Psychopaths are not emotionless they just have very shallow emotions, they can quickly fly into bouts of anger or tears and high are extremely short lived and superficial. They can also get weepy of something bad happens to them, they just wouldn’t shed a genuine tear for their misfortune of others. They are characterised by lack of empathy not lack of emotions.
Maybe this is the whole "empathy =/= sympathy" thing, but aren't you describing autists?
Autistic people can't put themselves in other people's shoes. Psychopaths can, and that's how they know how to get what they want. They just don't feel remorse as the one anon says (their actions will hurt someone, but they don't care).
>Psychopaths can
No, they can't. Most of them don't know how to get what they want and end up in prison. The smart ones just imitate whatever they see work.
I've known a diagnosed psychopath who wanted to hurt people, and he hurt animals as a child. He didn't do it because he knew he would get into trouble.
But I feel like he understood how hurting other people would affect them. The honest answer to "by hurting [___] you know you'd really cause them pain and distress, right?" would be "yes". The reason NOT to was to avoid getting into trouble for it. A lack of sympathy, not a lack of empathy.
Meanwhile autistic people genuinely struggle to understand how their actions might hurt someone, for example. But they're fairly typical when it comes to not wanting to cause pain or distress. So a lack of empathy, not a lack of sympathy.
But empathy is the capacity to understand another person's thoughts and feelings. Sympathy is caring about them.
He was diagnosed because he used to burn animals as a teenager, so it's like they caught it early. Grown man at work explaining this all neutrally, never felt the impression he was saying it for edgelord/shock value.
Yeah. Autistic people genuinely have hard time understanding that other might feel and think differently than them and have to usually learn really hard way. Psychopaths know other people think and feel differently, but are there just to serve them, I mean even tho 80iq psychopaths are able to use other people's kindness for their own gain. Of course both of these things require trial and error, autistic and psychopathic people too have life experiences where they more or less learn what works and what doesn't.
Both psychopaths and autists can lack empathy but it manifests very differently, autists struggle to pick up social cues where as psychopaths are adept at picking up social cues and mimicking them to manipulate others. So it’s not just lack of empathy. Psychopaths also have other extreme traits that autists do not share like narcissism, lack of remorse for misdeeds, hyper boredom, risk taking etc.
>Psychopaths also have other extreme traits that autists do not share like narcissism, lack of remorse for misdeeds, hyper boredom, risk taking etc.
*ahem*
Yeah, because the book and by extension the film are a satire of materialistic yuppies. Patrick Bateman is not an accurate psychopath, and he isn’t meant to be, he’s just a satirical and over exaggerated stock character
Psychopaths are not emotionless they just have very shallow emotions, they can quickly fly into bouts of anger or tears and high are extremely short lived and superficial. They can also get weepy of something bad happens to them, they just wouldn’t shed a genuine tear for their misfortune of others. They are characterised by lack of empathy not lack of emotions.
what's stopping us from tricking psychopaths by getting together and agreeing to tell all the psychopaths that if they help others and benefit mankind, they'll earn lots of money and power?
existence is suffering, we don't deserve or not deserve it, it just is. different religions tackle this in different ways, i have no idea what "nicer" atheists (e.g. humanists) do rather than be miserable or distract themselves.
but if you mean that anyone ought to go out of their way to INCREASE suffering, you're just a bully ;_;
>”hey, you’re not one of those people who manipulate and lie instinctively to get what other people just openly communicate for, right?” >”whew, good! I was worried, hey, I gotta tell you something.”
if you don't get that Bateman is clearly closeted (maybe not gay but definitely not straight) idk how to help you. Straight men don't describe clothing for pages and fly into rages because one of their friends is more handsome or dresses better.
The book was written by a gay man, so traits like that are likely just him accidentally injecting his own personality into the book. Although he did say Bateman was basically just him, so maybe you’re right.
Bateman is closeted/queer whatever. It's funny because he's gay the same way a lot of incels are. Dudes who obsess over their own appearance and the physiques of other men who hate women. I'm not saying they're all gay but something that isn't straight is going on under the surface.
I have wondered why the only characters who knew that Patrick was a real and distinct person was a woman and a homosexual
Was it the author's (homosexual) and the director's (female) inclination?
