Tumgik
#Psychopathy
autopsyfreak · 3 days
Text
people act like psychopaths are these beasts in society coming to get you, meanwhile in reality i’d rather never have to go near another human being again
151 notes · View notes
butch-reidentified · 2 months
Text
I've spoken before about psychopathy, particularly my own, and the importance of recent research and demolishing the stigma and absolutely absurd past conceptions and measures of psychopathy, which were exclusively based on studies of male prisoners convicted of violent crime.
Just to reiterate - psychopathy is not being deranged and uncontrollably violent. Villanelle from Killing Eve is actually an excellent and well-researched example of high-EQ female psychopathy, and the first fictional portrayal I can genuinely see myself in. Psychopaths with high EQ are entirely capable of cognitive empathy, and many (like myself) are actually very gifted in it, and can even make excellent counselors/therapists as a result of this combined with a lack of strong internal biases and the fact that we won't be emotionally impacted/drained by patients. This presentation of psychopathy is becoming more and more recognized and studied, and is distinctly more common in women. We retain the core defining traits, obviously - boldness, deviancy, disinhibition, very high fear threshold, a tendency toward meanness (self-control is a thing, though), reduced capacity for remorse and regret*, and of course lack of affective (emotional) empathy - but are much more able to moderate ourselves and prioritize social functioning, and tend to view the sadistic behavior of low-EQ psychopathic males as wasteful. My wife calls it "prosocial psychopathy."
Anyway, I just kind of wanted to touch on this again since it's been a while and there's a fair few new followers out here. I encourage you to read the above links and check the tag - it's a pretty interesting topic, to me at least.
Edit 4/25/2024: *Regarding the reduced capacity for remorse/regret: I firmly believe this sounds worse than it is. For people like me, at least, it's not that I'm going around doing terrible things and incapable of feeling bad about any of them. The truth is that remorse & regret most frequently occur as a result of intensely emotion-driven behaviors, which as a concept is largely foreign to me - I don't tend toward remorse/regret because the way I interact with the world, analyze situations, and choose to behave in response, is inherently from the very beginning done with the acceptance of potential consequences actively held in my mind. I'm not prone to regret/remorse because I know myself extremely well and make choices as consistent with my understanding of self as possible, having already prepared myself for the possibility that things could go wrong. It's more about being prepared for what might happen and able to cope when things do go wrong, rather than being a piece of shit and not feeling anything about it. This doesn't make me better or worse than others; it's a neutral fact that male supremacy has made seem otherwise by constantly claiming that "logic" or whatever is superior to emotions. Fuck that. Loads of the best people I've ever known have been very emotion-driven (what non-shit people identify as a firm of being passionate) and some of the shittest people I've known would waste their dying breath insisting they're 100% logical creatures, as if that's even a real thing. To me it feels very simple: if I'm making the best (most internally consistent, most reflective of my personality and values, etc) decisions I possibly can with whatever information I have at the time, then I've done my best, acted with integrity, and don't need to regret my choices. This is very challenging to write/talk about bc of the stigma & connotations involved, but again, this is a completely neutral fact to me in the same way I describe being a woman as a completely neutral fact despite the stigma & connotations involved there. Does any of this make sense?
237 notes · View notes
kariiimm · 7 days
Text
You took the best of my heart and left the rest in pieces
107 notes · View notes
fuzzyghost · 8 months
Text
Tumblr media
369 notes · View notes
shitswiftiessay · 6 months
Text
a swiftie tells the story about how she threw out her father’s heart medication because he doesn’t like taylor swift.
Tumblr media Tumblr media
and she justified her decision after getting backlash by talking how “attached” she is to taylor.
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
she further defended herself in this notesapp statement 💀
Tumblr media Tumblr media
109 notes · View notes
therealfailwhale · 8 months
Text
Vegas thoughts:
The thing with Vegas is that in the early episodes I was convinced he was a psychopath. He had so many stereotypical psychopathic traits—manipulative, little to no empathy but he could fake it so well, a tendency to take what he wanted however he could get it, violent. The manipulation especially screamed psychopath to me, like he would use people however he could to achieve his goals with little empathy for how it affected them. Every seemingly soft moment he had felt constructed and purposeful, an attempt to lure people (mainly Porsche) into position so he could execute his plans.
The only times he felt sincere to me were in his interactions with Pete. Here’s a guy he didn’t really see a point in manipulating. Didn’t see a real use for. Catching Pete in his quarters at night—leads him back to his room, doesn’t even bother trying to fuck with him. With Pete at the temple was a little more performative, but even that he was trying, vaguely, to make Pete a little uncomfortable or to try and seem normal.
But then they go to the safe house.
Suddenly we see Vegas having emotions like shame, grief, hopelessness, but also joy. He gets to be the most himself since the beginning of the show. He reads, he cooks, he’s interested in psychology, he likes small animals, he wants to please his father. Also he’s into pet play and ass, but that’s beside the point. The point is that outside the safe house, he acts like and genuinely seems to be a psychopath, but when he’s away from expectations and it’s just Pete—Pete who he’s been more real with than anyone else in the series—he doesn’t have to perform. He tries to. He gets upset and takes it out on Pete, but most of the time it feels like desperation and not like he’s genuinely enjoying it. Like this, torture and pain, is what he knows so he’s going to try it, but it doesn’t feel the same as it does pre-safe house.
