Tag Archives: psychopath

Click Image to hear Doc Nuccitelli interviewed.

ipredator-inc.- michael-nuccitelli-psy.d.-internet-safety-radio-interview-announcement-1100x733

Doc Nuccitelli will be interviewed live again October 2, 2015 at 7:15pm EST on “America Now with Meghan McCain” regarding the recent UCC shooting, the FBI investigating 4chan and the thread the UCC shooter was posting in. Link pasted below to listen to interview. Click on link and hit “Listen Live” at 7:15pm EST.

America Now with Meghan McCain http://www.americanowradio.com/onair/america-now-with-meghan-mccain-56597/

October 1, 2015 1st Interview Link  https://darkpsychology.co/wp-content/uploads//ucc-shooting-america-now-meghan-mccain-michael-nuccitelli-psyd-interview-ipredator.mp3

The more psychologically isolated we become, the more cyberspace perceptually distorts our reality. Michael Nuccitelli, Psy.D. (October, 2015)

RELEVANT LINKS ABOUT UCC SHOOTER
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/oregon-shooting-did-4chan-trolls-incite-chris-harper-mercer-massacre-umpqua-community-college-1522163

FULL 4CHAN MESSAGE BOARD LINK http://archive.is/KJ1LD

Advertisements

Secret Society War VI, Hacking Sony.

anonymous

I am going to start this blog by going on a little tangent.  Many of you might not know but Willy Nelson, much like Al Sharpton didn’t pay his taxes for years.  And Al Sharpton much like Willy Nelson had to come out of retirement to pay off the IRS.  Al Sharpton has been the oval office 83 times since the Obama Administration took office, he is essentially the President’s official spoke’s person.  Which means that what he is doing right now, and what he has been doing for the past 6 years is at the direct behest of Obama.

PSYCHOPATHS AND TYRANTS

There is a strong correlation between Psychopathy and tyranny.  Tyranny has been referred to as aggressive narcissism.  Psychopaths don’t reform, they just become more manipulative, which is to say they have a modus operandi, a form of conquest that they continue using over and over, and they can’t stop because their sense of self is tied up in the modus operandi.  Case in point.  Data has been found missing from computers of senators computers so that they couldn’t bring certain cases before certain people, this is known as data assassination.  https://discussions.apple.com/thread/1340543?tstart=0

In case you have forgotten German Chancellor Merkel accused Obama openly of spying on her computer, the Obama Administration never specifically denied, the charge, they minced words saying that the U.S. “is not and will not.” spy on computers, somehow missing the past tense “was”.

https://thoughtuncommon.wordpress.com/2013/10/26/is-not-will-not-was/

Ms. Merkel, who last fall declared that “spying between friends is simply unacceptable” and that the United States had opened a breach of trust that would have to be repaired, said at the news conference that “we have a few difficulties yet to overcome.” One remaining issue, she said, was the “proportionality” of the surveillance.  http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/03/world/europe/merkel-says-gaps-with-us-over-surveillance-remain.html?_r=0

NORTH KOREA DID NOT CYBER ATTACK SONY PICTURES

The moment I heard the claim I thought it was preposterous.  Not because it isn’t possible or plausible but because it wasn’t practical.  The information that they gleaned didn’t particularly hurt Sony or the United States it leveraged  Obama’s race bating strategy or what Bill Clinton referred to recently as identity based politics.  Why were they looking at the information that they were looking at? Ask yourself, who is the dictator that is getting offended at mildly racist jokes told about the president in private?

“The caution especially applies to the terror threat; the language in the terror message does not sound in sync with the standard propaganda language or aggressive rhetoric that the regime usually employs. ” http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/up-front/posts/2014/12/19-north-korea-sony-cyber-attack-moon

Even Korea says it wasn’t the source of the attack and is willing to work with the United States to discover who the real culprit is.

tumblr_luvliczyFb1qzpwi0o1_500

A LITTLE MORE ON PSYCHOPATHS

Now many of you might know about the large amount of research that I have done on psychopathology, in my psychological models.  One of the strategies of Psychopaths is to appear to be being victimized while they are victimizing.  This means that they can’t appear to be the first cause, they have to appear to be the second cause, the victim and the cause of the good.

Now let’s examine what Obama’s spokesperson and personal cheerleader said immediately after the Sony leak, as though he was prepared and being scripted.

“So the jury is still out on where we go with Amy,” Sharpton said. “We clearly are willing to deal with an immediate formula to see where we deal with breaking down the walls of inflexible and so far immovable racial exclusion in Hollywood.”

