dinosaurs.
C) Watson and Crick said while working on the DNA molecule that is too massively complex to be the product of random mutation. It is one in an almost infinite number probability wise that it exists as it does.
D) However, DNA forms all over the place. It forms on asteroids. It forms in radiation waste zones where the animals formed start eating the radiation. Which suggests that DNA can sponteneously form and is thus not a product of evolution as Darwin outlined it.
In me, it comes from emotional attachment to ideas, and fixation on there being only one thing to do, but that doesn’t seem like it would apply to a psychopath.
I was thinking about this earlier - lack of fear is obviously a psychopathic trait, but stubbornness not so much. Was wondering how it's linked to the underlying inability to process oxytocin. But then I thought about what stubbornness is and tried to define it, and decided that ultimately it's an unwillingness or resistance to being influenced by others from your original view or plan. And then suddenly it made sense in relation to psychopathy - psychopaths aren't wired to care about other people's opinions. NT's spend soooo much time worrying about what other people think of us, but psychopaths are indifferent to all that. And I guess if you spend a lifetime not being constrained by other people's opinions then that's a hard habit to break, even when your life's hanging in the balance. That would be my guess anyway.
I don't know if that is it completely. While it is relevant that a thought process that does not take in the other obviously will not see the incentive to yield to the other in matters of judgement. When I think about it it seems to me there that a deeper explanation might be possible.
If you spend your life in a manner where your own emotions are not accessible, in part or at all, then you will have less need to reference those inner emotions when making decisions.
This means that value of doing any particular thing changes, it changes value judgements in general.
If I want to go out for a walk and I have emotional thinking, when someone comes up to me and says 'oh you are going for too many walks, perhaps stop doing it'. Then this influences the emotions. But if you have an ND process of carefully working through the pros and cons, people will have to explain to you in relation to the cognitive process that you have put in place, in order to have any influence. "Yes, but if I walk three miles today I get x health benefit".
Once this becomes a strong pattern of behaviour, a self centered rather than generalised emotional decision making process, then there is no reason to change it. Until, in this case, it is overriden by another cognitive process... I.e. Athena weighed the potential con of bad health against the more instinctual con of being interferred with by doctors.
I had to read that a few times, but I think I get what you're saying now - do you mean that part of the reason a psychopath is more likely to be stubborn, is that when other people try to influence them they tend to do it by appealing to emotions (because they're most likely neurotypical, so everything has an emotional slant for them, at least in comparison to a psychopath) - so their attempts to influence don't really land or get through, because a psychopath doesn't make decisions based on emotion. If they tried to influence by appealing purely to logic and reason instead, then they might have a better chance of getting through, but most people don't do that because most people don't think purely in terms of logic and reason. So you're saying the stubbornness is as much because of the influencing style of the person trying to influence (which is mismatched to the psychopaths way of thinking), as it is because of the psychopath not being wired to care about other people's opinions?
Well, what I mean is that if you take the assumed reason for stubbornness at face value (i.e. that it is simply and only not fearing or relating to others). We would assume then that the psychopath (term I will use is ND going forward!) has an emotional reason that is then not opposed because of the self centeredness. But that assumes that the ND has an emotional decision making process in the first place. If we were to walk through the ND's decision making process, which is probably not emotional, it might add more to the discussion.
I am not really considering how the person influencing the ND operates but the ND themself. I am saying the structure of the decision making process is different.
We need to contrast this with how neurotypicals make decisions to understand. A neurotypical has a thought, which comes forward as a large part emotional, and then, due to their general sense of emotional empathy with those around them this becomes an ongoing negotiation. This is perhaps some of the interesting element to look at. This ongoing sense of emotion that means that the tribe all functions smoothly and people move in the same kind of direction.
That is not there with the ND (of the variety we are discussing), so a fact becomes a fact (ND) it is not a negotiable half fact, half emotion (NT) object.
I do not know how someone would influence someone that thinks like this.
Ohhhh ok, you're talking about the ND's own thinking style. Yes I definitely agree that most thoughts and decisions in the NT world are a blend of logic and emotion, and it's often difficult to separate the two or see where the line is between them. And I think you're saying that it's that element of emotion that makes thoughts and decisions seem inherently negotiable to the NT brain. You could even say that the whole NT world is one big long ongoing process of negotiation between people - and like you say it makes evolutionary sense for it to be that way, because prior to the last few hundred years humans always lived dangerously close to the edge (eg to subsistence level), so being part of a social group was pretty much essential to survival during the time our brains were evolving. And you can't really have social cohesion without openness to negotiation.
Whereas you're saying that for an ND (of the psychopath variety), that emotional element of thoughts and decisions is missing, so their thinking style is inherently less open to negotiation? It definitely makes sense that there would be a link between openness to negotiation on the one hand, and pro-social emotions on the other. We're willing to negotiate, and over time become skilled at negotiating (even though it can be bloody annoying at times), because our brains are telling us we need to be part of a group with other people. But when those pro-social emotions are missing, and the brain isn't telling you you need to be part of a group, the motivation towards negotiation would be missing or much weaker. And over time that tendency to see your own thoughts and decisions as simple facts that are not open to negotiation must become deeply entrenched. Also known as stubbornness of course!
I think you summarised what I had to say well, better than I did perhaps.
