A primer on the Cluster B disorders - Clarifying the distinctions

[JohnnyG]

Usually being arrested because they think traffic laws dont apply to them as a sovereign citizen or making videos about being a targeted individual.

I know it's overly simplistic, but I remember it as: Cluster A are the actual schizos, Cluster B are the noisy/dramatic/obnoxious women, and Cluster C are the abuse victims.

Or as someone half-jokingly explained it: "Cluster A is afraid they'll get popped in the mouth, Cluster B deserves to get popped in the mouth, and Cluster C has actually been popped in the mouth."

Too few days left on this planet to be dealing with a nuclear bomb going off in my personal life because I didnt respond to a text fast so their abandonment feelings are triggered.

 

[74164978231]

Or as someone once (half-jokingly) explained it: "Cluster A is afraid they'll get popped in the mouth, Cluster B deserves to get popped in the mouth, and Cluster C has actually been popped in the mouth."

Sounds about right.

Fucking a the feels. My favorite was them jerking the steering wheel while driving down doing 40mph, could have actually died there. Not like the time they screamed about jumping off the grand canyon, at the grand canyon with people all around. That was just manipulative.

 

[Susanna]

Interesting that ASPDs abuse substances so regularly they are at least 10 times more likely to be diagnosed as addicts than personality disordered. Under the radar and easily written off as criminals and addicts.

It’s the boredom thing I’ve mentioned. With a low base arousal you will feel desperately bored, and drugs are an easy and reliable way to address that. I use stimulants myself, but you need to be very careful because it’s probably even easier for us to get addicted than it is for neurotypical people.

Why would someone familiar with this and possessing self-awareness allow herself to score that high? What self-interested reason would there be to give honest answers, especially with an inheritance at stake, instead of aiming for a score that says "a few impulsive tendencies but overall well-balanced"?

It’s not a matter of ”why did you answer honestly, you idiot!”, they’re actual interrogations, each takes hours, and they don’t just take your word on anything because they already know you’re a good liar. Your parents have already answered for you and if there’s too big a discrepancy between how you frame something and how it was already framed, you end up looking worse. I did my best.

So the Dexter scenario (not just the "hunt other serial killers as an outlet" part, but the acting normal and treating others well parts too). I wonder to what degree you could convince a high-functioning psychopath that pro-social behaviours, at least most of the time, are actually in his interest.

A high-functioning psychopath will likely reach that conclusion on his own. I’d argue the ability to reach that conclusion, and to make good on it, is part of the definition of being high-functioning in the first place.

E.g. "You shouldn't go around lying and taking advantage of people constantly for short term gain, because they'll notice and shun you. Better to follow the Golden Rule, and focus on one big con, or just be legitimately good at your career and ultimately benefit more." That old joke about scamming someone into hiring you, continuing to scam them every day by doing solid work to scam promotions, then eventually retiring with a huge retirement account and pension...

Yeah, exactly. Life’s easier when you’re well-liked, and the easiest way to get liked is to be likable.

 

[Bothriolepis]

I never knew there was a kind of narc that knows they suck but crave validation anyway like a leech.

There are also narcs who know that they're terrible people, and think that's  why they're better than everyone else. Malignant Narcissism involves traits of Sadistic Personality Disorder, a condition that was removed from the DSM in part because of the risk that some lawyer might convince a jury to accept it as a mitigating factor in depraved acts of violence. MNs are pretty rare, but have disproportionate impacts on society at large, especially when they're able to gain some degree of power.

The only lolcow I can easily think of who would fall into that category is Bradley Cadenhead, the founder of the Telegram extortion group 764. He and his initially small circle of compatriots consciously tried to portray themselves as evil, adopting the aesthetic of an apocalyptic cult of Theistic Satanist Neo-Nazis called the Order of 9 Angles. Whether most of them actually believed their own bullshit or not, they groomed hundreds of minors into producing CSAM of themselves, then used that to blackmail them into an escalating series of degrading and horrific acts for clout rather than material gain. Cutting Cadenhead's username into their arms was on the low end of severity. Some were compelled to kill their pets, commit acts of abuse against younger relatives, or meet group members in person to be raped. The end goal was, at least theoretically, for the abuse to end in suicide. There's really not much humor to be found with Malignant Narccisists. It's kind of funny that Cadenhead looked like an obese ginger Muppet, I guess, and that he got pulled from public school by his parents because he was being severely bullied for being such an incredible loser. Other than that, there's a reason why a professional psychoanalyst once described the condition as "the quintessence of evil".