“We have agreed to having a working group deal with the racial bias and lack of diversity in Hollywood,” http://nypost.com/2014/12/18/sharpton-to-have-say-over-how-sony-makes-movies/

obama-sharpton

If you observe what I refer to as the direction of the conversation, the argument made by Al Sharpton was that the rhetoric and ideology coming out of Hollywood is not congruent with the experience of people in the black Ghettos, the ones that want’ cops to die right now.  Hollywood doesn’t portray cop killing hood rats as positively as Al Sharpton would like them to be portrayed.  He is essentially making an argument of a prima fasciae law case for proving disparate impact and benchmarking the affirmative action and vexatious litigations of lawyers to get women and minorities into positions of authority based on their sex and skin color not based on their success or results.  Hmmm, does that sound like the strategy of a person who was a lawyer but never a judge? (Barak Obama)  A person using identity based politics to force his agenda?

The argument tacitly suggests that the plight of the black people in the ghettos, whom Al Sharpton and Barak Obama have been bating, is because of the Evil Propaganda machine of Hollywood that is maligning the reputations of these soulful and earthy people that want’ to loot small businesses and assassinate the police.  They are arguing that these same people should essentially be given a portion of Hollywood cinema to make their own propaganda and show things from their own perspective, that perspective being stupid and violent.  It can’t be that that perspective failed of it’s own lack of merit, it has to be a conspiracy.

THOUGHT CRIMES BUREAU

11182

The thing that should concern everybody is that this was a private conversation.  Affirmative action has now passed into the realm of thought crime.  It isn’t bad enough that we no longer have freedom of speech as we have been forced into female communication rituals in the form of political correctness.  I can’t be proud of my culture and allow anybody else to be proud of their cultures.  We can’t talk openly and honestly about what we dislike about other people our opinions are scripted and we are bad people if we hold certain positions or have certain ideas.  The people who are allowed to be proud of and at the same time defensive of their cultures are people that have no reason to be proud of their cultures.

He said: ‘After the Obama joke, no one was going to get on the side of Amy, [Amy Pascal, Sony Pictures co-chair] and so suddenly, everyone ran for the hills. Look, I can’t make an excuse for that joke, it is what it is, a terrible mistake. Having said that, it was used as a weapon of fear, not only for everyone to disassociate themselves from Amy but also to feel the fear themselves. They know what they themselves have written in their emails, and they’re afraid.’

Clooney said he approached a large number of important people to sign his petition but kept getting rebuffed. He said that people are afraid of potential retribution.

‘This is just where we are right now, how scared this industry has been made,’ he told the magazine.

‘Quite honestly, this would happen in any industry. I don’t know what the answer is, but what happened here is part of a much larger deal. A huge deal.

‘And people are still talking about dumb emails. Understand what is going on right now, because the world just changed on your watch, and you weren’t even paying attention.’

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2885794/Film-studio-heads-say-never-saw-George-Clooney-s-petition-supporting-embattled-Sony-star-publicly-berated-refusing-sign.html#ixzz3N29mX1OS

“This is not just an attack on Sony,” Clooney wrote. “It involves every studio, every network, every business and every individual in this country.”

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/columnist/rieder/2014/12/22/george-clooney-emerges-as-hero-in-awful-sony-mess/20757945/

thoughtcrime is an occurrence or instance of controversial or socially unacceptable thoughts. The term is also used to describe some theological concepts such as disbelief or idolatry,[1] or a rejection of strong social or philosophical principles.[2]

The term was popularized in the dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell, wherein thoughtcrime is the criminal act of holding unspoken beliefs or doubts that oppose or question the ruling party. In the book, the government attempts to control not only the speech and actions, but also the thoughts of its subjects. To entertain unacceptable thoughts is known as crimethink in Newspeak, the ideologically purified dialect of the party.[3]  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughtcrime

CYBER TERRORISM

The Obama Administration and I believe Obama himself referred to this as an act of Cyber terrorism and immediately the next day, the rhetoric was being scaled down to Internet Vandalism.  Let me explain why, since corporations are now people, if this turns out to be the United States that did this under the auspices of Obamas dictate, what this means is that this is an attack on an American Citizen by the American Military, which is an act of tyranny.  Since ancient Greece, the leader of a Democratic people cannot use the military on their own people without being considered a Tyrant.

And Anonymous recently said that and I quote, “we all know the hacks didn’t come from North Korea,”.

Richard Dawkins the Data Assassin.

untitled

Yesterday I posted a link to an article from richarddawkins.net about Sue Blackmore’s experience at Oxford and how she tried to get the students that came to her lecture to think of a new meme, all they did was think of meme’s that humiliated Christians, when she asked the students to contemplate meme’s that mocked Muslims and Islam 100 stood up and walked out and today I go to look at the same link and it has been data assassinated.  

Anyway, I strongly recommend everybody read this article. 

Now I look today and the article is back up. 