But they didn’t know Patrick was a real person. Because he wasn’t a real person. Both of them just were really attracted to the surface level of him being handsome, fit, stylish and wealthy
Literally go watch the scene where he’s with Jean in the apartment. He doesn’t answer a single personal question she asks. Just gives vague non answers
3 months ago
Anonymous
oh yeah the whole point is he comes off standoffish and dehumanizing. a psychopath, if you will.
maybe i misunderstood the post but i meant in the reverse. whatever your gender/orientation it sounds like you're just describing "attraction". gay guy vaguely knows him from work, finds him good-looking, makes a move in a restaurant. what's the problem? is there one?
Pseudointellectual teenagers arguing over the "technical definitions" of psychopathy and talking about how "dude sociopathy is different in this way bro" might be one of the single most embarrassing things that happen on the internet.
You do know it's 100% pseudoscience right? Like it's not based on anything, just people maybe seeing something in a clickbait article once and now it's a psychological fact.
no less interesting to hear people’s tales on it. They evolve and build; your puerile take seeks to just shut down and end the thread. Others are creating; you are out to destroy. You sociopathic psycho.
I think it's fair to say there are broad clusters of people being unusual, you can define and even pathologize those.
You can argue about what's cultural or soft science, and what even matters (left handers? homosexuals?). With psychopathy you're getting into measurable brain activity territory.
I'd get what you're saying if we were talking about something like ADHD. Psychopathy is the absence of a trait most/typical human beings have, like being born without legs.
>Pseudointellectual teenagers arguing over the "technical definitions" of psychopathy and talking about how "dude sociopathy is different in this way bro" might be one of the single most embarrassing things that happen on the internet.
Psychopath isn't even a modern psychiatric diagnosis. I don't think people fall into discreet categories(this is why people go around in circles on the internet), in reality people who are called "psychopaths" have very extreme personalities.
>Psychopath isn't even a modern psychiatric diagnosis. I don't think people fall into discreet categories(this is why people go around in circles on the internet), in reality people who are called "psychopaths" have very extreme personalities.
That's just because the label has been applied liberally and the meaning diluted terribly. Anyone can have 'psychopathic tendencies', ie. diminished empathy. Actual psychopaths have some kind of innate wiring problem in their brain, they just can't feel empathy at all, and cannot fathom the point of empathetic actions such as e.g. petting a dog.
It's like being blind, either you are blind or you have some vision. But lo! In modern medicine even the concept of blindness has been diluted; if someone on the street tells you they're blind, chances are they're only 'legally blind', which means they can still see a little bit.
Labeling any mental condition is a waste of time. It has beer once shown to assist the patient or their loved ones in tackling the destructive behavior. There is literally no fixing people who behave this way and categorizing it is only done to assist strangers in avoiding them.
That being said, one can have such a personality and still be helpful and maintain appropriate distance and transparency with others, making them more “inconveniently quirky” than dangerous. >person A lies habitually, ignores others personal boundaries, and sees nothing wrong with manipulating them into close relationships so they can exploit their weaknesses for their own benefit. >person B does all of the above but they make no attempts to deceive anyone with their behavior and make no attempts to keep them close when they decide they’re better off without person B.
It’s really a matter of accepting their own nature and it’s consequences.
Because Patrick Bateman isn't an emotionless psycho, he's very emotionally driven by his desire to fit in, to the point of contorting himself into a literal 24/7 corporate workplace persona NPC. His drive to kill comes from a desperate desire for emotional catharsis after being an inhuman NPC for so long but he's so deep into the persona he shares with everyone else around him no one even recognizes him as an individual.
They mistake him for Paul Allen, he can never be get the catharsis he desires from being caught because he completely and utterly lacks any sort of individuality, the man behind the mask is long gone, only corporate homosexual #99999 handing out his business cards and giving empty platitudes about the state of the world exists and not even a violent string of killings could make people recognize him as a distinct individual
No one understands this movie except me, check these digits
Yes but the thing is that the woman selling the house where bodies were and the lawyer at the end are covering for him because they don't care if he was guilty or not, but it would just cause more trouble and people other than Bateman could go down if there was a real investigation.
I think there's definitely an element of "he's too rich and high status for anyone to give a shit or go through the trouble" but it annoys me when that's peoples main take away because I think it's a very boring and obvious message for such an interesting story to have. I still think what Patrick Bateman is has more significance to him getting away with it than where he stands in society
What's the acceptable cut-off for nerdery for TRUE nerds?
