Claudia Moscovici
Coping Mechanisms for Staying with a Psychopath
In the hit song Fifty ways to leave your lover, Paul Simon gives a man advice about how to break up with his lover. His advice would serve well any person who becomes intimately involved with a psychopath. There are at least fifty thousand great reasons to leave a psychopathic partner and not one good reason to stay with him.
Once you confront this basic truth, you run away from the psychopath in the opposite direction without ever looking back. In fact, if psychopaths generally have short-lived relationships, it’s not just because they get bored with their partners and leave them. As we’ve seen, such men tend to save women as back-ups to their back-ups. By their logic, the more the merrier. But after the psychopaths’ mask of sanity comes off, many of the women they’re involved with can’t stand the persons they see underneath. Psychopaths are often surprised by the degree of ice-cold contempt many of their former partners experience towards them. They can’t believe that their cheating, lying and malicious manipulations could ever lead those women to reject them utterly and completely, for the rest of their lives. One explanation for their surprise is, of course, that psychopaths lack empathy. Yet this reason is a kind of psychological shorthand and not entirely accurate. As sadists, psychopaths certainly do experience a perverse form of empathy. This twisted emotion enables them to sense and relish the pain they cause others. But their capacity to envision other people’s suffering is limited by the shallowness of their own feelings.
In other words, psychopaths can’t fully imagine how deeply they’ve hurt others. They therefore can’t understand how complete and irreversible those individuals’ rejection of them can be. Nor do they care. To return to my initial point, the natural response of most women involved with a psychopath once his thin layer of charm peels off is to not only leave that lover, but also to feel only disgust and contempt for his behavior, for him and for every shred of memory of him. Everything about the relationship—including the seemingly good moments—becomes irreversibly tainted once you see the real psychopath. What’s far more intriguing and puzzling, at least from a psychological point of view, is why some women choose to remain with a psychopathic partner even after his mask of sanity falls off and his real identity is revealed. Dating a psychopath briefly may be the product of chance or bad luck. But staying with him, I’m convinced, is the result of a long series of self-defeating choices. As we’ve seen, psychopaths test the limits of their partners’ patience, love, loyalty and capacity to tolerate mistreatment. In this chapter, I’ll explore the issue of why some women choose to stay with psychopaths from the perspective of narcissism, which lies at the core of the psychopathic bond.
In his book Malignant Self-Love: Narcissism Revisited, Samuel Vaknin explores in depth the malignant narcissist/psychopath side of the equation. He states that a malignant narcissist “is never whole without an adoring, submissive, available, self-denigrating partner. His very sense of superiority, indeed his False Self, depends on it.” The main difference between a narcissist and a psychopath, I would add, is that the narcissist experiences fundamental insecurities that trigger his demand for constant validation. Consequently, he’s more likely to be transparent in his egocentricity. He also usually lacks the psychopath’s glibness and charm. A narcissist seeks praise from others so desperately that he’s not likely to mask his disorder. He often appears pompous and even ridiculous to others. A psychopath, on the other hand, isn’t needy. Although he also requires others to agree with his self-assessment as smarter, hotter, cooler and more interesting than others, unlike the narcissist, if they disagree or criticize him, he’s not hurt at all. As we’ve seen, psychopaths are too emotionally shallow to experience genuine self-doubt. Their egos enable them to absorb praise and to deflect criticism, as if protected by a natural shield. In other words, for psychopaths, everything feeds and nothing disturbs their view of themselves as superior to others.