Introducing memes, I asked for volunteers to come up on the stage and invent a new meme. This same young man, called Moritz, was up in a flash, followed by four others. I asked him, at the word ‘go’, to make some simple movements and sounds. ‘One, two, three, Go,’ I said, and he waved one hand around in a circle, chanting ‘In the beginning was the word, and the word ….’. The others then imitated him and that was fun. Three obediently began reciting from the Bible but the fourth threw both arms in the air and declared ‘There’s a big old man in the sky’ and raised a huge laugh and cheer from (some of) the audience. This seemed an opportunity not to be missed so I asked the whole audience, at the word ‘go’, to imitate either of these two new memes, whereupon a great cry burst out of, ‘In the beg…’, ‘There’s an old man …’. Great, I said, we’ve now got two memes, you have just seen meme creation and selection at work.

I explained the idea of religions as memeplexes: they package up a set of doctrines, tell believers to learn them, to pass them on, to have faith and not doubt, and they ensure obedience with fearsome threats and ridiculous promises. This I illustrated with images of Christian heaven and hell. Then I read from the Koran “those that have faith and do good works, Allah will admit them to gardens watered by running streams … pearls and bracelets of gold.” “Garments of fire have been prepared for the unbelievers. They shall be lashed with rods of iron.” More walked out. By the time I arrived at a slide calling religions (Richard’s fault!) ‘Viruses of the mind’, the lecture hall was looking rather empty.

http://muckrack.com/link/ohFom/a-hundred-walked-out-of-my-lecture

https://www.facebook.com/RichardDawkinsFoundation/posts/10152568483890155

Richard Dawkins Deconstructed.

Image

So, I am going to practice describing Richard Dawkins inner world based on my psychological models and using my terms.  It is good for me to practice describing peoples profiles so I get used to using my thought technology (terms).  Religious language, in a manner of speaking, describes our internal world or the way we think the world works.  Our internal world is our soul, or our gestalt, it is our understanding of the world.  Now what is interesting with some atheists with the conceit that god doesn’t exist is that they don’t have any system for describing their internal world workings, which is to say they can’t scrutinize themselves.  Now I created my psycholinguistic model for detecting psychopaths while I was observing troll behavior on social networking sites.  Psychopaths conceal their true self and represent themselves falsely.  My model was created to understand the soul of people that were concealing themselves and revealing themselves strategically, people that don’t want to be understood.

Richard Dawkins, narrative recently changed, in his book, THE GOD DELUSION he mentions that a female associate of his said emotional abuse is worse than physical abuse and that he agrees with her.  Then recently this statement changed to, I was physically abused and I can’t condemn mild pedophilia.  One of the things I do in my deconstruction of narrative is learn to distinguish between authentic behavior and strategic behavior.  The second piece is closer to his true narrative (what is actually going on in his head)  but he is still concealing, although he did sidle up to his true narrative a little.  Now we look for variations on the narrative, and look for different deviations of narrative, and potentially contradictions.  One could say “nancy is a little loose” “nancy is a floozy” or “nancy is a slut.”  Each statement communicates slightly different data and characterizes the person speaking and the relationship between the two objects.  “I was molested and I can’t condemn it” in no way contradicts the narratives, “I enjoyed it” or “I wouldn’t mind doing it”.  So just like minesweeper we are going to go through his other actions and statements all of which are tautologies from his world view, as we think, so we speak, and so we act, unless you are a psychopath and concealing yourself, but we have the MIND HACKER on our side.

Image

(https://thoughtuncommon.wordpress.com/2013/08/28/everything-i-know-looks-through-me/)

Richard Dawkins was habituated into an environment that was highly sexually charged at a young age, boys punished each other sexually, and they rewarded each other sexually too, C.S. Lewis experienced this behavior in school, the boys called it tarting and fagging.  Dawkins also had a teacher that rewarded the boys with sexual attention, and put his hands in his pants at one point and knocked his junk around.  People have a normative bias, they think what is normal is good.  Although Dawkins portrays himself as a victim of circumstances as a tacit emotional appeal, I suspect that he actually enjoyed the environment, and the sexual attention and we will get into why later.  It is also important to mention that in Richard Dawkin’s mind, learning is associated with sexual arousal (and so is teaching), from his experience, teaching and learning are sexy and arousing.

Psychopaths perseverate in their behavior and internal narrative.  Psychopaths can’t reform they only become more manipulative.

In psychology and psychiatry, perseveration is the repetition of a particular response, such as a word, phrase, or gesture, despite the absence or cessation of a stimulus, usually caused by brain injury or other organic disorder.[1] Symptoms include “the inability to switch ideas along with the social context, as evidenced by the repetition of words or gestures after they have ceased to be socially relevant or appropriate,”[2] or the “act or task of doing so,”[3] and are not better described as stereotypy (a highly repetitive idiosyncratic behaviour).

The mind is averse, and it reacts against things it doesn’t like.  This eventually creates the form of the conquest for psychopaths.  Being morbidly in relationship with their issues and in the case of a histrionic psychopath clinging to those issues instead of seeking mental health, they need to change or attack whoever they blame for whatever their mind is averse to.  So what is Richard Dawkins mind averse to?

