Post: #1

I've been tossing the idea around in my head for a while that to be a true player you have to be somewhat of a psychopath or sociopath. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing if you have a good sense of control over yourself and your emotions.

Here's an excerpt from an article I found. Interesting read.

http://www.cassiopaea.com/cassiopaea/psychopath.htm

Psychopaths seem to have in abundance the very traits most desired by normal persons. The untroubled self-confidence of the psychopath seems almost like an impossible dream and is generally what "normal" people seek to acquire when they attend assertiveness training classes. In many instances, the magnetic attraction of the psychopath for members of the opposite sex seems almost supernatural.

Cleckley's seminal hypothesis concerning the psychopath is that he suffers from a very real mental illness indeed: a profound and incurable affective deficit. If he really feels anything at all, they are emotions of only the shallowest kind. He does bizarre and self-destructive things because consequences that would fill the ordinary man with shame, self-loathing, and embarrassment simply do not affect the psychopath at all. What to others would be a disaster is to him merely a fleeting inconvenience.

Post: #2

Nope.

I have empathy.

I can feel it when I hurt a woman. It sucks. I hate flaking, and I hate it when women get into me. (They always seem to go deep really quick with me.)

I hurt girls, because I am not going to elevate their happiness above mine, not because it feels good or because I lack compassion.

Post: #3

(02-12-2012 12:14 AM)MikeCF Wrote:  I have empathy.

Maybe you're not a true player

I have empathy too but I can turn it off and be cold and callous when I need to. I think I've gotten to the point of being able to turn on and off individual emotions.

I have issues

Post: #4

Well, if you want to talk about psychopathy, you need to start with Hare's research.

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

If you mug an old lady and feel guilty later, you're probably not a psychopath. If you can mug an old lady, spit on her, and laugh, then you're probably a psychopath.

Not having empathy would make you a better player, but plenty of players have misgivings about their using women.

Post: #5

I think some could be but many just have some of the traits. I've had multiple people taking psychology courses call me a psychopath (but they only had wikipedia knowledge). I did the narcissist test pdog had on his blog and got 35 (double normal or something. The girl I lost my virginity to dumped me because she was convinced I was incapable of emotion. I lack empathy and rarely anything I do upsets me to the point of lost productivity unless it is something that directly affects me ie. rawdogging and blowing inside a mega-whore, but not feeling any remorse for banging her while her boyfriend was out of town.

As for the checklist traits i would identify with:

Factor 1: Personality "Aggressive narcissism"

Glibness/superficial charm
Grandiose sense of self-worth
Cunning/manipulative
Lack of remorse or guilt
Shallow affect (genuine emotion is short-lived and egocentric)
Callousness; lack of empathy
Failure to accept responsibility for own actions

Factor 2: Case history "Socially deviant lifestyle".
Poor behavioral control
Promiscuous sexual behavior
Criminal versatility
Acquired behavioural sociopathy/sociological conditioning (Item 21: a newly identified trait i.e. a person relying on sociological strategies and tricks to deceive)


I don't think this makes me a bad person as I don't go out of my way to destroy/hurt someone unless they truly deserve it. I do think these traits have helped with game, but have hindered my formation of long term relationships longterm/otherwise.

I also think that people need to watch with wikipedia diagnosing, a lot of people can identify with those traits at one point or another. To actually diagnose these need to be present too: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality...#Diagnosis

Post: #6

Psychopaths don't hurt people for the hell of it, they hurt people to get what they want and feel no remorse afterwards. You are thinking of serial killers.

Post: #7

I think sociopathic traits are more along the lines of what a player needs. I recall this recently coming up in another thread, where the OP felt a player needed to be truly callous in his dealings, and never feel anything for chicks. I remember the context now...Roosh felt bad that a chick he just fucked was up the next morning sweeping his crib or something like that, and at that moment he felt he didn't deserve that kind of treatment, because all he wanted her for was to fuck her, and he'd gotten what he wanted. When I questioned the OP on why he was critical of Roosh, he got defensive.

I think the problem is he associated the word "sociopath" with criminality or a serial killer. ANYONE can have sociopathic tendencies. Serial killers have them to a larger degree obviously, but I think they also get a charge out of the actual killing, as well as lacking empathy for their victims. A player can have empathy for a chick, but as long as it doesn't prevent him from going out and hunting more poon, it isn't a liability.