Leads to a lot of interesting places in my view. Like, for instance, when it comes to the psychopaths 'charm'. Is it that because there is no internal reflection, internal checking on feelings and feelings getting in the way, that they can look at others in a way that makes them feel seen? Rather like watching a young attractive women and being able to get in her head. Rather than trying to show how good the other person is (i.e. look at my haircut and money) actually seeing like 'If I can subtly make her feel attractive in this way?'
Also, if we think of the ND as opposing potentially dangerous group think. Say there is a narcissist whom is good at getting NT's wound up and pointing them in the wrong direction. The ND is going to be like 'But that's stupid what that narc just said, I don't want to do x'.
These are all very rough ideas but I thought it was interesting.
I think the only way to influence someone who thinks in the way Athena does is via reward. Athena has to regularly force herself to do mundane tasks she doesn’t want to do. She does it ( if I remember correctly) by using a system of reward. Self compensation with something she does want to do. “Clean the kitchen then you get to try that new recipe you found online.” So if that system self motivates, in terms of an influencer I would think reward would be an approach to try.
I also remember Athena describing an outing with a psychopath friend and choice of restaurant came into play. I remember thinking if that was me, I’d go to the restaurant the friend wanted to go to this time, and then the one I preferred next time. That wasn’t the approach taken though as both want their needs to be met in the now, not at some future point (which might be subject to change). So a reward system would likely have time constraints. There is little room for delayed gratification. That was my interpretation of what I read.
Well, I was being over simplistic because that is a rabbit hole I did not particularly feel the need to go into.
Firstly, her boyfriend has manipulated her by, in a small way, martyring himself. He has taken a hit and she has had to take a step back and concede because of that although the concession applies to the future.
In a more immediate sense. Perhaps reward may work, but what reward can you give someone that is already in pain if it does not directly address said pain? It is unlikely he could have said to go to the hospital and he would buy her something she wanted and in a sense the "martyrdom" path would be more successful. She is incentivised by her own admission to not being unreasonable because 'she would prefer he was around than not'.
Athena basically stated that she was 'begging for pain medication'. This means the pain is already having an effect. If he, or someone, had taken the attitude that the pain is providing a function, to tell her to go to the hospital, and so it's alleviation is counter productive. Well that would be influence and it would be influence that even if it was not yielded to, we would know it was felt. There is a level of extremity where it would definitely be yielded to.
Might have been a pyrrhic victory in a relationship. But ultimately, anyone can be manipulated. In my view. Everyone finds one thing more desireable than another thing and can be incentivised towards a preferred behaviour.
Strong will occurs in many NTs and NDs, and failure to account for it can be expensive. One of my therapists was of the opinion that alcoholics are weak willed. I suggested she place herself between an alcoholic and a drink to discover how "weak-willed" the alcoholic is. I remember getting a good grip on an autistic whose customary meal time was 6:00 pm and keeping him from hurting himself until the meals arrived at 6:15 pm and then contracting with him not to hurt himself til he had eaten.
Curious to know about the part you say you can speak as an equal to a docter. It's normal for neurotypicals to feel below or at least feel hierarchy in front of a doctor or any high rank person in a profession. Do you feel it? Or just notice that some people just follow others and adiquate to the situation?
No, I don't feel anything like that. When dealing with doctors, as far as I'm concerned, it's my body that they are providing a service to. I require their assistance, but they are not the ones in charge. I am, because I am the one that will deal with the results of the decisions made.
It almost sounds in this context like your sub-contracting your health care out to a professional to do a job. And now that I think on it, almost sounds like shopping for a physician. I've had friends in the past that have told me that that's a bad idea that you shouldn't do that that you should just respect a professional opinion and go along with the flow, but I've always been forced to look at it to a different lens of maybe get a second opinion. I mean most of the time just straight up tell you to go find a second opinion. I don't know why people ignore such good advice. Like taking my car to the mechanic I would never trust the first mechanic I take it to I always make sure that I get a second opinion on it so I know the first guy ain't trying to rip me off. Seems like a fairly reasonable and rational thing to do
I have seen way too many people that can't be bothered with progressing their education or thinking outside the box to just allow them to have control of my health. I respond paradoxically to many things, and need a doctor that is going to listen to me on that instead of assuming that they know me better than I do. I don't have time, nor interest in allowing them to play catch-up. They need to take the information and formulate their plans based on the facts, not their ego.
Thank you for this post, it was an enjoyable read. It is interesting to see you describe your experiences with the downsides to psychopathy, or what can be a downside. I am fond of seeing balanced discussions of psychopathy, when most discourse on the topic is very black and white. It is similar when it comes to autism, we are either super geniuses or incapable of even existing without assistance. Either savants or lacking intelligence entirely. Autism and intellectual disability being falsely conflated doesn't help. 'Discussions' made up only of extreme one-sided perspectives are everywhere, and they are tiring.
Yes, I have noticed that belief structure when it comes to autism, and it is baffling to me that people seem to consider it in such a rudimentary way. No nuance.
Hmm, sounds like I dodged a bullet. I made myself a code of conduct since I have a problem recognizing authority other than my own, but rule 1 is that I must reconsider the code when I meet opposition that I would have to use significant time to remove, and then cost/benefit analyze the time spent removing the obstacle against the time spent recognizing it (in all likely instances). I am very stubborn about rule 1, because time is not a renewable resource. It does mean the rest of the code is flexible and consequently, I am.