Image

He is averse to shame and he blames Religion as the cause of the bad for his shame.  Now when he says “child abuse” he is referring to emotional abuse and when we say emotional abuse we mean shame, specifically sexual shame.

Image

Notice the association between not being able to enjoy your life, and god not existing?  That is the way he is mentally in relationship with god.  If god exists it means you don’t get to enjoy your life.  Because of sexual shame.  So now we look for repeating occurrences in his behavior and narrative for sexual shame, what do we find?  Do we find a perseveration of emotional morbidity?

Out Campaign

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Out Campaign is a public awareness initiative for freethought and atheism. It was initiated by Dr. R. Elisabeth Cornwell, Executive Director of the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science, and is endorsed by Richard Dawkins, who is a prominent atheist.[1][2]

 

“There is a big closet population of atheists that need to come out.”  Richard Dawkins

R. Elisabeth Cornwell has stated that the gay rights movement was a source of inspiration for the campaign.[5] The campaign, however, encourages one to “out” only oneself; it invites atheists to:

  • Reach out and talk to others about atheism and help spread a positive view of atheism
  • Speak out about their own beliefs and values without feeling intimidated, thus helping people realize that atheists don’t fit stereotypes and are a very diverse group
  • Keep out, meaning to promote the idea that religion should be kept out of public schools and government, and that nobody’s religious agenda should be allowed to intimidate
  • Stand out and become visible in their communities and become involved. An offshoot of Stand out is the Non-Believers Giving Aid campaign, which has raised money to help out in the aftermath of disaster. The A+ symbol used in the campaign refers to Atheists Standing out for their activism in social and humanitarian efforts.

So we see he was inspired by a campaign for reversing the sexual shame of the stigma associated with being gay.  How do they identify themselves?

Image
The campaign aims to create more openness about being an atheist by providing a means by which atheists can identify themselves to others by displaying the movement’s scarlet letterA, an allusion to the scarlet letter A worn by Hester Prynne after being convicted of adultery in Nathaniel Hawthorne‘s The Scarlet Letter.[3] It encourages those who wish to be part of the campaign to come out and re-appropriate, in a humorous way, the social stigma that in some places persists against atheism, by branding themselves with a scarlet letter.
Again we see the recurring theme of sexual shame.  What this signals to me is that he is concealing something that was very powerful and he is very averse to, and that was caused by his being shamed, by a religious person, and that is why the form of his conquest is to attack and marginalize religion, and humiliate and ridicule religious people.  Let’s see if we can’t piece together more of his narrative.
ImageImage

“Do you really mean to tell me the only reason you try to be good is to gain God’s approval and reward, or to avoid his disapproval and punishment? That’s not morality, that’s just sucking up, apple-polishing, looking over your shoulder at the great surveillance camera in the sky, or the still small wiretap inside your head, monitoring your every move, even your every base though.”

― Richard DawkinsThe God Delusion

So exactly where do morals come from?  And what are your morals Richard Dawkins?  Some of his arguments suggest that humans are innately moral.  I find this interesting.  I think he is suggesting that his morals are good which means that he doing what he wants is innately correct.  Because men are innately good, and we shouldn’t be being good because somebody is watching us or threatening us.  Are you starting to get the picture yet?  Let’s take it a step further, what of the morals of a psychopath or a sociopath or a child molester?  If people are innately good than whatever their morals allow them to do is also innately good.  How does he propose we agree on what is good and moral?  Should we turn Science into a religion?  and then science can tell us what is moral?  I mean this is coming from the man that wants to eradicate religion.  Should our morals come from the government?

 

RELATED ARTICLES

Sex matters…

Image

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/sex-matters-drugs-can-affect-sexes-differently/

I catch a lot of flack for my ideas about the differences between men and women and a lot of that flack comes from feminazis, gomers, vagina worshipers, highly educated idiots and children that have been indoctrinated into man hate.  The reason that happens is because this is America the most feminized country on the planet.  The problem is this, it doesn’t matter how many morons agree with one another, it doesn’t make them more correct.  The tyranny of the stupid majority cannot go unchecked.

You have been propagandized into thinking that there is no difference between masculinity and femininity and this creates a disparate impact in favor of femininity.  This prejudice is not only dangerous for relationships and to the stability of america it is dangerous for individuals.  Women in america think that their is a magickal force that protects them from evil and bad things happening to them and they are right, that magickal force is American men.

Image

deviant art

If you are familiar with my theories on the male brain and the female brain you know that I consider the true uncorrupted male brain to be sociopathic (not the pussified western male mind)  and the female mind is psychopathic, and the psychopath is an over coddled child.