Post: #8

It would make sense to me since, most murka whales are crazy, it takes equally crazy to fuck a bunch of them.

Post: #9

I don't think so. The whole argument does make sense, but while girls are attracted to psychopaths (who naturally have lots of game), that doesn't make players psychopaths. You can have lots of game without compromising your morals or character. Although true, at times I do feel that a part of me has been lost, but it's the part about innocence, not the part about empathy and kindness.

Post: #10

To the degree that one deliberately misleads someone to get what they want while believing it hurts the other person, I think pump-and-dump shows anti-social tendencies.

(Psychopaths are a more dangerous subset of anti-social people, the difference is too complex to go into here.
Anti-social people (ASP) might include non-violent people who don't follow convention, such as politicians who lie about everything, or drug-users who borrow money/never pay back) . ASP are much more likely to be high-functioning, they might make good lawyers.)

To look at the social benefit/damage of any given situation, you have to realize each one is different.

Let's take a simple division of situations:

TYPES OF GIRLS

1) Vulnerable girls who want a LTR, and say that. ( "Are we going to just do this tonight, or do you really like me")

2) Vulnerable girls who want an LTR, and don't say that. ( She silently hopes the guy will become attached to her)

3) Party girls that develop as little attachments as players do.

In (2) and (3) "player" is morally off the hook, because (2) took risks she was not able to handle but did not exercise due caution and inform others around her of her situation. it could be compared to her renting an airplane and not telling them you have no license. In (3)- she's one of you.


If (1) , player says:
"I am really into you" , deliberately letting her think he could be serious--knowing at the time he only wants to have sex with the girl once, then that is antisocial behavior even if not an actual lie in my opinion, lying to someone to get something from them -- basically the social equivalent of fraud.

Reaction-- maybe she becomes more guarded in the future, less able to trust and have healthy LTR.
Theoretically, she might benefit from having an experienced lover and learn about sex, but his lying still works
against trust in the society.

In my dealings with thousands of criminals, one interesting aspect includes blaming the victim. "She asked if I was serious about her. Of course I lied. Any bitch that's stupid enough to believe me deserves to get gamed."
compare to
" The stupid old lady went out alone at 11 at night. Of course I robbed her. Anyone stupid enough...etc."

Of course, someone with pair bonding circuitry missing is not going to really care about what I say, as they don't
feel connected to me. "That IKE is just a beta wimp." ( Antisocials demand perfection in actions of others, but deny any responsibility for themselves).

And also, the reality is nature selects for whoever reproduces most, not who is the most considerate.
Rampant sex without reproduction is an artifact of the last few dozen or hundred years, since birth control
arrived.

You rawdog players ( meaning you cum in the girls, withdrawal actually works pretty well) are very likely to succeed in evolutionary terms.
I can't say I feel bad for you-- if you were lying to someone to get laid-- and it gets you standing stunned in a child support court in the US/Western Europe.

Dishonest Players' actions probably helped create Feminism and the whole fascistic child support system; making everything worse for Betas everywhere.

Post: #11

Most "great" people are psychopaths if you follow the definition closely. Women love psychopathetic men because psychos are bad boys, wild, unpredictable, have charm, charisma, attitude, etc. psycho dudes are drowning in pussy.

Post: #12

It seems popular perception of narcissistic personality disorder and sociopathy/psychopathy is that they're bad. But my question is - bad for whom?

In my last LTR I got accused of narcissism and sociopathy, but I would argue (obviously, as a narcissist) that narcissistic traits are part and parcel of being alpha and having strong inner game. Many narcissistic traits seem to be linked to the same feature - overconfidence - that is essential in getting anywhere near your goals in life.

It's estimated there is a much higher percentage of psychopaths in business leader positions than in the rest of life. Could the following elements of psychopathy (at a low level) be beneficial in being uncaring about others, enabling you to focus on your own goals and achievements in life?
Cunning/manipulative
Emotionally shallow
Callous/lack of empathy

If you've heard or read any of Roy Baumeister, he talks about emotion depth being a fundamental difference between men and women - women bond deep with a few people, men bond shallow with a large number of people - and this is why men are able to build and work in large, broad organisations, with competitive, challenging and meritocratic social structures, where respect is earned, not given. Women demand politeness and respect from the get go, so end up crying off to the courts every time someone in their workplace treats them meanly. So the argument here is that "being emotionally shallow" is a not an exclusively negative trait.