Vaknin goes on to describe the other half of the equation. He focuses on the kind of woman who stays with a psychopathic or narcissistic partner: “First and foremost, the narcissist’s partner must have a deficient grasp of her self and of reality. Otherwise, she (or he) is bound to abandon the narcissist’s ship after the honeymoon phase is over. The cognitive distortion is likely to consist of belittling and demeaning herself—while aggrandizing and adoring the narcissist.” Vaknin characterizes their complementary relationship in terms of the polarity of sadism (on the part of the psychopath or malignant narcissist) and masochism (on the part of his adoring partner): “The partner is, thus, placing herself in the position of the eternal victim: undeserving, punishable, a scapegoat.” The author acknowledges, however, that the “masochistic” partner’s position isn’t always self-denigrating:
Sometimes, it is very important to the partner to appear moral, sacrificial and victimized. At other times, she is not even aware of this predicament. The narcissist is perceived by the partner to be a person in the position to demand these sacrifices from her partner, being superior in many ways. . . The status of professional victim [or martyr] sits well with the partner’s tendency to punish herself, namely: with her masochistic streak.
I’d like to pause here for a moment. In reading the rest of Vaknin’s book, I’m left feeling like the rewards for the so-called “masochistic” partner are being glossed over. The author suggests that any woman who stays with a malignant narcissist or with a psychopath lacks self-confidence. But the research on women who love psychopaths indicates that this is not necessarily the case. From the external perspective of an observer looking in on the relationship between a psychopath and his partner, she may appear to be weak or masochistic. Otherwise why would any woman willingly choose to stay with a man who routinely mistreats her and who’s incapable of reciprocating anyone’s love? Yet from an internal perspective, meaning from her own point of view and experience, the psychopathic bond appears more rewarding and complex. As we’ve seen, such a woman, who truly believes that her psychopathic partner is superior to other men and that therefore their relationship itself is extraordinary, also feels superior to others by association with him. Thus staying with a psychopath is not just a matter of being masochistic or of having an inferiority complex, though such tendencies may exist. It also involves having a superiority complex.
Now I’d like to take one of Vaknin’s comments a step further. The author states that the women who stay with narcissists and psychopaths play the role of “professional victim” because they wish to redeem the psychopath at all cost. I’d argue, however, that such a martyr complex implies a sense of one’s own moral strength and superiority. Women who cling to psychopathic or narcissistic men know enough about their partners’ misdeeds and deficiencies to feel superior to them and to wish to reform them. A huge incentive—and constant challenge—for women who stay with dangerous men is the struggle to “save” them. Masochism and having an inferiority complex have little to do with this aspect of the psychopathic bond. On the contrary, being with a psychopath can make a woman who does have a moral compass feel needed and, in some respects, better than her dysfunctional partner. While the psychopath may have excessive self-confidence, he’s emotionally and morally immature. His partner may believe that he needs to “grow up” by following her example and learning how to love. Thus, in some respects, the women who stay with psychopaths adopt a maternal attitude towards their comparatively childish partners. So if one wishes to apply Freudian categories, the Electra complex fits their relationship better than the masochism-sadism duality.
I’d like to dwell on the superiority complex, since I believe it explains best the tenacity of women who stay with psychopaths. Such women tend to feel superior not only to the morally deficient psychopath, but also to other women: especially to those who left or were left by the psychopath. I’ve mentioned earlier that the psychopath’s inflated view of himself rubs off on his partner. She comes to believe that she’s in a superior, unique and special partnership with him. Furthermore, if she’s the only woman who’s capable of having a long-term relationship with him (because the other women left him or because he left them), she may also feel like that she’s privileged in his eyes. Consequently, she justifies her misguided tenacity in positive terms. She assumes that other women lacked the qualities necessary to retain the psychopath’s long-term “commitment” or the patience to guide him towards moral and emotional growth. She thus convinces herself that she’s far more devoted and other-regarding than them. In her own mind, staying with a psychopath in spite of all the difficulties he causes in their relationship reveals her strength of character.