Most significant, and the thing that really shatters the psychopath facade, is that he shows empathy to Pete. When he’s treating Pete’s wounds, he cares about how he’s feeling. When he’s pleading Pete to stay and apologizing, he’s demonstrating remorse for his actions and genuine awareness of and concern for how Pete is feeling. Yeah he’s begging Pete to stay with him, which is somewhat self-centered, but he seriously cares for how Pete is feeling in that moment.
All this to say: Vegas pretends to be a psychopath because he wants to make his father proud, but in his more private moments with someone he inherently cares for, the psychopathy falls away and reveals a sensitive little guy who yearns for a different life.
128 notes · View notes
mischiefmanifold · 22 days
Text
watching the people around me talk about psychopaths as if they're mythical creatures and giggling because babe I'm standing right here
34 notes · View notes
evawritesstuff · 3 months
Text
Darth Vader never fully embraced the dark side. He was conflicted. More than anyone, he hated himself. But he was also able to love. Love and hate: two sides of the same coin as some scientists tell us, battling each other within a person who couldn't bring balance to his psyche in his years as Darth Vader.
True evil sith lords relish in the dark side. We call those people psychopaths in real life. They are often empty inside, aspiring only to satisfy their boredom. You would never see them hate themselves. At best, they could get angry with themselves for getting caught. Can you really hate when you've never known what love is? Only raw, empty, primitive anger. Palpatine never hated anything. But being the psychopath he was, he was able to detect the hate in people who could feel ( and love ) and use it for his own benefit.
Darth Vader was neither bored nor empty. He had a burning fire inside him and people, life, feelings, power interested him very much.
He brought balance to the force by destroying both corrupted Jedi and sith alike. In real life, only people who have faced both their light and dark sides can bring balance to society by dealing with pathologies from all sides, even if it takes them long enough to achieve that.
According to the psychoanalysist, Adler, the " regretful" person is often the strongest one. The one who dealt with a great dark in their lives but at later point chose to live in the light, aware of their darkness but now * in control of it*. These people can then guide the rest and help them where other people failed due to their partiality towards good/ evil.
37 notes · View notes
doomedkttn · 4 months
Text
Tumblr media
i swear i can fix him
36 notes · View notes
takeyourcyanide · 7 days
Text
The only (mediocre at best, if not downright horrible) representation that psychopathic schizophrenics/comorbid APSD & Schizophrenia havers are ever going to get is the entirety of the mad scientist archetype.
14 notes · View notes
butch-reidentified · 7 months
Text
Tumblr media
ID: Screenshot reading "You will recognise it as an arguable point as soon as you switch the victim to a species that you think morally matters. Humans will inevitably die too" followed by a comma before the screenshot cuts off. It is not shown who the author is.
Preface: This will be a long post, but I think it's worthwhile as part of my efforts to open up real conversation about psychopathy and the stigma + misinformation surrounding it. The main reason I'm making a separate post instead of reblogging is that this post is not really intended to be about veganism. I'm more using the contents of the above screenshot to dive more into a topic I've touched on a few times recently.
Humans being "a species that you think morally matters" is an interesting assumption I often see vegan activists make. I've been undecided for a while about talking about this because I know how controversial this is and don't feel a strong desire to deal with the fallout of posting it/saying it outright, but seeing as I've always tried to be as honest and open as possible in here: I do not actually think humans "morally matter." I do not think killing is inherently wrong, either, regardless of species. Just about every creature on Earth engages in killing, either of each other or of members of other species, if not both. I don't think humans are sacred or special in any way, and thus are no exception. I don't see humans killing each other as any more INHERENTLY (this word is incredibly important here... obviously) wrong than, say, leopards killing each other. My culture used to engage in religious human sacrifice, so I have thought about this a whole lot, and it is a bit of a discourse topic in my community to this day (some even think we would be better off today if we had not stopped giving human sacrifices to the gods).
Most arguments for killing being inherently immoral that I've encountered are directly or indirectly rooted in religion, a societal value accepted without question, and/or the result of emotional reactions. One response I often get to this is that if I don't think killing is inherently wrong, I'm not allowed to be sad about it or grieve when people are killed - the idea being that this is somehow hypocritical. This is nonsense. I don't believe abortion is wrong in any way, but I'd never dream of telling someone who had mixed feelings about her abortion that she was a hypocrite for it*. Having complex, mixed, or even negative emotions about something does not make that thing immoral. Not to jump too far into moral philosophy**, but my view is that emotional responses are not - or at least should not be - an indicator of morality in any capacity. I suspect that more people agree with me on this than realize they do, and here is an example of why: Some people feel badly about killing an insect in their home, but most people do not consider this wrong. Even when it comes to humans, many - if not most - people would likely experience negative emotions when they kill out of genuine necessity, such as in self-defense, but very few people will argue that this is morally wrong, that you should just allow yourself to be harmed or killed if someone attacks you.