Post: #13

(02-12-2012 05:37 AM)Rocket Wrote:  So the argument here is that "being emotionally shallow" is a not an exclusively negative trait.

..and to support your point many chicks go for exactly that as long as the money/status keeps flowing...I can never get over the images of beautiful blond chicks cheering Hitler while beautiful brown haired Jews choked on poison in the ovens...

but there are noble women..here's Sophie Scholl, German student who was killed by the Nazis for non-violent protest against the fascist regime.

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

Post: #14

I think it depends on what level of game you have. As a newbie, you really can't trust your emotions. Alphas are allowed to be deeply in touch with their emotions.

Post: #15

True players have different...characteristics...of a psychopath not all of them.

http://www.arkancide.com/psychopathy.htm

I view true players as Ubermensch.

Mental chameleons who can camouflage/transform their persona at will to influence/manipulate people for physical and/or financial gain.

Great post Parlay.

Post: #16

Some are, some aren't.

Just like any other type of guy. (married, single, introvert, extrovert)

Anyone who is truly dedicated to his craft and is seriously working hard to get better will appear a little psycho because he will seem to put nothing in front of their his goal and seem almost obsessed with it. But there is a big difference between that type of dedication and real psychopath who can kill people without remorse.

Post: #17

Consider two men who beat their wives. One beats her because he just has some impulse to, that's how he deals with stress, whatever. The other guy beats her because he knows it's what satisfies her and sustains the relationship. The second guy may be indifferent to it, or he even hates doing it, but he has found it necessary...

Some players are psychopaths because it's who they are, and it has made them successful with women. But others become one, because they've found it to be effective and even necessary, for maximum success with American women. You Did This To Me. The distinction between the two types may be hard to make, or even not worth making in the first place. When women reward callousness, players will be callous.

If someone's mad that players are psychopaths, they should be mad at the women for rewarding that behavior. These guys would be nowhere without women effectively consenting to it at every step. Otherwise, you're effectively saying that women are children and cannot be trusted to make their own decisions. And to be consistent with that, you'd have to question women's freedom to choose their mates, if not also their legal status as an adult, their suffrage, etc.

And I'm not saying players = wifebeaters.

Post: #18

(02-13-2012 02:25 PM)basilransom Wrote:  Consider two men who beat their wives. One beats her because he just has some impulse to, that's how he deals with stress, whatever. The other guy beats her because he knows it's what satisfies her and sustains the relationship. The second guy may be indifferent to it, or he even hates doing it, but he has found it necessary...

Some players are psychopaths because it's who they are, and it has made them successful with women. But others become one, because they've found it to be effective and even necessary, for maximum success with American women. You Did This To Me. The distinction between the two types may be hard to make, or even not worth making in the first place. When women reward callousness, players will be callous.

If someone's mad that players are psychopaths, they should be mad at the women for rewarding that behavior. These guys would be nowhere without women effectively consenting to it at every step. Otherwise, you're effectively saying that women are children and cannot be trusted to make their own decisions. And to be consistent with that, you'd have to question women's freedom to choose their mates, if not also their legal status as an adult, their suffrage, etc.

And I'm not saying players = wifebeaters.

When it comes to matters of sex, love, relationships, etc., I believe women are like children and cannot be trusted to make their own decisions.

I am anti-discrimination and all that, but women have too many internal contractions driving them. In this sense, they actually don't have free choice when it comes to mate selection. They don't have will power over these matters- they are like animals, controlled by whims and instinct, which doesn't always work out for their long term benefit.

That's why game is so powerful- it reveals this mechanistic nature of women. It reduces/reveals them to be the animals that they truly are.

Post: #19

(02-13-2012 02:42 PM)soup Wrote:  When it comes to matters of sex, love, relationships, etc., I believe women are like children and cannot be trusted to make their own decisions.

Which makes it appropriate for their guardians to police their relationships.

More generally, I've always been fascinated by how a woman can say, write an excellent research paper, and make fine use of logic and all. And, moments later, she will do things in her personal life that are just absolutely retarded, and totally counterproductive to accomplishing her stated aims, eg getting a good boyfriend. All those powers of logic and deduction vanish when it comes to her personal life.