I play these mental games with myself, to interact with neurotypicals more or less smoothly, but there is a fellow who sat on one of my objectives who was once a high level official and who was dismissed for highly erratic behavior 6 months after I met him. He did most of the work himself. Mostly, I wrote complimentary memos to his superiors and threw his copies away.
The headache described I have second hand experience with since I watched my mother suffer with it. I have sufficient experience with pain reinterpretation and time dilation and time compression that I could probably use self-hypnosis to experience stillness of 24 hours in about a subjective minute, so it is not an issue on which I would be stubborn.
The surgeon who cleaned out my left carpal tunnel was impressed that we did it without anesthesia other than my self-trance (but then what the anesthesiologist proposed was something I would have stubbornly refused because I would have ended in a serotonin storm). I guess the old adage holds, "You pays your money and you takes your chances."
I like this story! For me, I've always been a little worried about my health since the hospital was basically my second home when I was a child. So I'm aware of everything I feel as hard as possible because due to my poor interoception, I can't really identify what I'm feeling in my body, such as, hunger, thirst, pain, discomfort. So I'm always like "okay, I feel something in my head, so I'll pay attention to it to see if it gets intense or not."
Okay so I have a quick question for you Athena and as well as anyone else who cares to comment. For most of my life, as a rule, I have avoided going to see any type of healthcare professional be it physical mental or emotional because I don't know them for one which means I certainly don't trust them. And my big issue here is not so much fear as I see it in a different light then I guess most neurotypicals do. I have serious issue with interesting my well-being in any of those areas to a person that has a vested financial interest in return business. Now my question is, does this seem paranoid to those who think logically instead of emotionally? My wife is simply thinks that I am so afraid of hospitals and healthcare professionals giving me potentially what most would see his life-altering news that it borders on paranoia. But I explained it to her exactly like I just explained it to the readers here she told me I just need to suck it up and go in anyway.
I don't consider that paranoid, especially if you have had negative interactions in the past. The way through that is to know what it is that you are looking for and not settle for different. I don't have a real interest in telling a doctor what to do, but will if I have to. Instead, I am just looking for someone that is open and paying attention. If I see that, then we have a basis to work from.
Interesting post. In a post awhile back you mentioned something about pain not being debilitating to you. Which really surprised me, because although pain for neurotypicals usually involves emotions (fear especially), severe pain can be debilitating even when in stubborn denial, just from the sheer fact that it's incredibly distracting.
It sounds like this one was debilitating for you, though.
Yes, there is always going to be a threshold that once you pass it there is no ability to deny the pain. I was able to deny the pain until I lost connection to reality. After that, not so much.
Hi Athena! Long time no talk. This text of yours is, IMO, the closest you'll ever be of writing a psychopath's love letter. Or I should say a respect letter (Damn neuros and their love I'm telling you!!:) ) The way you talk about your SO is really amazing as the depth of respect you show towards him is quite high. Take care and talk to you later!
Many times after something has gone very badly and I'm doing an analysis of what went wrong...it was bloody minded strong willed stubbornness on my part
I know just what you mean
If you ever get the inclination, take the top 5 times stubborness caused you a bad outcome and write them down. I would love to read and learn from this. Is it just me or this is a VERY interesting topic and character trait?
I can think about it and try to come up with more that I am willing to share, but I am also very private, so there are definitely things that I wouldn't relay due to that.
Yes. Your posts are so revealing and personal. Your writing and content is so very impressive, like startling: NTs don't go where you do. No. They can't.
Your very attributes, stubborn and fearless, overwhelm your privacy and reserve. As your audience increases, you MAY become more guarded: Meaning we, who are with you now, are VIP special level right now.
Hi Invisigoth. I wonder whether the assessment of things having gone “very badly” is at all time bound. At the time, the assessment is things went very badly due to supreme stubbornness but actually years later and with the benefit of hindsight, maybe stubbornness serves a purpose more often than you perhaps first thought.
I’m stubborn, neurotypical stubborn and whilst I might view this stubbornness as having caused problems at the time, often when I look back I’ll think “Actually, you were right there.” There was a genuine reason the stubbornness activated that I couldn’t fully point to at the time.
I do think stubbornness is survival related, I think that’s its overall purpose, it’s just not quite as necessary as it once was. A bit like fear. It was necessary as part of survival for many, fear isn’t as necessary today yet it still activates.
I can say without a doubt that I have looked back and still see that my stubbornness nearly unjustifiably killed me.
Does it cure it? No. I just recognize that I nearly lost my life because I didn't want to do what I should have done.
Yes, here and when you wrote about your ballet and yoga, your stubbornness works against you demonstrably. It is there for a reason though and I hope that you also get to benefit from it as well as having to ‘manage’ it.
If we looked at how humans evolved, the dangers and hardships faced when we lived in tribes. I can’t help but think that that stubbornness would actually save lives more often than endangering them.
In the event of a subway tunnel collapse for example, it would be you stubbornly digging your way out with bare hands, while many of us froze in panic. It ties in to survival in my view, that particular trait just doesn’t get called upon as often for most people in this day and age.
I am not going to write out details of any incidents but I can give you a hint of an ending using the punchline from a Ron White joke.
"I don't know how many cops it'd take to whup my ass but I know how many they used.... all of 'em"
And that all started because the beer tent didn’t accept your “coupins”.
I have to say I found this tale amusing. I enjoy reading about your interactions with your SO. I’m aware that psychopaths don’t trust emotionally, though they can trust cognitively and I think this post is a great example of that in action.