Aristotle’s views on women

“The slave is wholly lacking the deliberative element; the female has it but it lacks authority; the child has it but it is incomplete”

Differences between male and female[edit]

Aristotle believed that nature ordained not only physical differences between male and female but mental differences as well. By comparison to man, he argued, woman is “more mischievous, less simple, more impulsive … more compassionate[,] … more easily moved to tears[,] … more jealous, more querulous, more apt to scold and to strike[,] … more prone to despondency and less hopeful[,] … more void of shame or self-respect, more false of speech, more deceptive, of more retentive memory [and] … also more wakeful; more shrinking [and] more difficult to rouse to action” (History of Animals, 608b. 1-14). Moreover, in accord with his society’s custom of allowing girls and women to eat only half as much as boys and men, he added that woman “requires a smaller quantity of nutriment” (History of Animals, 608b. 14) [2] Aristotle wrote extensively on his views of the nature of semen. His views on how a child’s sex is decided have since been abandoned.[3]

He wrote that only fair skinned women, not darker skinned women, had a sexual discharge and climaxed. He also believed this discharge could be increased by eating of pungent foods. Aristotle thought a woman’s sexual discharge was akin to that of an infertile or amputated male’s.[4][5] He concluded that both sexes contributed to the material of generation, but that the female’s contribution was in her discharge (as in a male’s) rather than within the ovary.[4]

His idea of procreation was an active, ensouling masculine element bringing life to a passive female element.[6]

While Aristotle reduced women’s roles in society, and promoted the idea that women should receive less food and nourishment than males, he also criticised the results: a woman, he thought, was then more compassionate, more opinionated, more apt to scold and to strike. He stated that women are more prone to despondency, more void of shame or self-respect, more false of speech, more deceptive, and of having a better memory.[7]  wikipedia

Book cover of an edition ofOikonomikos from 1830.

Therefore it befits not a man of sound mind to bestow his person promiscuously, or have random intercourse with women; for otherwise the base-born will share in the rights of his lawful children, and his wife will be robbed of her honor due, and shame be attached to his sons.And it is fitting that he should approach his wife in honor, full of self-restraint and awe; and in his conversation with her, should use only the words of a right-minded man, suggesting only such acts as are themselves lawful and honorable. Aristotle’s thought that a wife was best honored when she saw that her husband was faithful to her, and that he had no preference for another woman; but before all others loves, trusts her and holds her as his own.[12] Aristotle wrote that a husband should secure the agreement, loyalty, and devotion of his wife, so that whether he himself is present or not, there may be no difference in her attitude towards him, since she realizes that they are alike guardians of the common interests; and so when he is away she may feel that to her no man is kinder or more virtuous or more truly hers than her own husband.

I might remind you that every civilization that stopped studying Aristotle fell into the dark ages.  The word Oikonomikos is where the English word economics comes from and the word oikos means house.  How is our economy doing?  As women have increased in “rights” and by rights I mean power without responsibility, the right to wage a propaganda war against masculinity, the right to get divorced on a whim, the right to have disposable relationships with men and sell themselves to the highest bidder while at the same time not wanting to be thought of as sex objects, the right to not suffer or struggle for the success of a relationship, how has our American economy fared?  How has the marriage unit fared? How is relationship doing?

Men and women are not the same, when you make a false forced equality between them you upset the flow of energy between the poles.  Rain does not fall up, and water does not flow up hill.  Women enter into relationship and immediately start turning the man that they are attracted to into a woman, and when they have succeeded they move on to the next man.  It is a conquest of the ego.  But you are sabotaging yourselves, historically there is a pattern that repeats, women that turn their men into women have no defense when foreign invaders come and take the women and rape them.  The men have no incentive to defend the women having had a life time of abuse from women and having been successfully turned into women they also don’t have the ability to wage war even if they wanted to.  The women, now having a child, kind of want to keep and raise the child and they are thus assimilated into another culture.  I am not making this stuff up.  Genghis Khan is related to more people on the earth than any other single person, and he was the most prolific rapist in history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rape_of_the_Sabine_Women

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/02/0214_030214_genghis.html

American women, you are not winning a victory over men, you are defeating yourselves…

Women are fickle emotional creatures incapable of being reasonable an analytical consistently, when you make a woman’s emotional thinking the equal of a man’s intellectual reasoning, you destroy the possibility of a rational relationship.  This pattern is destroying the educational system, the economy, America and the world, it is ruining everything that was good about America.

Image

Image

Image

Image

What is funny is watching this ugly feminazi stonewalling Leslie, she is operating on a slippery slope, seeing years of feminist propaganda being flushed down the toilette where it belongs.  Her entire empire that was created for her by man hating women that she wants to pass on to all of her Amazonian little man hating daughters is going bye bye.  The subjugation of the American Male is coming to an end, or at least it better if we want to survive.  Stop homogenizing the sexes, they were created different for a reason, respect it.

Mung (computer term)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mung or munge is computer jargon for a series of changes to a piece of data, which are often well defined and individually reversible, but which transform the original item into an unrecognizable form. The changes may be destructive, for example by corrupting a computer file, or simply concealing, for example changes to an email address to disguise it fromspambots.

