The dark side of Aspergers: serial killers, sociopathy

Post Reply New Topic

Speculatively, I think that "codependence" (not a DSM diagnosis), as it is usually defined, is also a more-or-less opposite of autism. Perhaps it would be difficult for an autistic to be have either codependence or antisocial personality disorder.

The Codependency Test:

http://www.okcupid.com/tests/take?testi ... 9366070282

Personality Disorder Test:

http://similarminds.com/personality_disorder.html

I don't think the opposite of autism is a social thing, because autism is clearly a perceptual difference, not a social-specific difference. So the opposite of autism would be the opposite of that perceptual difference, whatever it was. Not the opposite of the rather tangential effects the perceptual difference has on interactions with non-autistic people.

I wondered that myself... Who would go into an autism support forum and post such a thing, complete with scary pictures of the killers' faces, etc?? Who would purposely go out of their way and try to antagonize an autistic person? and making fun of those who responded to the post... and try to minimize Einstein, a hero of the autistic community..

It was mentioned before in this thread that one of the signs of a serial killer was not only to torture animals, but may also be to torture autistic people...

Whoever this person is, they have an intense fascination with serial killers and some type of need to humiliate autistics..

OR... Maybe this person really is an autistic themselves and just wanted us to be aware of such studies going on and get our feedback??... BUT why post all the pictures AND make fun of almost all of the responses to his thread?? He made fun of my post and several others here.. I suspect this person is not an autistic, but the type of bullying sort that probably would be more prone to being a serial killer than anyone else here... Ha! weird, huh?

Last edited by MusicMaker1 on 24 Feb 2008, 2:11 am, edited 3 times in total.

Are you sure about this? In general, people with autism favor routines and obsessional interests because the unknown is too discomforting for them. Many psychopaths are described as having a superficial charm about them, but this is not the same as leadership ability or even charisma; their brand of charm is suited more for short-term fraud and exploitation than corralling the masses.

However, both the autisms and codependence (often defined as control and enablement) have social implications or "symptoms."

I don't see that any of the participants on this thread have stated the things that you implied were being said--much less all of the participants. It is possible that you have misinterpreted their words.



Oh, I didn't miss your points there. I also didn't miss the reply you made in that thread and then quickly deleted. It's clear that you have an agenda on this site, but so far you haven't presented any solid evidence to back up your position--and that's quite a heavy burden of proof on you, since that position of yours is contrary to that of the vast majority of today's experts in the field. So it's not that people aren't understanding your points. There's just little reason to reply to unfounded allegations.

If you're asking for evidence regarding my thoughts on your aims on this site, all anybody needs to do is search your post history. You began by implying that the site owner is a fake aspie, and you've continued to say that anybody who can hold a conversation must not be a real autistic, then went on to make a thread on the link between autism and killers (which by the way contradicts your last point, as sociopaths are generally good conversationalists). I'm curious what your motivation is.



Here's what happened:

People provided counterpoints and evidence against the position you presented in your opening post (which was not at all neutral). Rather than responding to those points, you responded by mocking your fellow posters and you used all-caps in parts, which is the internet equivalent of a voice raised in anger. If all you're trying to say is that you don't think there's any link at all between genius qualities and autism, then give us some evidence. You haven't yet.

Regarding staying on the topic of the thread: the majority of this thread has been firmly on-topic, but please be aware that brief off-topic discussion is part of the norm here on WP and is acceptable.

Asperger-Silva Syndrome, or ASS for short.

I definitely agree with this. Many sociopaths are extremely unhappy with their lifestyles, and their extreme difficulties in forming meaningful relationships (gee, that sounds familiar...)- because, obviously, not many people are going to want to my friends/romantically involved with a person to whom lying, cheating, and isolating themselves are second nature. Not to mention the fairly common theory that sociopath = killing.