I do find it interesting that with your SO, you are able to accept that the additional information he might provide to doctors doesn’t translate to you as an invasion of privacy, a kind of overstepping of the mark. You clearly want things done in a specific way yet there is an allowance made for the well being of your SO and an acceptance of the fact that on occasion, in this context he might be a better judge of what is best for you than you are.
I find this particularly interesting, without the emotional connection it’s not how I would imagine a psychopath to behave. That just demonstrates my own misconceptions and my underestimation of cognitive empathy coupled with the conscious effort to take into consideration the needs of someone who matters to you.
I wonder which is the greater motivation. Self preservation? You view your SO as more competent than yourself in this specific context so the self preservation function is outsourced to him. Or, it’s simply a case of wanting to protect your SO from unnecessary worry, so the deal or agreed framework of the relationship motivates a handing over of medical decision making (to a degree) meaning that it is preservation of his well-being that is the driver. Both maybe.
I recognize that I tend to channel things how I want them to be, not necessarily how they need to be. He is that insistence of reason that I have to accept
Your SO sounds like a very strong character himself. It would be interesting to learn more about him in terms of character traits.
This is a truly wonderful post: And I can't add to your words and thoughts.
Like you: "it’s not how I would imagine a psychopath to behave"
So what is it then?
It appears Athena loves her SO - by her will and violition: As her Love in purity.
How can her actions and commitment be anything else but love?
Perhaps her stubborness, Idk, compels her to express LOVE in a manner that transends "us" and our limitations.
Thanks Tim. I’m always trying to figure out the core motivations for why people behave as they do or make the decisions they make.
In some ways, it does appear very much like emotional love, largely due to that element of trust that’s involved. However, given Athena is a psychopath I have to rule that out and look for a more self serving motivation. Self serving is often perceived negatively but I don’t see it as a bad thing necessarily, particularly when placed in context of consciously taking another’s needs into account. I don’t see Athena’s relationship as ‘ less than’ a relationship between two people with emotional empathy. I don’t see it as ‘more than’ either. I just see it as ‘different than’. It works for both parties and it’s lovely that it does.
English imposes limitations.
In English we love pizza (Yes, I would love another slice, please) just as we love our grandmother as we contemplate her death (I loved her even MORE than pizza but less than downhilll skiing).
Certainly, we agree Athena does not "feel" love, (I confess I do not either - even to my own children) she nevertheless can and does "express" love. Grant me this please. To her SO.
I appreciate Athena's actions towards her SO as "love" - more than I experienced in mine. I don't feel jealousy but I know what it is.
Can you imagine what her SO must feel toward her? It has to be like a large active volcano! Now imagine Athena gave that to you. What would your reaction be?
Her actions seem "love", not as a feeling but the result of conscience: determined, difficult choice and will.
She causes me both to respect her and to be challenged to do better in my life especially with my children. I don't particularly like them or want them around me. Yet, like Athena, I have a responsibility to love them whether I feel it or not.
Best wishes always!!!
I considered very carefully before posting. I don't try to offend you (or anyone else) If I did, it is not my intent. I am certainly the least insightful and less likely to be on the right track.
Omg your comment about pizza and downhill skiing literally had me laughing out loud! I don't think you'll offend anyone, you choose your words carefully and you're coming from a good place. Most people will make allowances for almost anything if those two things are true.
Hi Tim,
No I’m not offended at all and I think you’re exactly right when you point out that someone can express love without necessarily feeling it. I can’t remember which article it was but it included a part about Athena going to get Chinese takeaway. I remember pondering the effort it must take when someone doesn’t naturally think about another person, isn’t prompted to do things for another person in the same way that my emotional empathy prompts me. I concluded that that’s a huge amount of effort and self reminding to meet the needs of another person in the way that Athena does every day. It takes more thought and more consistent effort for Athena to show consideration and affection than it does for me. I actually found that quite romantic. So the effort involved to express love, in a non hearts and flowers narcissistic way, I think is really quite something.
So no, not offended at all. For me, I see Athena’s effort as different to my effort but on balance, neither better nor worse. We are all different with different emotional needs, so it makes sense to me that the expression of love or affection will also look and feel different to different people.
To clarify, when I state that it takes effort to express love in a non hearts and flowers narcissistic way, what I mean there is that Athena expresses affection / love for her SO in a realistic genuine way, not in the hearts and flowers way that a narcissist would utilise to create the impression of love or affection.
When reading my comment back, that wasn’t clear. Now I am content!
Yes, I agree on the potentially positive element of the stubbornness. In Groundhogs, there has been research that has determined that a groundhog will sacrifice itself to a predator if the other groundhogs nearby make up the genetic material of half it's offspring.
I do believe there are also non positive forces that upset these genetic processes. Rather like how a tyranny with it's own agenda can upset the smooth working pattern of a team.
I have mentioned here that I have an illness, one that is quite severe. When I was young I used to do things similar to this. I used to be like, when phoned by a friend... 'Oh yeah, there is a problem with my metabolism and I'm probably going to die', in far less direct terms, not explicitly saying I would die I don't think, but then I put the phone down. The friend then phoned my mother. I cannot recall the outcome. It might have been one of the times I went to hospital.
With a lot of repetition of this kind of thing, I have pushed against an apparent lack of ability to take care of my own health, with ongoing consequences, currently I am at risk of sudden death at least as I understand it (bloodwork is off). But now I am researching I know a lot about health and this will very likely positively influence everyone around me going forward. I have a technical thinking ability that while people have it, they don't have my endurance in that area. So rather like the groundhog example it ultimately serves the tribe.