Some guys might say that she doesn't actually want a good boyfriend, and sometimes that's true. Even when she truly does though, rarely will she actually analyze what she's doing, and see if it will produce the desired consequences. The only time she behaves soundly is when she has a wise group of women surrounding her giving her good advice, which is pretty rare nowadays.

Post: #20

I'm not gonna act like a professional but from my understanding psychopath = no human emotions which isn't true. Alphas will still feel sad and happy and angry at times. Now I also believe sociopath = no sympathy Sociopaths cant relate, on a real meaningful level, to someone else's pain, and I think that's more to the tune of what it takes to be a player. You have to look at the beta dude orbiting a girl and be completely capable of crushing his soul while also knowing you're going to use and toss aside the girl. You cant let all that bother you or you'll hesitate and stall yourself.

Chef In Jeans
A culinary website for men

Post: #21

(02-13-2012 02:25 PM)basilransom Wrote:  Consider two men who beat their wives. One beats her because he just has some impulse to, that's how he deals with stress, whatever. The other guy beats her because he knows it's what satisfies her and sustains the relationship. The second guy may be indifferent to it, or he even hates doing it, but he has found it necessary...

Some players are psychopaths because it's who they are, and it has made them successful with women. But others become one, because they've found it to be effective and even necessary, for maximum success with American women. You Did This To Me. The distinction between the two types may be hard to make, or even not worth making in the first place. When women reward callousness, players will be callous.

If someone's mad that players are psychopaths, they should be mad at the women for rewarding that behavior. These guys would be nowhere without women effectively consenting to it at every step. Otherwise, you're effectively saying that women are children and cannot be trusted to make their own decisions. And to be consistent with that, you'd have to question women's freedom to choose their mates, if not also their legal status as an adult, their suffrage, etc.

And I'm not saying players = wifebeaters.

You da man. As far as I can see its true. Even if your a psycho, just make sure you're a psycho for the right reasons.

Post: #22

I think people might be misunderstanding why psychopaths/sociopaths are the best players. Yes they are good with women but they are good at gaming EVERYONE.

A psychopath/sociopath has to learn how to put on a mask when interacting with any other human just for sheer survival. You can't out game a psychopath simply because he has been practicing his social manipulation skills since birth. Just imagine your entire life being a field report since there is no way you can relate to any other human being who has emotions.

Post: #23

Plenty of psycho/sociopaths don't do well with women at all. Some do. (BTK v. Ted Bundy)
Some women like bad boys, some of which are psycho/sociopaths
Plenty of players get chicks because they feel their emotions very well.
Other players draw chicks in with their own emotions.

Many if not most sociopaths do not realize that they are sociopaths. Something being wrong with them can't register in their minds.

Most importantly, as regular dudes, we can't "model" sociopaths and hope to gain their success. Some are born with the issue, others were abused early on.

WIA

Post: #24

But along the n-path dialogue, how much behavior of regular women could we classify as sociopathy?

Post: #25

(02-13-2012 02:59 PM)basilransom Wrote:  

(02-13-2012 02:42 PM)soup Wrote:  When it comes to matters of sex, love, relationships, etc., I believe women are like children and cannot be trusted to make their own decisions.

Which makes it appropriate for their guardians to police their relationships.

More generally, I've always been fascinated by how a woman can say, write an excellent research paper, and make fine use of logic and all. And, moments later, she will do things in her personal life that are just absolutely retarded, and totally counterproductive to accomplishing her stated aims, eg getting a good boyfriend. All those powers of logic and deduction vanish when it comes to her personal life.

Some guys might say that she doesn't actually want a good boyfriend, and sometimes that's true. Even when she truly does though, rarely will she actually analyze what she's doing, and see if it will produce the desired consequences. The only time she behaves soundly is when she has a wise group of women surrounding her giving her good advice, which is pretty rare nowadays.

Women are masters of compartmentalization. They can be 10 different people and flip between them on the fly as it suits their needs.

Men are much simpler. We're defined by our career usually and earn respect by displaying honor and loyalty to the group that we're a part of.

The only way a women can truly earn respect in this world is to be a wife and a mother and fulfill those duties as best she can. Anything short of that and nobody takes her seriously. Not even other women.