Claudia Moscovici 
Specific Loss of Insight
If psychopaths appear to be cardboard figures compared to normal human beings, it’s because they not only lack the full range of human emotions, but also the awareness that they’re in any way deficient. Cleckley observes, “In a special sense the psychopath lacks insight to a degree seldom, if ever, found in any but the most seriously disturbed psychotic patients” (351). They fail to see anything wrong with what they do to harm others: unless of course someone else is doing it to them. Cleckley adds that a psychopath “has absolutely no capacity to see himself as others see him. It is perhaps more accurate to say that he has no ability to know how others feel when they see him or to experience subjectively anything comparable about the situation. All of the values, all of the major affect concerning his status, are unappreciated by him” (351). Although he’s incapable of deeper reflection and genuine emotion, simulated feelings come very naturally to a psychopath. In fact, he expresses fake emotions much more readily than normal people express genuine feelings.
Although a psychopath can mimic emotions, he’s inconsistent in that capacity since the feelings themselves aren’t real. If you pay closer attention, red flags appear in any relationship with a psychopath. For instance, he’ll sometimes laugh when you’re in pain. Or he’ll dismiss your distress. Or, as Neil Entwistle in court, his attempts to simulate deeper human emotions, such as sorrow, will look phony. Cleckley explains that such glitches occur because the psychopath can’t really grasp the emotions he acts out. “Perhaps it was less a voluntary deception than a simulation in which the simulator himself fails to realize his lack of emotional grasp or that he is simulating or what he is simulating… His clever statements have been hardly more than verbal reflexes; even his facial expressions are without the underlying content they imply. This is not insight but an excellent mimicry of insight. No sincere intention can spring from his conclusions because no affective conviction is there to move him” (352).
Unresponsiveness in General Interpersonal Relations
What seems very puzzling to most people about charismatic psychopaths is that they generally target the persons closest to them. That’s whom they choose to hurt, betray and sometimes even murder. As we’ve seen in the cases of Mark Hacking and Neil Entwistle, they prey upon the women who trust and love them and on the children who depend upon them. Psychopaths lack any sense of reciprocity. The notion that if someone treats you well you should also treat them well is completely lost on them. On the contrary, they view decent behavior as a symptom of gullibility, weakness or stupidity, the qualities of an optimal target for their ruses. Cleckley elaborates:
The psychopath cannot be depended upon to show the ordinary responsiveness to special consideration or kindness or trust. No matter how well he is treated, no matter how long-suffering his family, his friends, the police, hospital attendants, and others may be, he shows no consistent reaction of appreciation except superficial and transparent protestations. Such gestures are exhibited most frequently when he feels they will facilitate some personal aim. The ordinary axiom of human existence that one good turn deserves another, a principle sometimes honored by cannibals and uncommonly callous assassins, has only superficial validity for him although he can cite it with eloquent casuistry when trying to obtain parole, discharge from the hospital, or some other end (355).
Yet at the same time, a psychopath can appear to be very generous. For instance, he may volunteer his time and money to worthwhile causes. He may help out a neighbor in need. He may attend church regularly. Such actions, however, don’t reveal any genuine kindness. They only help bolster the psychopath’s façade, to give others the illusion that he’s a good person. Moreover, even in the rare instances when these generous impulses are genuine and without ulterior motive, they’re too shallow and fleeting to add up to anything worth counting on. In other words, a psychopath can be generous when his investment remains low. But he can’t put his partner or anybody else first when it comes to anything that really matters, such as trust, fidelity, mutual respect, raising children or leading a stable and fulfilling life together. If a psychopath has to choose between the welfare of his marriage and his impulse to screw his wife’s best friend, needless to say, he’ll chose the latter. Worse yet, he’ll draw extra pleasure from the fact that the affair was with his wife’s good friend, not a total stranger. As Cleckley observes:
In relatively small matters psychopaths sometimes behave so as to appear very considerate, responsive, and obliging. Acquaintances who meet them on grounds where minor issues prevail may find it difficult to believe that they are not highly endowed with gratitude and eager to serve others. Such reactions and intentions, although sometimes ready or even spectacularly facile, do not ever accumulate sufficient force to play a determining part in really important issues” (355).
If keeping up his mask of niceness takes minimal effort, a psychopath may do it. But he won’t be able to be other-regarding in any respect that truly matters to those closest to him and improves the quality of their lives. Which is why Cleckley concludes that even when a psychopath appears to be a decent and loving human being, it’s always an act that will be consistently belied by his selfish attitude and harmful actions.
Sex Life Impersonal, Trivial, and Poorly Integrated
Cleckley observes that “In contrast with others, the psychopath requires impulses of scarcely more than whim like intensity to bring about unacceptable behavior in the sexual field or in any other” (361). Psychopaths engage in promiscuous sex to gain power over others, feel pleasure, transgress social boundaries and divert themselves. Sometimes, however, they also seek longer-term entertainment with individuals whom they can seduce. While psychopaths tend to be exceptionally good at faking and provoking romantic love, they’re incapable of actually feeling it. Cleckley elaborates:
The male psychopath, despite his usual ability to complete the physical act successfully with a woman, never seems to find anything meaningful or personal in his relations or to enjoy significant pleasure beyond the localized and temporary sensations… What is felt for prostitute, sweetheart, casual pickup, girlfriend, or wife is not anything that can bring out loyalty or influence activities into a remedial or constructive plan. The familiar record of sexual promiscuity found in both male and female psychopaths seems much more closely related to their almost total lack of self-imposed restraint than to any particularly strong passions or drives (364).
If psychopaths are particularly dangerous sexual partners, it’s not just because they’re so promiscuous that they’re likely to transmit venereal diseases. More ominously, their quest for power and lack of empathy makes them very likely candidates for rape, pedophilia, incest, sadism and sometimes even murder. Generally speaking, the more transgressive and perverted an act is, the more it excites them. Cleckley explains:
Entanglements which go out of their way to mock ordinary human sensibility or what might be called basic decency are prevalent in their sexual careers. To casually ‘make’ or ‘lay’ the best friend’s wife and to involve a husband’s uncle or one of his business associates in a particularly messy triangular or quadrilateral situation are typical acts. Such opportunities, when available, seem not to repel but specifically to attract the psychopath (364).
Since sex is so central to a psychopath’s life, as well as a key weapon he uses to hurt others, I’ll devote the next chapter to the subject of psychopaths as lovers.
Dangerous Liaisons/Legături Periculoase, Editura Vremea, http://www.edituravremea.ro/leg–turi-periculoase–cum-s–recuno–ti-un-psihopat–i-s–scapi-din-mrejele-lui