In the 1960s if you were watching Star Trek on the television instead of reading Isaac Aasimov, were you a poser? Have 2000s-onwards nerds who mostly play video games seen every episode of TNG?
He is just unfeeling towards others except for bad feelings when they have something he wants to have (envy) or if they annoy or anger him otherwise. He can feel sorry for himself or fear punishment etc.
Patrician /film/ group
https://chat.whatsapp.com/FQVMkp9xzYpCat600gkbZC
>whatsapp
you stink of old age, grandpa.
What do kids use these days? Discord?
Discord is used by pedos to groom kids.
d*scord, slack, telegram
iMessage
Quill on parchment hand delivered by courier on horseback
Grindr
EPIC TROLL BRO
Why is Jim Carrey imitating the Wii theme soiboy?
icq
join up bud
>whatsapp group instead of telegram
Who the fuck would join this
Indian gentlemen sir
nice try glowie
The whole point of crying is to get attention from people around you. It's why children do it but adults don't, with a few exceptions.
...one such exception being psychopaths. They know how to manipulate people to get what they want.
Lol, thats why when I see someone crying I don't feel sorry for them, I know they are trying to manipulate me etc.
Its probably more that you are spiritually deaf and have no empathy.
No, crying is a tool used by psychopaths
You’re retarded.
Psychopaths aren't emotionless, they lack empathy.
More like they lack remorse specifically
Maybe this is the whole "empathy =/= sympathy" thing, but aren't you describing autists?
Autistic people can't put themselves in other people's shoes. Psychopaths can, and that's how they know how to get what they want. They just don't feel remorse as the one anon says (their actions will hurt someone, but they don't care).
>Psychopaths can
No, they can't. Most of them don't know how to get what they want and end up in prison. The smart ones just imitate whatever they see work.
Are you sure?
I've known a diagnosed psychopath who wanted to hurt people, and he hurt animals as a child. He didn't do it because he knew he would get into trouble.
But I feel like he understood how hurting other people would affect them. The honest answer to "by hurting [___] you know you'd really cause them pain and distress, right?" would be "yes". The reason NOT to was to avoid getting into trouble for it. A lack of sympathy, not a lack of empathy.
Meanwhile autistic people genuinely struggle to understand how their actions might hurt someone, for example. But they're fairly typical when it comes to not wanting to cause pain or distress. So a lack of empathy, not a lack of sympathy.
>He didn't do it because he knew he would get into trouble.
It means he did do it, and he did get in trouble. It's trial and error, not empathy.
But empathy is the capacity to understand another person's thoughts and feelings. Sympathy is caring about them.
He was diagnosed because he used to burn animals as a teenager, so it's like they caught it early. Grown man at work explaining this all neutrally, never felt the impression he was saying it for edgelord/shock value.
Yeah. Autistic people genuinely have hard time understanding that other might feel and think differently than them and have to usually learn really hard way. Psychopaths know other people think and feel differently, but are there just to serve them, I mean even tho 80iq psychopaths are able to use other people's kindness for their own gain. Of course both of these things require trial and error, autistic and psychopathic people too have life experiences where they more or less learn what works and what doesn't.
Empathy is the wrong word, this anon
is correct. Psychopaths can understand how other people work and think, they just don't feel bad about using them for their own gain.
Both psychopaths and autists can lack empathy but it manifests very differently, autists struggle to pick up social cues where as psychopaths are adept at picking up social cues and mimicking them to manipulate others. So it’s not just lack of empathy. Psychopaths also have other extreme traits that autists do not share like narcissism, lack of remorse for misdeeds, hyper boredom, risk taking etc.
>Psychopaths also have other extreme traits that autists do not share like narcissism, lack of remorse for misdeeds, hyper boredom, risk taking etc.
*ahem*
So Chris was just a psychopath with downsyndrome this whole time...
"psychopath" isn't an actual psychiatric term, so it can mean whatever you want.
I can fix him
In the book he cries all the time. If someone had a better outfit or stereo he would cry
Yeah, because the book and by extension the film are a satire of materialistic yuppies. Patrick Bateman is not an accurate psychopath, and he isn’t meant to be, he’s just a satirical and over exaggerated stock character
psychopathy is a spectrum disorder, the term itself is just a pop culture definition.