This was interesting to read.
It reminds me of my beloved animals, how they hide their illness until it's impossible - and even then, the vet is the last place they want to go.
They never connect the vet with being the place that made them feel better, either. No appreciation at all, lol
I am very glad you're still here, Athena. I remember you telling the story, but I had no idea you never went to the hospital! I'm glad your SO has a plan and the authority to save you despite your objections now.
He was and still is, definitely awesome
I am secretly waiting for him to start a blog ... about ... what it would be like to spend a life with such an interesting person like you.
I doubt that will happen. Writing isn't something he's particularly drawn to
I can see why people in real life might assume it was driven by fear (of hospitals or whatever), but online, where you're open about your psychopathy, it actually seems like the exact opposite - it sounds like it's the lack of fear that's stopping you from recognising your own fallibility. It's weird cos you clearly recognise the limits of your own knowledge/skills etc cognitively, but I guess you don't act on it, because you don't feel any fear in the moment, so you kind of forget you're not immortal or a superhero?
One of the reasons I love your writing on psychopathy is because it helps me understand myself better - it makes me realise that emotions in neurotypicals, especially fear, are alot less logical and rational than they seem to be subjectively. When I'm scared it almost always feels extremely rational and logical to me - it feels like a simple chain of cause and effect, like 'situation x is dangerous/threatening, therefore I could get hurt, therefore I'm afraid'. I feel like the fear is caused by the thing I'm scared of directly, in a very simple straightforward way. But I'm beginning to realise that fear is way more emotionally driven than that, it's not just a logical response. I was in a situation recently that used to terrify me, but as a result of therapy my background anxiety levels have massively reduced over the last few years, and I found myself in a situation that I know used to scare the hell out of me, but wasn't able to access or feel the fear at all. I actually stood there forcing myself to think all the same thoughts I used to think, consciously go over the 'logic' of the fear, willing myself to feel it, and it just wasn't there. The situation hadn't changed, the level of threat hadn't changed (it was almost non-existent in the first place, but was very real to me), but I just couldn't feel the fear to anywhere near the same degree. Because the fear was never coming directly from the situation itself, it was coming from my sky high anxiety levels about life in general, which were making me see danger everywhere, even in situations that seem ridiculous to me now. It was a very strange experience to realise that my fear was never logical in the first place, even though it felt like it was. I had believed all my life that my thoughts were causing my fear, only to find that if anything my fear was actually causing my thoughts!
This post is a really good demonstration of the fact that fear is not a logical response - because your ability to recognise logically/cognitively that certain situations are dangerous seems to be functioning pretty normally, and yet because you can't feel the fear, you don't act on it, and end up putting yourself at risk. Thank goodness you have your SO to look out for you!
You are correct. This is a lack of fear coupled with stubbornness that I reach these decisions through. It would likely be better if I was more reasonable when it comes to my health and other things that might put me at risk.
Agreed, rationally it would likely be better for you, but believe me from the NT point of view a total lack of fear seems like quite an attractive proposition sometimes - as you've said before fear stops alot of people doing alot of things that would otherwise be quite cool/fun/enjoyable, so the idea of being immune to fear is quite a seductive one for us. Just goes to show what a contradictory love/hate relationship NTs have with our emotions - on the one had they can make us feel totally horrific and want to die, on the other hand they protect us, or drive us to protect ourselves, which is pretty damn important.
There is one thing I'm really curious about though Athena, I've been wondering about it for a while - I know you've said before that if there was ever a cure for psychopathy you wouldn't want anything to do with it (I don't mean just pumping you full of oxytocin, I know that wouldn't make any difference, I mean a genuine cure using some kind of gene therapy to fix the underlying genetic mutation that stops your brain from being able to process oxytocin, so probably few decades away at least). I can totally understand that having spent your whole life painstakingly working out how to get by in an NT world that doesn't make any sense to you, now that you've mostly got there the idea of waking up one morning as a neurotypical is probably not at all appealing - it would be like going back to square one, back to nothing making sense, and alot of the strategies you've developed over the years might suddenly become useless or even problematic. But I'm curious as to whether, if someone could offer you the chance to be neurotypical just for a single day, and then go back to normal (your own psychopathic normal) whether you would do it? I would definitely do it the other way around, I would love to know firsthand what the psychopathic experience is like (although admittedly would be terrified that they wouldn't be able to put me back to normal after) - I guess what I'm asking is, do you have some level of curiosity about what the NT experience is like, how it feels to have normal intensity emotions etc, or are you really quite indifferent and not intrigued in the slightest?
It's interesting to watch, but not remotely interesting in terms of being like. I do not want to be anyone but me.
The thing that I have found about healing is that it is a very slow process. It is peoples lack of awareness of psychology that means this isn't well known enough. But peoples belief systems and biology are so incredibly fragile that even the tiniest change can send them into a complete meltdown. I believe this is a big part of the reason why things work as they do in our society.
For instance, this has happened to me. I have had to bring a body that was not in a good place to better health and learned how difficult and slow this has to be. As I talked about before the mind needs to keep up with hormonal changes changing ones perspective. I believe a lot of things we apparently 'think' we assign to our own motivations in order to remain sane. But they are completely outside our control.