In this sense, it would be most logically consistent for me to view hunting wild animals in their own territory (as opposed to shit like when rich people transport animals to a personal hunting ground so they're guaranteed not to lose their prey) for food as morally superior to livestock farming, and I very much do. Traditional hunting is the method of killing for food most similar to that of other animals, as far as I understand. That said, I'm not remotely an expert on the topic beyond having hunted before as a kid and having a general understanding of animal behavior at the college level.
However, I will not pretend like I always behave consistently with the moral conclusions I come to. Like I've discussed before, I don't have an emotional response to violating my own morals. I simply didn't come wired with that feature. I don't really feel guilt or shame, so when I do something "bad," whether by my standards or others' standards, I either don't care at all or make a deliberate effort to cognitively "scold" myself, depending on the circumstances. I do consume meat that I have not personally hunted in the wild. While I do not think that livestock farming, especially modern livestock farming, is good in any way (ethically but also environmentally and health wise), because I don't have an emotional reaction to that thought (but do receive dopamine when I eat tasty food), I have so far been unable to convince myself to stop consuming meat.
I have said previously that I am glad that I am the way that I am, and that remains true; I do think my psychopathic traits are overwhelmingly more beneficial than not. This, however, is one example of the ways it actually is a negative to me - I really can't force myself to care about something I don't care about by default, and often have a hard time making conscious decisions that run counter to what produces dopamine. For this same reason, I have repeatedly failed to cut out gluten despite my doctor's insistence that I need to, and despite knowing how much better I feel (no daily migraines!) when I do abstain from it for a while. I tried to go vegan before and found that I latched onto very unhealthy junk food that was vegan by nature, like Oreos, and was eating incredibly badly. It does not help that I don't know how to cook, partly because my genetic disabilities make cooking a difficult endeavor for several reasons.
I am well aware that some people may be upset by this post, and may feel a need to label me a bad person for being this way. This is your prerogative, and I am certainly open to hearing your responses to this post, within reason. If all you want is to "punish" me for this, send me hate anons and insults, feel free, but I'll go ahead and let you know it doesn't do anything to me... not to mention I'm very used to it already as a radfem blogger. If you still want to do so because it makes you feel righteous or something, by all means go ahead, just be aware that it will not elicit a response from me in any way you'd desire, and definitely won't change my thought processes or behaviors. If you want to have an actual conversation, though, I'm more than happy to engage, answer questions, and hear your perspectives.
*I chose this specific example not because anti-choicers think abortion is killing, but because I have seen women be told that their sadness or grief about an abortion (which, btw, does NOT mean she regrets it!) is somehow "pro life" and that she can't talk about how she feels or else the right wing will use it against us. This is also nonsense, and fucked up nonsense at that. The right wing will use whatever they can; I'm in no way disagreeing with that. However, silencing women and girls to serve a narrative is not the answer. The lived experiences of women and girls (or any marginalized persons) cannot ever be devalued or concealed just because the enemy would use them against us. Actually, this is the same response I have given when told I should hide the fact that I didn't regret my mastectomy, or even that I should pretend that I did regret it. My story, my truth, is mine to own and discuss as I choose, whether it could be weaponized by ideological opponents or not. Same is true for all marginalized persons.
** If you are interested in moral philosophy, specifically where morals come from/what people base morals in, this page and the following pages (there's a Next button in the bottom right corner) sum it up pretty well on Page 1, then dive in a good bit more thoroughly with individual pages for each "root cause" of moral systems.
Side note: I will be reblogging this later because it's 6:30am EDT and a lot of my audience is in the USA. I worked hard and spent a lot of time on this, so I'd like it to actually be seen. Not much point trying to educate/inform/raise awareness if nobody sees it lmao
100 notes · View notes
kariiimm · 3 months
Text
No one can hear the scream of your heart only your heart can.
35 notes · View notes
dangalakmayhem · 3 months
Text
Tumblr media
Yall remember elements of insanity
20 notes · View notes
thepineconelord · 7 months
Text
Thinking about how minhkhoa's psychopathy diagnosis is invalid. For one psychopathy isn't even a proper diagnosis, the actual diagnosis that people associate with psychopathy is anti social personality disorder. And also people under the age of 18 are not diagnosed with anti social personality disorder!! That diagnosis is held off until adulthood for a number of reasons. Mainly because sometimes kids are just Like That, and also due to the stigma, and because with early intervention many ASPD stuff can be avoided. Anyway kids are usually diagnosed with a conduct disorder instead. So like did Minhkhoa have a shitty doctor? Did nobody writing know these things? Also Thinking about how ASPD is thought to be partially genetics and partially caused by trauma(true cause is unknown all of that is theories for rn) so like did ghostmaker have childhood trauma. Anyway I'll be thinking about this all day hbu?
39 notes · View notes
jollyrebelwinner · 3 days
Text
Tumblr media
10 notes · View notes
mischiefmanifold · 7 months
Text
It is endlessly frustrating to me that I can't follow the tags for my own fucking disorder without seeing people glorifying violence and blaming it on their "psychopathy". Babe, you are fourteen. You're not a psychopath. Get the fuck out of our tags.
87 notes · View notes