The term was coined in 1958 in the Tech Model Railroad Club at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In 1960 the backronym “Mash Until No Good” was created to describe Mung, and a while after it was revised to “Mung Until No Good”, making it one of the first recursive acronyms. It lived on as a recursive command in the editing language TECO.

Usages of the term appear in munged password (a strong, secure password created through character substitution), data munging (cleaning data from one “raw” form into a structured, purged one) and address munging (disguising an e-mail address).

Munging may also describe the constructive operation of tying together systems and interfaces that were not specifically designed to interoperate (often using the Perl programming language). Munging can also describe the processing or filtering of raw data into another form.[1]

Munging implies destruction[dubious – discuss]—to make large-scale and irrevocable changes to a file and to destroy it. Hence in the early text-adventure game Zork, also known as Dungeon, the user could mung an object and thereby destroy it (making it impossible to finish the game if the object was an important item).

Insanity.

Image

They say that psychopaths don’t reform, they just become more manipulative.  I guess I wanted to see if it was true.  I am still not convinced, I think psychopaths could be reformed with torture, I believe that psychopaths only respect coercive authority.  I think this is because they were over coddled as children when they should have had their asses beat.  Their parents created an environment where they children could manipulate them and rewarded the children for manipulating them, or lying to them successfully.

I learned long ago to observe a person’s actions and their results more than what they tell you they are doing or thinking.  This is one of the ruses psychopaths like to use to manipulate people.  They say this is what I am doing and this is why I am doing it but they keep getting a different result.  When you point out the disparity between what they say and what they do, and force them to rationalize it, you get pretty words, and emotional appeals but the behavior remains consistent and the result the same.

I have long observed all the strategies and techniques women like to use for passive aggressively taking over the relationship, it is amazing that this pattern remains so consistent and women will lie to your face when you confront the behavior and the result.  I don’t know, I just kind of hate my life, it is so obvious to me what is going on.  What women do isn’t love, because it isn’t reasonable, it is greedy and stupid, insidiously evil.  Below is a photoshop I did for L, this is her gambit, her ace up her sleave, she is a histrionic psychopath which means that she manipulates people with an appeal to sympathy.

L is very good at portraying herself as a victim of circumstance tossed about on the sea of fate.  A helpless, hapless, hopeless victim.  But that is the strategy that has been most successful for her all of her life, appealing to others pity by looking pathetic.

wikipedia:

Histrionic personality disorder (HPD) is defined by the American Psychiatric Association as a personality disorder characterized by a pattern of excessive emotions and attention-seeking, including inappropriately seductive behavior and an excessive need for approval, usually beginning in early adulthood. People affected by HPD are lively, dramatic, vivacious, enthusiastic, and flirtatious. HPD affects four times as many women as men.[1] It has a prevalence of 2–3% in the general population, and 10–15% in inpatient and outpatient mental health institutions.[2]

HPD lies in the dramatic cluster of personality disorders.[3] People with HPD have a high need for attention, make loud and inappropriate appearances, exaggerate their behaviors and emotions, and crave stimulation.[3] They may exhibit sexually provocative behavior, express strong emotions with an impressionistic style, and can be easily influenced by others. Associated features includeegocentrismself-indulgence, continuous longing for appreciation, and persistent manipulative behavior to achieve their own needs.

Essentially what the histrionic psychopath does is she makes an appeal to emotion by characterizing herself as a victim of everything causing people to come to her rescue.  She has used this gambit repeatedly throughout her life successfully.  Like Fritz Perls says, “a person will emulate whatever behavior they believe to be dominant.”

Appeal to emotion or argumentum ad passiones is a logical fallacy which uses the manipulation of the recipient’s emotions, rather than valid logic, to win an argument. The appeal to emotion fallacy uses emotions as the basis of an argument’s position without factual evidence that logically supports the major ideas endorsed by the elicitor of the argument. Also, this kind of thinking may be evident in one who lets emotions and/or other subjective considerations influence one’s reasoning process. This kind of appeal to emotion is a type of red herring and encompasses several logical fallacies, including:

In spite of my repeatedly pointing out her recurring patterns in her behavior she refused to change them.  One of the boundaries I laid down for her was not going outside the relationship to make me look like an ass.  On over 8 different occasions since I have told her not to do this I have found out that she was doing it.  The last yesterday.  It’s not just that, she causes these big scenes, she doesn’t participate with reason, she agrees to stuff and then doesn’t act on it or does the exact opposite of what she said.  She expects me to be loyal to her and predictable to her while she does whatever she wants, leveraging herself against the relationship, trying to use the relationship as though it were money, using my reputation while at the same time ruining my reputation.  Psychopaths are insane, they consider themselves as the cause of the good, they are incapable of scrutinizing themselves, punishing themselves, controlling themselves, or being critical of themselves.  They do not respect your boundaries.  Because everything they do is good, they, like your mother have no reason to respect your boundaries, why do you need boundaries?  Are you hiding something?  They presuppose their own moral authority to judge others and to punish others while refusing to accept the consequences of their actions.