The reason I am saying this is because, I believe, if Athena was to go through a major change, the process would be excruciatingly slow. One of the reasons is as she said so she is allowed to feel like herself as she notices the changes. There are also spiritual rules surrounding this.
I am a bit off the wall in my belief system and I don't put a lot of stock in the mainstream idea that so much of our problems can't be cured. For instance, the idea that autism comes from vaccines came from a guy who claimed he found MMR vaccine in the digestive system, he published this in the Lancet. The opposition he then faced was serious enough that he was then run out of the country.
The point to me is that I don't know whether psychopathy is a legitimate part of the personality or an abberation that will be fixed with the nutrition and such. But if there were a cure I think it would be both excruciatingly slow. It would be slow digestive changes and insights leading to changed behaviour. And it would not be opposable. Not if it linked to societal changes i.e. some toxic substance being taken out of the food, or some other change.
It is neither. It is a genetically coded difference. There is no reason to fix what has been there for the entirety of human history and is beneficial to the human race. There is nothing wrong with psychopaths. We do not want, nor need to be fixed.
I did not say that you needed to be fixed. My last paragraph made it very clear I was talking in generalities. I would consider it the height of arrogance to assume I knew for sure on such matters. So for me, I will not consider whether any particular thing is fixed or part of our environment hence subject to change.
Another point I want to mention though is that it considers Darwiniism i.e. evolutionary psychology sacrosanct. I do not think it is and see a good deal of what is said in that area simply creating convenient stories to justify preferences. Some thoughts, certainly not an exhaustive list but I am not sure how to phrase the argument properly yet:
A) Male lions kill the young of a female they want to mate with, this is explained by evolutionary psychology. Female foxes will shack up with other mothers and look after off spring that is not there own. This seems to me a good example of opposing behaviour both explained as evolutionary and darwiniism, is this kind of belief in the ways it is applied falsifiable? Does it have some condition that disproves it?
B) There are simply not enough skeletons to justify Darwins hypothesis of animal husbandry applied to humans. If it were real there would be ape, 3/4 ape, 1/2 ape 1/2 human, 3/4 human then human. But none of this exists. Rather like the dinosaurs.
C) Watson and Crick said while working on the DNA molecule that is too massively complex to be the product of random mutation. It is one in an almost infinite number probability wise that it exists as it does.
D) However, DNA forms all over the place. It forms on asteroids. It forms in radiation waste zones where the animals formed start eating the radiation. Which suggests that DNA can sponteneously form and is thus not a product of evolution as Darwin outlined it.
Just some thoughts.
I’m curious about the stubbornness in general.
Where does it come from?
In me, it comes from emotional attachment to ideas, and fixation on there being only one thing to do, but that doesn’t seem like it would apply to a psychopath.
I was thinking about this earlier - lack of fear is obviously a psychopathic trait, but stubbornness not so much. Was wondering how it's linked to the underlying inability to process oxytocin. But then I thought about what stubbornness is and tried to define it, and decided that ultimately it's an unwillingness or resistance to being influenced by others from your original view or plan. And then suddenly it made sense in relation to psychopathy - psychopaths aren't wired to care about other people's opinions. NT's spend soooo much time worrying about what other people think of us, but psychopaths are indifferent to all that. And I guess if you spend a lifetime not being constrained by other people's opinions then that's a hard habit to break, even when your life's hanging in the balance. That would be my guess anyway.
I don't know if that is it completely. While it is relevant that a thought process that does not take in the other obviously will not see the incentive to yield to the other in matters of judgement. When I think about it it seems to me there that a deeper explanation might be possible.
If you spend your life in a manner where your own emotions are not accessible, in part or at all, then you will have less need to reference those inner emotions when making decisions.
This means that value of doing any particular thing changes, it changes value judgements in general.
If I want to go out for a walk and I have emotional thinking, when someone comes up to me and says 'oh you are going for too many walks, perhaps stop doing it'. Then this influences the emotions. But if you have an ND process of carefully working through the pros and cons, people will have to explain to you in relation to the cognitive process that you have put in place, in order to have any influence. "Yes, but if I walk three miles today I get x health benefit".
Once this becomes a strong pattern of behaviour, a self centered rather than generalised emotional decision making process, then there is no reason to change it. Until, in this case, it is overriden by another cognitive process... I.e. Athena weighed the potential con of bad health against the more instinctual con of being interferred with by doctors.
I had to read that a few times, but I think I get what you're saying now - do you mean that part of the reason a psychopath is more likely to be stubborn, is that when other people try to influence them they tend to do it by appealing to emotions (because they're most likely neurotypical, so everything has an emotional slant for them, at least in comparison to a psychopath) - so their attempts to influence don't really land or get through, because a psychopath doesn't make decisions based on emotion. If they tried to influence by appealing purely to logic and reason instead, then they might have a better chance of getting through, but most people don't do that because most people don't think purely in terms of logic and reason. So you're saying the stubbornness is as much because of the influencing style of the person trying to influence (which is mismatched to the psychopaths way of thinking), as it is because of the psychopath not being wired to care about other people's opinions?
Hello Jen,
Well, what I mean is that if you take the assumed reason for stubbornness at face value (i.e. that it is simply and only not fearing or relating to others). We would assume then that the psychopath (term I will use is ND going forward!) has an emotional reason that is then not opposed because of the self centeredness. But that assumes that the ND has an emotional decision making process in the first place. If we were to walk through the ND's decision making process, which is probably not emotional, it might add more to the discussion.