Literally me.
the whole point of the book/film is he’s just larping as a psychopathic killer
Brainlet
Psychopaths are not emotionless they just have very shallow emotions, they can quickly fly into bouts of anger or tears and high are extremely short lived and superficial. They can also get weepy of something bad happens to them, they just wouldn’t shed a genuine tear for their misfortune of others. They are characterised by lack of empathy not lack of emotions.
So austists are psychopaths?
Schizos aren't always moral.
>normies are moral
If moral comes from within then no, not really.
what's stopping us from tricking psychopaths by getting together and agreeing to tell all the psychopaths that if they help others and benefit mankind, they'll earn lots of money and power?
Helping people is gay and everyone deserves to suffer.
Without irony or edgyness, you're right
existence is suffering, we don't deserve or not deserve it, it just is. different religions tackle this in different ways, i have no idea what "nicer" atheists (e.g. humanists) do rather than be miserable or distract themselves.
but if you mean that anyone ought to go out of their way to INCREASE suffering, you're just a bully ;_;
Shut up, woman. You specifically deserve to have your face broken by a metal pipe.
>”hey, you’re not one of those people who manipulate and lie instinctively to get what other people just openly communicate for, right?”
>”whew, good! I was worried, hey, I gotta tell you something.”
Jesus tried. It worked for zero years.
They're usually not that stupid.
Why did he hesitate?
She genuinely cared for him, same with Carruthers
I thought Carruthers was more a disgust thing
if you don't get that Bateman is clearly closeted (maybe not gay but definitely not straight) idk how to help you. Straight men don't describe clothing for pages and fly into rages because one of their friends is more handsome or dresses better.
I do
The book was written by a gay man, so traits like that are likely just him accidentally injecting his own personality into the book. Although he did say Bateman was basically just him, so maybe you’re right.
Bateman is closeted/queer whatever. It's funny because he's gay the same way a lot of incels are. Dudes who obsess over their own appearance and the physiques of other men who hate women. I'm not saying they're all gay but something that isn't straight is going on under the surface.
his whole thing is killing people that disgust him like the homeless man, though. thats the one emotion he feels strongly
I have wondered why the only characters who knew that Patrick was a real and distinct person was a woman and a homosexual
Was it the author's (homosexual) and the director's (female) inclination?
But they didn’t know Patrick was a real person. Because he wasn’t a real person. Both of them just were really attracted to the surface level of him being handsome, fit, stylish and wealthy
what's NOT surface level?
personality? hobbies?
Literally go watch the scene where he’s with Jean in the apartment. He doesn’t answer a single personal question she asks. Just gives vague non answers
oh yeah the whole point is he comes off standoffish and dehumanizing. a psychopath, if you will.
maybe i misunderstood the post but i meant in the reverse. whatever your gender/orientation it sounds like you're just describing "attraction". gay guy vaguely knows him from work, finds him good-looking, makes a move in a restaurant. what's the problem? is there one?
am i a psychopath, bros?
Waiting for the compressor to stop running
>Why did he hesitate?
On some level he cared for her, all the other people he killed were either in his way, or were unimportant to him.
She was what he aspired to be
>inb4 troon
She was sincere.
Pseudointellectual teenagers arguing over the "technical definitions" of psychopathy and talking about how "dude sociopathy is different in this way bro" might be one of the single most embarrassing things that happen on the internet.
Fuck off I'm enjoying people's posts.
YOU pick a topic, then.
You do know it's 100% pseudoscience right? Like it's not based on anything, just people maybe seeing something in a clickbait article once and now it's a psychological fact.
Are you saying I don't enjoy watching people die?
no less interesting to hear people’s tales on it. They evolve and build; your puerile take seeks to just shut down and end the thread. Others are creating; you are out to destroy. You sociopathic psycho.
I think it's fair to say there are broad clusters of people being unusual, you can define and even pathologize those.
You can argue about what's cultural or soft science, and what even matters (left handers? homosexuals?). With psychopathy you're getting into measurable brain activity territory.
I'd get what you're saying if we were talking about something like ADHD. Psychopathy is the absence of a trait most/typical human beings have, like being born without legs.