A few nights ago was the last straw, once again L was building herself up to throw a hissy fit. She competes with my room mate, an old lady, L feels aggressive towards any women around me, anyway, my room mate doesn’t have to stay in her room until after 8, and it was 7 and L was flashing her eyes at her like an animal like she always does.  L is also jealous of the attention I give to my little 10 pound cockapoo, which is a way of reliving my child hood in a positive way because of having an abusive father and family life.  My only family in the world is this old lady and my dog and L wants to get me away from both of them so she can hen peck and nag me into insanity or submission.  So I asked her if she wanted to cheer up or get out and immediately she started raising her voice, we have a rule, she doesn’t get to yell at me, she communicates reasonably and there are topics that she can’t talk about namely my room mate and my dog.  She compares herself to my dog and my room mate, she is not my dog and she is not my room mate, my relationship with her is my relationship with her, not my relationship with them.  Does she want to be my dog?  Cuz then I will treat her like my dog.

Long story short she says that she will leave but she is going to take all the food she bought, great, I work retail and it is thanksgiving and I had to put up with bitchy, retarded, customers and employees all day so all I want is to enjoy myself in peace.  She leaves and I sit down to watch some tv.  Next thing I know she is banging at the door and window, and yelling at me, oh and she yelled at me in the parking lot in front of my neighbors (3-story apartment building), I gave her all the food she bought and some of the food I bought.  I know she said it just to win the argument, she expected me to back down, instead I helped her load up her car.  So now she is banging on my window and calling me again and again and again.  She eventually stops and I don’t know where she is but come to find out she is over at my neighbors, a 6 foot tall skin head with amphetamine psychosis.  She is using her power play, acting like a victim to get people to come to her aid.

Knock knock.  Who is it?  Skin head.  Skin head who?

I open the door this time, cuz it’s no L, and their is skinhead, I am standing there in my underwear with my right nut hanging out half asleep and he is standing there very excited with electrical tape wrapped around his knuckles.  He very loudly with violent gestures explains to me that he is going to protect my girl friend from me.  I figure he was there for about 15 minutes yelling at me, he was standing inside my door.  I am no slouch to combat but I was tired, and I am getting old, I realized long ago that when a person is this prepared for battle and drunk and who knows what else they are on, that you don’t waste words, you prepare for actions, reason will avail you not.  I am trying to think how I can prevent the conflict from escalating.  If I close the door he will block it and start a fight.  If I ask him to leave nicely he will refuse and start a fight.  If I try to push him out of the door he will start a fight.  Solution, quickly move his center of gravity and lock the door.  I double fist punch him in the chest, to move his center of gravity and then close and lock the door.    At the very least it will create a trail of evidence if he pursues the conflict.  He punches the door leaving two massive dents right about neck level where I would have been.

THE CAUSE OF THE GOOD

What is so fascinating about the psychopathic mind is that it never admits that it was wrong.  It always perceives itself as the cause of the good.  Not only did L not take responsibility, she lied about being at his house, and when pressed she asked me why I didn’t take out my anger on him?  Why wasn’t I angry at him?  Because I don’t have a relationship with him, I have a relationship with you and I expect you not to be an idiot and put me in harms way.  I talked to her briefly the next day and she was still as remorseless as ever and full of venom and vitriol.  Raising her voice, talking over me, still on the warpath.  I told her not to call me, and not to come over, if she came over I would call the police.  Almost immediately the phone starts ringing and 15 minutes later she is knocking at my door.

Psychopaths don’t reform, they just become more manipulative…..

EMERGENT PROPERTIES IN HUMAN JUDGMENTS.

Image

Ponder this, how many people have had an enjoyable experience with a bewb?  Now how many people have had an enjoyable experience with a penis?  The vast majority of people are not analytical philosophers, they don’t know the logical fallacies and they don’t know the cognitive biases and as such they can’t stop themselves from making them.  Furthermore I have found that neural myelination accounts for 90% of the decision making of human beings which means cellular memory.  I refer to humans as organic computers because they are predictable.  In their judgments there are certain patterns that emerge, such as a pro female bias.

Contemplate how many more people spend on breast cancer than veterans or prostrate cancer and the fact that Veterans charities are rampant with fraud and theft, which is not tolerated with breast cancer awareness, people are much more hyper vigilant.  But women didn’t sacrifice themselves for us.  Every person that served protected the entire nation from threats.  A woman having breasts is not necessarily a mother or our mother.  Yet we are far more sympathetic to feminine concerns than masculine concerns.

