I don’t mind in the slightest, it‘s an interesting read.

Good

There’s nothing you’ve accused me of in this thread I had not already wondered about myself.

I think anyone who is reflective must do at some stage.

If I had to boil what you’ve said down to a sentence or two, it would read “yeah, tests in psychiatry are not without faults, but they work better than the media would have you believe, and we do try to keep improving upon them.”

Psychology, not Psychiatry. I’m not entirely opposed to Psychiatry but I do have certain reservations about a propensity thereof to favour medical/pharmacological interventions more frequently than the broader practice — although that’s not to say I favour Psychoanalysis any more (which, IMO, has a propensity to go too far the other way).

And, yes, that’s about the size of it, but if I had simply said that, it would’ve been glib and come across as dismissive, don’t you think? A bit “Don’t worry your pretty, little head about it — just trust the experts to know what’s best.”

I have taken the dark triad test floating online, both the 12 and 27 questions variants, probably not official ones tho. I consistently score low on those. That’s one of the reasons I really don’t mind if you keep insisting I’m a sociopath. I’ve already put my mind at ease on the topic.

Oh, you didn’t take any of my ‘accusations’ seriously, did you?

I made them as blatant as I could without shouting “J.O.K.E” from the rooftops!

What do you WANT … a skywriter!?

By the way, how does —

— and —

— reconcile in a coherent opinion?

You’re not turning trying to lawyer me, are you?

So they could exist, but honestly, they don’t. Not really. Kinda like how people have their recreational meth use under control, huh?

Yeah, I did look at that and think “Shit, I’d better clarify that” but I was getting tired by then and rather hoped you’d not notice.

I did say, however, “in the large”, not “never”.

In both instances I’m talking about it in the context of all the Cluster B disorders … (it’s hard not to, I’m afraid, you know what it’s like when you know a lot about something, impossible to give a simple answer, because there isn’t one) … and, whilst none of them are exactly benign (they wouldn’t be disorders, if they were) … and when you get to the extremes of them they’re all pretty much of a muchness to those on the receiving end of the behaviour … the differences are nevertheless not merely academic and, in the former instance I was questioning whether someone who is full of themself and domineering … not an ideal partner or parent, not someone you’d want as a boss (or even an ambitious colleague) … whilst, undoubtedly unpleasant, merits incarceration; whereas in the latter, I was pointing out that even the relatively benign narcissist is still an unpleasant individual and their behaviour has a negative impact upon those with whom they have contact (it’s just not as dangerous as what you can expect from someone with ASPD).

So, yes, it seems a bit contradictory on the surface, especially because I didn’t word it as clearly as I should have (I was getting fatigued by then, I’m afraid), but I hope I’ve clarified now that it isn’t actually — it’s just that the focus in each instance was different.

No. No, what I am saying is Yes, you’re right, I have a skill (regardless of natural talent) for getting inside people’s heads and I exercise it almost constantly, but I spent a lot of time and deliberate effort honing that skill.

I don’t really care you might find it alarming, but I’m not going to sit here and let you insinuate it came easily or by accident. It took work, damn it, and a bit of appreciation of said work would be nice.

And I quote …

“Thank you.”

“ Thank you :) I am very happy to read that.”

“ This sort of praise really gets me.”

And then there were the remarks about my having a talent for (albeit the backhanded variety) compliment (which I have worked hard on over the years, I’ll have you know).

Don’t come it with me, sweetheart … we both know I complimented you and you’re pleased as punch about it 😛

Moreover, we both know that you know I don’t find it alarming. Well, I at least don’t find it alarming as much as I do find it alarming anyway — although I’d be wary of (not) telling you too many secrets (you’d read too well between the lines either way around).

Yes, you have a skill, but, no, skill alone won’t get you where you are — you can learn to play an instrument and play someone’s composition note-perfect, but if you don’t have the soul for it, your performance will only ever be robotic no matter how skilled you are.

But, yes, talent will only get you so far and to master the skill you still have to put in the time and effort and you have clearly done that too — it’s just that the grace with which you do so … not altogether infrequently making it look effortless … gives away the fact that you do have a talent to start with.

There now … you got your catch — you can stop fishing for the day/night and take your haul home 😛

Eh. Before or after yelling “What the fuck are you doing in my house?”

Hahahahaha!!!

Excellent retort.

I really did LOL 😀

You keep writing me into these scenarios, Angel, and anytime I point it out you keep insisting I am the pervert.

I’m not the only one with buttons to push … nor are you the only one adept at finding and pushing them 😉

But since I am a pervert, I’d be much more likely to try to talk you into the situation than myself out of it.

There is that, yes … but you know there’s only one way you’re ever getting me into bed — and it doesn’t involve an ensemble cast of extras.

Really? After your restraint, sarcasm and relief I won’t keep going on…you hit me with this?

Yes … I’m flink and flexible and can switch, elegantly, from from one topic and tone to another with ease — I may be an essayist rather than a storyteller, but that doesn’t mean I am clodhoppingly inelegant about it. Do keep up.

And now I’m supposed to do a 50 words or less instead of 50 page explanation? When there’s over 350 hours of story telling leading up to it?

No, you just have to describe the tone of voice.

Reassuring. It was said in a reassuring voice. Because if the bad man tried to hurt the wizard again, the other 6 members of the adventuring party would make sure it was the last thing the bad man ever did. The moment just had more impact because it was the quasi-pacifist, who always searched for the non-violent solution first, who said it.

That means nothing.

It means you felt reassured by it, it doesn’t describe the tone.

I’m a quasi-pacifist, who always searches for the non-violent solution first. I have to be. It’s the only way I can justify gleefully resorting to the unrestrained use of excessive force afterwards.

Was it said angrily, passionately?

Or was it said deceptively calmly … with cold menace?

Or, even more frighteningly, with childlike gleeful anticipation?

These things matter, you know — especially to someone like me, who’s hoping it was the third (because it’s the most disturbed), would be nearly as happy with the second (because I have a disturbing propensity for coldly angry violence myself) but would still be happy with the the first (because I enjoy the effect raging has on people, because most aren’t subtle enough to notice calm menace and so rage is what it takes to worry them about what I might do next; especially when I go from zero to ultraviolent in less than a second, without any prior warning).

You’re talking about the threat of ultraviolence … I wanna know the details ¹.

—
¹ Okay … so … an argument might be made that there’s more than one kind of perversion — but I recommend you don’t make it ².

² Not if you know what’s good for you anyway — I don’t do safe words … I do “I warned you what would happen” object lessons.