(Too bad the caption on this was written by what I hope is a foreign national and not simply an imbecile.)
Stalking is an extremely common crime, and can range from deadly dangerous, to harmless but eyebrow raising. I bring my situation up in this post because I'm sure it's interesting, "how does a psychopath react to such an emotional crime like stalking?" Because let's face it, generally the true goal, or rather effect, of stalking is emotional trauma. Being followed maliciously invokes a feeling of 'violation' that is often professed as being more disturbing than a violent altercation might have been(though I doubt that's accurate).
My Wannabe Terror is really as benign as a stalker can get. An ex whose obsession has gone a little too far. But I am compelled to add that love interest is a common motive for stalking, and some of the most bloody endings of such instances, have been by past, or hoping-to-be future lovers.
Said person fills my phone and machine night and day with- oftentimes delusional-messages. Whole conversations are had without me uttering a word in response. They vary from "I love you baby, pick up the phone" to "I fucking hate you you goddamn asshole!" My personal favorites are the insidiously planted references to locations I frequented that day, "I saw you at so and so's house," or "I like the shirt you're wearing"-which is particularly flattering because they live many miles away and have no authentic reason to be anywhere in this area except to follow me. I think I feel the need to blush.
Recently, because Nature never saw fit to instill in me the same danger signals as an Empath I acquiesced to a meeting, which eventually led to somewhere secluded and a bit of, shall I say, overt aggression ensued on my Terror's part. This was a very curious situation to me. Before and after the altercation I was very introspective, very observant of this person. I know a predator when I see one; I am one. Upon first reading this you may be perplexed, even flabbergasted at my willingness to associate with my stalker. You may short-sightedly view me as foolish, naive perhaps- I assure you that is not the case.
I post this because, although I know that all psychopaths are different, and many would act differently than I- that this scenario could lead to one of few actual insights into the psychopathic mind offered by my blog. I am quite aware that I do not post articles, quote studies or delve too seriously into the psychology of people of like minds. I am interested in these things, and comment in those ways on others' blogs, but that's not my aim here. Plenty of psychopaths are able and willing to intellectualize those things much more than I. On this blog my aim is to entertain, namely myself, but perhaps others as well, and to express things I generally must internalize.
I was not threatened because such a 'predator' is no threat to me, much like a lion is no threat to a spider or a pedophile is no threat to a full grown man (without kids, sheesh! You people are always delving for lapses in logic). Someone who preys on emotions is no more than a nuisance to someone like me, who has and always will be, a much more literal danger.
So when said person grabbed me, I became fully myself quite instantly. As I've posted no doubt too many times (though unfortunately it continues to be relevant), I generally maintain a stringent level of self control for this very reason. Once my real face comes on there's really no going back until I'm satisfied. And so when this occurred I very instantly lost control-though that is less dramatic than you might imagine. This loss of control is not accompanied by an insane wale of rage nor some kind of rabid physical reaction, it is quiet, gentle and foreboding for the focus of my attention. A simple acknowledgement that the cage has been opened, so to speak.
Normally, this is reserved for specific times when I allow myself to play- this time however, it came with a hint of irritation that stemmed from the realization that this Child seemed unaware it was picking on a grownup several times its size (and I truly hope you realize that was a metaphor).
I grabbed the closest hand that dared touch me and squeezed and twisted whilst simultaneously calculating certain variables that one rarely thinks of while in an emotional rage-but while in my trance I do quite naturally, including level of seclusion, potential witnesses and method of disposal. The result of my calculation was that 1 and 1 equalled 3 and so I quickly shifted gears, into a more appropriate yet less satisfying persona. And so the situation ended much less messy than it could have, but with no less message sending for my Terror. You may be thinking I left quite a few details out, and indeed you'd be right.
A like-minded observer who possesses a similar, shall I say, tendency, as I, might not comprehend how my need differs from theirs. How this situation shifted with little consequence. The difference is simple, there is a certain ritual, a certain guideline that must be met for many people like me--and I'm not talking psychopaths in general, I'm talking an even more minority group-to satisfy that aspect of their personality. Mine goes hand in hand with my control. It is difficult to explain, but this tendency demands that when I 'lose control' I still maintain it in every way but one. It is like a jonesing crack addict who is offered heroin and declines. You may superficially think an addict is an addict, 'why would he decline a drug?' Conversely, another addict quite fond of heroin might rage that no one like him, in their right mind would refuse his drug of choice. But you see, that drug was not what the first addict craved; its lure does not shoot shivers up his spine nor make his hands shake with the anxiousness to be enveloped in its veil of euphoria. So yes, while said addict had a need, and was being offered a fix in the same category as the one he craved, it wasn't what he was looking for. The situation did not meet the requirements of his ritual, and so he waited, as did I.