I am not really considering how the person influencing the ND operates but the ND themself. I am saying the structure of the decision making process is different.
We need to contrast this with how neurotypicals make decisions to understand. A neurotypical has a thought, which comes forward as a large part emotional, and then, due to their general sense of emotional empathy with those around them this becomes an ongoing negotiation. This is perhaps some of the interesting element to look at. This ongoing sense of emotion that means that the tribe all functions smoothly and people move in the same kind of direction.
That is not there with the ND (of the variety we are discussing), so a fact becomes a fact (ND) it is not a negotiable half fact, half emotion (NT) object.
I do not know how someone would influence someone that thinks like this.
Ohhhh ok, you're talking about the ND's own thinking style. Yes I definitely agree that most thoughts and decisions in the NT world are a blend of logic and emotion, and it's often difficult to separate the two or see where the line is between them. And I think you're saying that it's that element of emotion that makes thoughts and decisions seem inherently negotiable to the NT brain. You could even say that the whole NT world is one big long ongoing process of negotiation between people - and like you say it makes evolutionary sense for it to be that way, because prior to the last few hundred years humans always lived dangerously close to the edge (eg to subsistence level), so being part of a social group was pretty much essential to survival during the time our brains were evolving. And you can't really have social cohesion without openness to negotiation.
Whereas you're saying that for an ND (of the psychopath variety), that emotional element of thoughts and decisions is missing, so their thinking style is inherently less open to negotiation? It definitely makes sense that there would be a link between openness to negotiation on the one hand, and pro-social emotions on the other. We're willing to negotiate, and over time become skilled at negotiating (even though it can be bloody annoying at times), because our brains are telling us we need to be part of a group with other people. But when those pro-social emotions are missing, and the brain isn't telling you you need to be part of a group, the motivation towards negotiation would be missing or much weaker. And over time that tendency to see your own thoughts and decisions as simple facts that are not open to negotiation must become deeply entrenched. Also known as stubbornness of course!
I think you summarised what I had to say well, better than I did perhaps.
Leads to a lot of interesting places in my view. Like, for instance, when it comes to the psychopaths 'charm'. Is it that because there is no internal reflection, internal checking on feelings and feelings getting in the way, that they can look at others in a way that makes them feel seen? Rather like watching a young attractive women and being able to get in her head. Rather than trying to show how good the other person is (i.e. look at my haircut and money) actually seeing like 'If I can subtly make her feel attractive in this way?'
Also, if we think of the ND as opposing potentially dangerous group think. Say there is a narcissist whom is good at getting NT's wound up and pointing them in the wrong direction. The ND is going to be like 'But that's stupid what that narc just said, I don't want to do x'.
These are all very rough ideas but I thought it was interesting.
JLW,
I think the only way to influence someone who thinks in the way Athena does is via reward. Athena has to regularly force herself to do mundane tasks she doesn’t want to do. She does it ( if I remember correctly) by using a system of reward. Self compensation with something she does want to do. “Clean the kitchen then you get to try that new recipe you found online.” So if that system self motivates, in terms of an influencer I would think reward would be an approach to try.
I also remember Athena describing an outing with a psychopath friend and choice of restaurant came into play. I remember thinking if that was me, I’d go to the restaurant the friend wanted to go to this time, and then the one I preferred next time. That wasn’t the approach taken though as both want their needs to be met in the now, not at some future point (which might be subject to change). So a reward system would likely have time constraints. There is little room for delayed gratification. That was my interpretation of what I read.
There is also the question of, why should either of us delay their gratification when logically we can both have what we want?
Hello TS167,
Well, I was being over simplistic because that is a rabbit hole I did not particularly feel the need to go into.
Firstly, her boyfriend has manipulated her by, in a small way, martyring himself. He has taken a hit and she has had to take a step back and concede because of that although the concession applies to the future.
In a more immediate sense. Perhaps reward may work, but what reward can you give someone that is already in pain if it does not directly address said pain? It is unlikely he could have said to go to the hospital and he would buy her something she wanted and in a sense the "martyrdom" path would be more successful. She is incentivised by her own admission to not being unreasonable because 'she would prefer he was around than not'.
Athena basically stated that she was 'begging for pain medication'. This means the pain is already having an effect. If he, or someone, had taken the attitude that the pain is providing a function, to tell her to go to the hospital, and so it's alleviation is counter productive. Well that would be influence and it would be influence that even if it was not yielded to, we would know it was felt. There is a level of extremity where it would definitely be yielded to.
Might have been a pyrrhic victory in a relationship. But ultimately, anyone can be manipulated. In my view. Everyone finds one thing more desireable than another thing and can be incentivised towards a preferred behaviour.
Strong will is my guess.
Strong will occurs in many NTs and NDs, and failure to account for it can be expensive. One of my therapists was of the opinion that alcoholics are weak willed. I suggested she place herself between an alcoholic and a drink to discover how "weak-willed" the alcoholic is. I remember getting a good grip on an autistic whose customary meal time was 6:00 pm and keeping him from hurting himself until the meals arrived at 6:15 pm and then contracting with him not to hurt himself til he had eaten.
And it is our problem as well.
Curious to know about the part you say you can speak as an equal to a docter. It's normal for neurotypicals to feel below or at least feel hierarchy in front of a doctor or any high rank person in a profession. Do you feel it? Or just notice that some people just follow others and adiquate to the situation?