Brown draws the same conclusion from the research on women who love psychopaths. She notes that persistent and strong-minded women, rather than weak and unconfident ones, refuse to give up the fight against their partner’s personality disorder. This only works in the psychopath’s favor. Brown states, “Her high relationship investment in a situation like this can do nothing but benefit the psychopath, while his low relationship investment has disaster written all over it for her” (Women Who Love Psychopaths, 120). Out of love and tenacity, they foreground all the positive aspects of the relationship. They relegate the negative aspects, as much as possible, to the background. By saying that the women who stay with a psychopath consider themselves in some respects superior to their deficient partner, I’m not suggesting that the relationship itself doesn’t remain fundamentally hierarchical, tipped in his favor. Of course it does. Being narcissistic and control driven, psychopaths dictate the parameters of their relationships. But abiding by a given hierarchy, however unfair it may be, doesn’t have to imply weakness or low self-esteem. That would mean that all women who participate in cults, where the cult leader is clearly at the top of the totem pole, or women who accept gender hierarchies in more traditional cultures, are necessarily passive, masochistic or submissive. They aren’t. Anthropological studies have shown that such women often regard themselves as strong, feminine and ethical individuals. They also consider themselves superior to women who don’t observe the same cultural norms and complimentary and necessary to the men who govern their lives.
Yet one’s still tempted to ask, how can any confident, rational and sane woman ever believe that black is white? How can she possibly interpret the psychopath’s negative behavior in a positive manner? She can, indeed, if she herself feels superior to others by association with her psychopathic partner, whom she considers so special. In other words, she can if she herself gains some kind of validation from the relationship. As we recall, psychopaths depict not just their own selves as superior, but also the romantic relationship with them as unique and special. They inculcate in their partners an “us versus them” mentality.
Just as they justify their negative behavior (the cheating, lying, etc.) in positive terms, they also justify your deviant behavior as a couple in positive ways as well. If they foster your pathological dependency and distrust so that you follow them around like a puppy, they explain it as a form of extraordinary intimacy. Other couples don’t spend as much time together because they’re not as close, not because they have more autonomy as individuals and more warranted trust in each other. If they demand that you have sex in public or in perverted ways, they argue that normal couples don’t engage in such activities because they’re less sensual and less attracted to each other, not because most other couples’ sexual behavior is not dictated by the perverse desires of a psychopath. When you’re deeply immersed in the psychopathic bond, especially one that lasts for several years, your partner’s self-aggrandizement and his narcissistic justifications for his behavior tend to rub off on you. You get some validation, and thus begin to feel superior yourself, by being involved with such an “extraordinary” man and by participating in such a “unique and special” relationship, which normal people can’t even imagine, much less experience.
At this point in my explanation, however, all the negative reasons come into play as well. Because how can a strong and sane woman continue to find the positive image established by the psychopath plausible over time, when there’s so much overwhelming evidence to the contrary? The false image of the psychopath as an extraordinary man and partner, rather than the subhuman person he is and the pathological relationship he establishes with you, sticks only if he’s isolated you from others and undermined your moral boundaries and identity. If you need his praise to feel good about yourself; if you need his company to feel complete; if you need to remain his partner to feel adequate in the eyes of others, then it will be very difficult to detach yourself from the psychopath no matter how much he mistreats you.
The psychological and emotional chains of dependency can be stronger than physical chains. They’re internal to how you define yourself and to who you have become. In that case, it may take years of further abuse by the psychopath, or even being left by him, to confront the harsh and, in many ways, obvious reality: that any man who repeatedly cheats on you; who lies with great ease and no compunction whatsoever; who hurts both you and others; who deceives and manipulates all those who love and trust him and who undermines your efforts to become a stronger individual, can’t possibly be better than other men, uplift you or build with you a fulfilling relationship. Such a man can only bring you down. Whatever validation you might have gotten from staying with a psychopathic partner was hollow, tenuous and short-lived. What’s more, you’ve probably paid for each good moment, loving word and compliment from him with years of humiliation, betrayal and abuse. If you’re one of the women who chooses to stay with a disordered partner even once his true self has been revealed to you, just remember that everything good about that man is pure illusion and, by extension, so is everything positive about your relationship with him: past, present and future.