Kincaid's Cave in popular media
>Pseudointellectual teenagers arguing over the "technical definitions" of psychopathy and talking about how "dude sociopathy is different in this way bro" might be one of the single most embarrassing things that happen on the internet.
Psychopath isn't even a modern psychiatric diagnosis. I don't think people fall into discreet categories(this is why people go around in circles on the internet), in reality people who are called "psychopaths" have very extreme personalities.
>Psychopath isn't even a modern psychiatric diagnosis. I don't think people fall into discreet categories(this is why people go around in circles on the internet), in reality people who are called "psychopaths" have very extreme personalities.
That's just because the label has been applied liberally and the meaning diluted terribly. Anyone can have 'psychopathic tendencies', ie. diminished empathy. Actual psychopaths have some kind of innate wiring problem in their brain, they just can't feel empathy at all, and cannot fathom the point of empathetic actions such as e.g. petting a dog.
It's like being blind, either you are blind or you have some vision. But lo! In modern medicine even the concept of blindness has been diluted; if someone on the street tells you they're blind, chances are they're only 'legally blind', which means they can still see a little bit.
Labeling any mental condition is a waste of time. It has beer once shown to assist the patient or their loved ones in tackling the destructive behavior. There is literally no fixing people who behave this way and categorizing it is only done to assist strangers in avoiding them.
That being said, one can have such a personality and still be helpful and maintain appropriate distance and transparency with others, making them more “inconveniently quirky” than dangerous.
>person A lies habitually, ignores others personal boundaries, and sees nothing wrong with manipulating them into close relationships so they can exploit their weaknesses for their own benefit.
>person B does all of the above but they make no attempts to deceive anyone with their behavior and make no attempts to keep them close when they decide they’re better off without person B.
It’s really a matter of accepting their own nature and it’s consequences.
I'm B and I want to kill myself
lol this guy gets embarrassed by things that other people do
what a fucking emotional cuckold
Maybe some anon already said it above, but psychopaths can cry.
Because Patrick Bateman isn't an emotionless psycho, he's very emotionally driven by his desire to fit in, to the point of contorting himself into a literal 24/7 corporate workplace persona NPC. His drive to kill comes from a desperate desire for emotional catharsis after being an inhuman NPC for so long but he's so deep into the persona he shares with everyone else around him no one even recognizes him as an individual.
They mistake him for Paul Allen, he can never be get the catharsis he desires from being caught because he completely and utterly lacks any sort of individuality, the man behind the mask is long gone, only corporate homosexual #99999 handing out his business cards and giving empty platitudes about the state of the world exists and not even a violent string of killings could make people recognize him as a distinct individual
No one understands this movie except me, check these digits
>he can never be get the catharsis he desires
He can never get the catharsis he desires*
I guess I had a stroke but god willed it to be because I was saving the digits for this correction
>They mistake him for Paul Allen
He's mistaken for Marcus Halberstram
Yes but the thing is that the woman selling the house where bodies were and the lawyer at the end are covering for him because they don't care if he was guilty or not, but it would just cause more trouble and people other than Bateman could go down if there was a real investigation.
I think there's definitely an element of "he's too rich and high status for anyone to give a shit or go through the trouble" but it annoys me when that's peoples main take away because I think it's a very boring and obvious message for such an interesting story to have. I still think what Patrick Bateman is has more significance to him getting away with it than where he stands in society
>emotionless
that's a meme like The Dude being calm
>I'm like, totally, a psychopath. I don't even really care about my husband I'm just like so psycho, right guys?
Terrible episode
It's cool to be mentally ill now
>my personality? I hate le females ew!
>my personality? I am le whiteknight simp on the internets :DDDD
What's the acceptable cut-off for nerdery for TRUE nerds?
In the 1960s if you were watching Star Trek on the television instead of reading Isaac Aasimov, were you a poser? Have 2000s-onwards nerds who mostly play video games seen every episode of TNG?
finally a non-retarded tweet
>here is that sigma stoic grind male I was telling you about
He is just unfeeling towards others except for bad feelings when they have something he wants to have (envy) or if they annoy or anger him otherwise. He can feel sorry for himself or fear punishment etc.
Suffering makes everybody cry.
You can cry from mental breakdown.
Still manly.
Cry because watching movies/videogames = homosexual.
Cry because life = tr00n