--This was a very longwinded post, I know. But I am rarely so inspired to shed true insight into my reality.
I would ask that you not make assumptions or irrational conclusions based upon my words. My intent is ambiguous at best, but I assure you, like most things of interest more is read between the lines than with stroke of quill. To the educated reader this is obvious, but unfortunately, too many read with their eyes instead of their brains and those such people, I'd prefer not frequent this site.
Also, I'm not sure if I've said this before, but feel free to mention any spelling or grammatical lapses you may have noted, they are generally not left due to ignorance, but rather, a slip of the brain. No matter how much I proof, I always seem to find an error a day or days hence.
6 comments:
I had a stalker once ages ago, back in high school. This girl was obsessed with me, always complimented me, followed me to work one day, got my number from a friend, and found where I lived. She started befriending my friends too, which is where I decided to put my foot down.
Don't get me wrong, she was good looking, ideal if I'll be honest (I have a real weakness for natural red-heads) but she suffered from Idiot Syndrome, which is simply not acceptable.
So I decided that enough was enough, but I had to by sly about it. I went with her for coffee after school one day, we hung out in the parking lot, all cozy-like and had some interesting conversation. I acted very bored whenever she talked about herself and her interests, but when she asked me, that's when I set her alarms off. I talked about my joy for killing, I talked about the feel of fat when I cut something open, and that odd plaster-y effect blood has when it dries on your hands. I talked maybe about ~5 minutes about that stuff, and asked her if she wanted to go hunting with me, just her and me.
She said she'd have to think about it, and was visibly stricken.
Stalker problem, over.
It could have backfired if she was just as much as a sicko as me, but I had a pretty good feeling that it would do the trick.
I don't like to use the written words for communication. As Jacque Lacan and Socrates believed, it's ineffective and often lead the readers to the irrational and incorrect conclusion.
Then, I am curious about one thing.
If I meet a person and talk directly, I can always achieve my goal and dominate a person,
but if I say the same things indirectly(through the phone or e-mail or chatting) I often fail to achieve my goal.
Haven't you had experienced such a thing?
Anyway, ZKM, I am trying my best to understand your articles correctly AMAP.
Thank you for the posting!
-j139220
@ Anonymous:
Impersonal communication such as that experienced on the Internet retains the same strategies used in person, just fewer of them. As in, they are tactics you use in person, they are just more focused and less diverse.
When manipulating someone in person you have many more crutches to fall back on, even the unskilled many times can achieve their goal. On the phone or the web, it is more a measure of technique, because there are only a few techniques you're riding on.
Talking to someone one on one incorporates clever use of diction, voice intonation, body language, general positioning etc. Whereas say, on this blog all I can really rely on is my diction, character portrayal and analytical abilities to achieve a goal.
Also, there are SEVERAL reasons a strategy used in person would NOT work on the web. There is more use for aggressiveness in person, both passive and on occasion overt. Online such efforts would be fruitless without the ability to subtly intimidate said person-they have a buffer between you and them.
You must remember that techniques used from a distance should be more 'long term' and techniques in person should be more 'short term'. What I mean is, in person part of what you're capitalizing on is their inability to analyze deeply, most of these techniques at their most basic level, are ways to decrease the time they feel they have to think even more, therefor leading them in the direction you wish. This can be very subtle.
With an email, the same strategy would be mostly ineffective, they have all the time in the world to read and reread what you said and note the fallacies in your words. Therefor you must take this in mind, word things so that the MORE they think about it, the more they agree.
Does that answer your question?
@ Notable:
Ha, so you went all 'American Psycho' on her ass, eh?
I originally had every intention of solving this through more subtle means, but the unexpected physical aggression made that impossible. I hate to sound theatrical, but as I've mentioned before I have two very distinct 'personalities' (for the lack of a better word) that make up my mind, and the darker one's weakness is any sign of disrespect. Generally, I allow that side of me to comment in the background, but allow my more apathetic side take the wheel of my actions. This affront, however, was too sudden.
Objectively, you can view the separate aspects of my mind as being my natural antisocial traits versus my self control. You might think of it all being apart of the same thing, but it is very apparent the difference between me in control, and me when I let the reigns loose. It is drastic. And as they say, no horse can be saddled dawn to dawn.
There is no way for me to constantly maintain self control without completely losing it on occasion- and that's the problem. Everything is centered around those times, and the longer I go without them, the more things start to slip.
lol penis is a funny word
Stress is the demon in our society, stalking the cities and the countryside, striking down young and old and growing in strength daily. See the link below for more info.
#stalking
www.ufgop.org
Post a Comment