Every year at least $1.5 billion is spent on breast cancer research.  Some of this money comes from an ever-growing number of breast cancer non-profit organizations, but the vast majority comes from government organizations such as the National Cancer Institute (NCI), the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Department of Defense (DoD).  The funds go largely to preventionand early detection.http://thinkbeforeyoupink.org/?p=1772

girls-playing-doll1

Men women and children have the same bias, choosing in favor of femininity and weakness.  Men are even insensitive to their own desires.  Men don’t even question this when asked to sacrifice themselves for women and children, they just presuppose the validity of it.  Women also don’t question it.  Women have gotten so arrogant and so expectant that men will sacrifice their desires and wishes for women and children that even after not having contributed anything meaningful to a man’s life women finding they don’t have enough of what they want will turn to the man and expect him to sacrifice himself so that she can have more.

image2

The manliest men go off to war, they are in relationship with death and the threats and the ugliness, they create the outside perimeter, the grizzled, gnarly, rind, the crust, the tough outer layer.  That is why I say the male mind is sociopathic.

Inside that are the effeminate men, the champions of normalcy and pleasantness, captain save a ho, the white knights, the arm chair philosophers, with their feminist, elitist, bias.  It is the guy that is not fit to go into battle.  He acts as a moral authority protecting the women from the manly men, but also gaming the system for his own benefit.  He is to cowardly to do what the manly man does.  He is a champion of femininity.

-

The butch women essentially perform the same function as the effeminate men, protecting women from the truth, reality, ugliness, and death.  Lying to women about themselves.  Telling them they are equals to the men and not to worry.  The butch women are closer to the women and children then the effeminate men.  Women have an innate feeling of inferiority to men, Sigmond Freud got that right.  If you observe women in their reasoning, arguing, and behavior, they want to control the penis, they want to own it.  They want to direct the activities of the penis.  They want to send it to attack their enemies.  They want to control how it thinks and they want to be the focal point of its attention and the only source of its happiness.

Penis envy in Freudian psychoanalysis refers to the theorized reaction of a girl during her psychosexual development to the realization that she does not have a penis. Freud considered this realization a defining moment in the development of gender and sexual identity for women[1] — the parallel reaction in boys to the realization that women do not have a penis being castration anxiety. In contemporary culture, the term sometimes refers inexactly or metaphorically to women who are presumed to wish they were men.[2]

law-offices-charity-bar

What is the most fascinating is how the behaviors used to champion negate their own arguments.  The manly women copy the behavior of men, therefore demonstrating that they tacitly believe that masculinity is dominant.  Fritz Perls said that you copy what ever behavior you believe is dominant when you want to win.  So the fact that they use masculine behavior when they want to win demonstrates that they believe masculinity is dominant.  You have to understand the psychosis that the individual must have to use a means different from their argument in order to obtain a sense of victory.  Women do this because it is a natural psychopathic/female strategy to expand and increase feminine authority.  Women think of themselves as a group, WOMEN.  Whereas men do not think of themselves as MEN, they think of themselves as a man.  Men do not feel that their position is increased by being men, while women do, and this comes from the fact that their need recognition was stimulated in that they closetedly feel inferior to men, thus the need for the repeated conquest against men.

The effeminate man will argue that the woman is the equal of man in mental function and ability, but if that is so why does she need the protection of the effeminate man?  The effeminate man argues against reason, and the participation therewith to increase the amount of poontang he has available to himself and not being able to compete with the manly man in manly endeavors, he adopts a strategy flying in the face of reason he presupposes that women need protection from the manly man and that they are incapable of dealing with reality and handling the truth.

The fascinating thing about people’s judgments, when they are no analytical philosophers, is that their judgments always make themselves correct.  It always justifies why they are good for wanting what they want.  Because their are so many weak, stupid, and incorrect people out their all of these strategies and judgments create a disparate impact in favor of weakness, stupidity, and failure.  Why are we attracted to emotional pornography?  Puppies, babies, kittens?  because they are harmless, because we feel like we could protect them and contribute to them, that has positive survival data for us, it means we are surviving well and that we are capable of providing for another.  If we were really secure we wouldn’t judge so hatefully and immediately against things that pose potential threats.   We wouldn’t be controlled by our emotional reactions and pre emptively attack people because they appear strong or smart.

baby-turtle-eats-strawberry-big

http://terminclature.wordpress.com/2013/09/13/organic-computers-definition-by-joxuashiva/ https://thoughtuncommon.wordpress.com/2013/10/22/deuchebag-nation-womans-world-part-2/ http://finscribeofwisdom.blogspot.com/2012/10/unsustainable-emergent-patterns-in.html http://terminclature.wordpress.com/2013/10/16/armchair-philosophers/ http://terminclature.wordpress.com/2013/10/23/histrionic-co-morbidity-psychopaths-at-work-part-2/ http://terminclature.wordpress.com/2013/10/11/emotional-pornography/