No, I don't feel anything like that. When dealing with doctors, as far as I'm concerned, it's my body that they are providing a service to. I require their assistance, but they are not the ones in charge. I am, because I am the one that will deal with the results of the decisions made.
It almost sounds in this context like your sub-contracting your health care out to a professional to do a job. And now that I think on it, almost sounds like shopping for a physician. I've had friends in the past that have told me that that's a bad idea that you shouldn't do that that you should just respect a professional opinion and go along with the flow, but I've always been forced to look at it to a different lens of maybe get a second opinion. I mean most of the time just straight up tell you to go find a second opinion. I don't know why people ignore such good advice. Like taking my car to the mechanic I would never trust the first mechanic I take it to I always make sure that I get a second opinion on it so I know the first guy ain't trying to rip me off. Seems like a fairly reasonable and rational thing to do
I have seen way too many people that can't be bothered with progressing their education or thinking outside the box to just allow them to have control of my health. I respond paradoxically to many things, and need a doctor that is going to listen to me on that instead of assuming that they know me better than I do. I don't have time, nor interest in allowing them to play catch-up. They need to take the information and formulate their plans based on the facts, not their ego.
Thank you for this post, it was an enjoyable read. It is interesting to see you describe your experiences with the downsides to psychopathy, or what can be a downside. I am fond of seeing balanced discussions of psychopathy, when most discourse on the topic is very black and white. It is similar when it comes to autism, we are either super geniuses or incapable of even existing without assistance. Either savants or lacking intelligence entirely. Autism and intellectual disability being falsely conflated doesn't help. 'Discussions' made up only of extreme one-sided perspectives are everywhere, and they are tiring.
Yes, I have noticed that belief structure when it comes to autism, and it is baffling to me that people seem to consider it in such a rudimentary way. No nuance.
Hmm, sounds like I dodged a bullet. I made myself a code of conduct since I have a problem recognizing authority other than my own, but rule 1 is that I must reconsider the code when I meet opposition that I would have to use significant time to remove, and then cost/benefit analyze the time spent removing the obstacle against the time spent recognizing it (in all likely instances). I am very stubborn about rule 1, because time is not a renewable resource. It does mean the rest of the code is flexible and consequently, I am.
I play these mental games with myself, to interact with neurotypicals more or less smoothly, but there is a fellow who sat on one of my objectives who was once a high level official and who was dismissed for highly erratic behavior 6 months after I met him. He did most of the work himself. Mostly, I wrote complimentary memos to his superiors and threw his copies away.
The headache described I have second hand experience with since I watched my mother suffer with it. I have sufficient experience with pain reinterpretation and time dilation and time compression that I could probably use self-hypnosis to experience stillness of 24 hours in about a subjective minute, so it is not an issue on which I would be stubborn.
The surgeon who cleaned out my left carpal tunnel was impressed that we did it without anesthesia other than my self-trance (but then what the anesthesiologist proposed was something I would have stubbornly refused because I would have ended in a serotonin storm). I guess the old adage holds, "You pays your money and you takes your chances."
I like this story! For me, I've always been a little worried about my health since the hospital was basically my second home when I was a child. So I'm aware of everything I feel as hard as possible because due to my poor interoception, I can't really identify what I'm feeling in my body, such as, hunger, thirst, pain, discomfort. So I'm always like "okay, I feel something in my head, so I'll pay attention to it to see if it gets intense or not."
Lmfao momma always knew how to explain things where i could understand them. I fully understand the difference in those headaches now.
Okay so I have a quick question for you Athena and as well as anyone else who cares to comment. For most of my life, as a rule, I have avoided going to see any type of healthcare professional be it physical mental or emotional because I don't know them for one which means I certainly don't trust them. And my big issue here is not so much fear as I see it in a different light then I guess most neurotypicals do. I have serious issue with interesting my well-being in any of those areas to a person that has a vested financial interest in return business. Now my question is, does this seem paranoid to those who think logically instead of emotionally? My wife is simply thinks that I am so afraid of hospitals and healthcare professionals giving me potentially what most would see his life-altering news that it borders on paranoia. But I explained it to her exactly like I just explained it to the readers here she told me I just need to suck it up and go in anyway.
I don't consider that paranoid, especially if you have had negative interactions in the past. The way through that is to know what it is that you are looking for and not settle for different. I don't have a real interest in telling a doctor what to do, but will if I have to. Instead, I am just looking for someone that is open and paying attention. If I see that, then we have a basis to work from.
Interesting post. In a post awhile back you mentioned something about pain not being debilitating to you. Which really surprised me, because although pain for neurotypicals usually involves emotions (fear especially), severe pain can be debilitating even when in stubborn denial, just from the sheer fact that it's incredibly distracting.
It sounds like this one was debilitating for you, though.
Yes, there is always going to be a threshold that once you pass it there is no ability to deny the pain. I was able to deny the pain until I lost connection to reality. After that, not so much.
Plus..
Waiting in the ED to be finally seen really sucks.
(I'll write more later. )
Hi Athena! Long time no talk. This text of yours is, IMO, the closest you'll ever be of writing a psychopath's love letter. Or I should say a respect letter (Damn neuros and their love I'm telling you!!:) ) The way you talk about your SO is really amazing as the depth of respect you show towards him is quite high. Take care and talk to you later!
Dom
I love this post (though it may be quite difficult for you to write) and I learned alot from your experience and writing. Thank you.