In life, you can apply your strength to worthy objectives or to futile ones. Fixing a psychopath and your relationship with him constitutes a self-defeating goal. So why do so many strong women continue to bang their heads against the wall of this personality disorder? I’d like to outline below some of the coping mechanisms that enable such women to accept the fiction that a psychopath can grow to love them and that the problems in their relationship can be improved:
1. Denial. The most common defense against any unpleasant reality is denial. Each time you have a suspicion that your partner is being unfaithful or lies to you, you push it towards the back of your mind. It often resurfaces in the form of anxiety, insecurity, depression, neuroses, insomnia or bad dreams. When your partner offers you implausible excuses for his lateness or absences, you accept them because you want to believe him. When others try to tell you about his misdeeds, you refuse to listen to them. To deflect blame away from him, you focus on their flaws rather than his. When you read about psychopathy, you push that information aside. Nobody can really understand the depth of your relationship with him. You keep on believing that because you’re so special, moral, patient and kind and, above all, because you love him, you can be the exception that confirms the rule. You consider yourself to be the only person who truly understands him and who can “save” or reform him.
2. Isolation. If your narcissistic or psychopathic partner has succeeded in isolating you from others, you miss out on getting external points of view. You’re also cut off from potential confidants who might be able to offer a more realistic perspective on your relationship with him and genuine emotional support.
3. Superiority Complex/Narcissistic Tendencies. I’ve covered this point previously. In some respects, you feel superior to other women in his eyes and in your own as well. If other women left the psychopath, it’s because they were less moral, less kind, less generous, less forgiving, less everything than you. You believe that your unwavering loyalty to him reflects your exceptional qualities. Others can’t appreciate just how special you, he and your relationship really are.
4. Doublethink. George Orwell coined this term to describe how people cope with mind control in totalitarian societies. They’re brainwashed to believe that black is white. But they still know in the back of their minds that white is white and black is black. This concept also sheds light upon the dualistic and contradictory mindset of individuals who survive in cults or in intimate relationships with psychopaths and malignant narcissists.
As Sandra L. Brown, M.A documents, many of the women who choose to stay with psychopaths are far from naive. They know in the back of their minds that their partners are cheating and lying to them. They know in the back of their minds that their partners lack a moral compass. They know in the back of their minds that one can’t blame only other women for the endless string of affairs. They recognize when their partners’ lies and excuses sound so implausible that they’re utterly ridiculous. But they survive in the relationship with the psychopath through a kind of doublethink. They believe two mutually exclusive sets of assumptions. On the one hand, they think that their partner is great, honest, loving, faithful, devoted and in many respects the ideal man. On the other hand, they also realize that he’s a lying, conniving, cheating Loser who can’t love anybody and who can’t be trusted at all. In any logarithm, one couldn’t possibly accept both sets of premises. But the human mind is far more complex than any logical framework. Emotions, hopes, fantasies, defense mechanisms and desires enrich our mental landscape. They also enable us to reconcile incompatible assumptions and thus, in this case, to cope with dangerous men and to adapt to pathological relationships.
At the risk of sounding too rational, however, I’ll say that lucidity about who you are, who he is, what your relationship is and, more generally, educating yourself about personality disorders offers a far better self-defense than the coping mechanisms I’ve described above. These trap you in a series of double-binds: between masochistic and sadistic tendencies; between inferiority and superiority complexes; between contradictory assumptions (or forms of doublethink); in denial strategies that reject reality, which nonetheless resurfaces through negative psychological and physical symptoms, such as depression, insomnia, anxiety or various neuroses. However difficult it may be to confront the truth about the psychopath, and however resilient you may wish to be, giving up on a hopeless relationship is not the same thing as accepting defeat. In fact, the real defeat consists of wasting your entire life with an irredeemably bad human being who will never give you anything positive in return for your irreversible sacrifice. After all, you only have one life to live. How will you choose to live it?
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