What you say for the most part is true, i have met one AS person though who is good at playing mind games and I believe is a sociopath. She uses other people very easily through pathologically lieing; this is not a trait I would have ever expected of any AS person until I actually saw it myself. She's a really good bully. Although, in no way do I point this down to this being at all an AS trait, theres alot more to consider, the other people she hangs out with, upbringing, other conditions she might have (she's dyspraxic as well) etc.

Frankly, I don't see why a person on the spectrum couldn't have learned dependency issues. Young people with ASDs often have difficulty starting to live on their own (many continue to live at home and have no jobs to support themselves), and thus remain dependent on their parents in some significant ways. And, if the parent happened to be controlling and would not only take care of the autistic adult, but would also try and manipulate him (her) into something, the autistic person could be unable to stand up for himself (herself). This could be especially true for those people with ASDs who are very passive and have trouble initiating action on their own accord, and/or are extremely sensitive and would simply be unable to handle the emotional overload that comes with not complying.

Besides, for those ASD people who share extremely close, if not symbiotic, relationships with their mothers (or at least with one of their parents), it would be very difficult to emotionally separate themselves from their mother in case she were abusive and controlling. This could result in profound guilt at not being able to live up to her expectations and "upsetting" her, attempts to act so as to please her, etc. As far as I know, all this qualifies as dependency issues.

(Actually, I think Donna Williams has mentioned somewhere that learned dependency seems to be a common problem for people on the spectrum for these precise reasons)

Regarding the serial killer thing: it sounds pretty odd to me that whenever someone with a certain label does something atrocious, everyone else seems to jump to conclusions and projects this upon all the people who share the same label. Even if someone with an ASD diagnosis is or was a serial killer, it by no means implies that this is something common to all people on the spectrum. People on the spectrum can be moral or immoral; people outside it can also be moral or immoral; it's as simple as that.

Last edited by ixochiyo_yohuallan on 23 Feb 2008, 6:14 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Sounds to me like another misconception. A small minority is looked upon as the majority

of the rest. Most AS PT are not "Killers." You have to look at each case. Dahmer had alcohol

problems, and his mother has admited to drink while pregnant. The unibomber had to be

placed in isolation whae a small child ,for he was very sick.The Boston Strangler I cannot

explain except that he was angry with women.

The correct response to this was: Boy, he liked them so much, he had them for dinner on more than one occasion.

Sorry, just my own little brand of serial killer humour. I find the topic of serial killers fascinating, it's been one of my special interests for years. You'd think that would keep my ex a little more at bay, wouldn't you.

I don't think that AS or ASD's in general lend themselves to socio/psychopathic behaviour.

Some of the issues involved in actually killing people would be too much for most people on the spectrum to deal with. I.E. touching them, socialising enough with them to gain trust to get them close enough to touch, blood, cleaning up the blood....see, what I'm getting at? There are way too many sensory issues involved here.

Although, I can understand, how given our tendencies to be anti-social, etc, would lend a point to people trying to show that serial killers might be on the spectrum.

Dependency, yes. However, codependence, at least as it has generally been defined, is a bit different.



Maybe. However, I would like to see someone do an empirical study on it. I still suspect that, taking the usual pop psychology definition of codependency, aspies would less frequently be codependent than the general population.

I agree with you re: the serial killer subject.

Same on the flip side regarding all the persistent Einstein's a great Aspergers, look he was autistic, threads. The flip side--

Sounds to me like another misconception. A small minority OF GENIUS/EINSTEINS is looked upon as the majority of the rest. Most AS PT are not "GENIUS/EINSTEINS." You have to look at each case.

Last edited by frields on 23 Feb 2008, 10:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I have suspected that the reason why some aspies become "intellectuals" or give the appearance of being geniuses is due to positive and negative reinforcement. For instance, I was socially inept as a child and teen (less so now). However, I found that, when I discussed intellectual subjects, people payed attention to me, asked me questions, complimented me, etc. In retrospect, that played a significant role in my decision to become a college professor. Combined with my aspie tendency to be somewhat pedantic anyway, it was something I could do well.

I have a different kind of theory. I've wondered a couple of times about Martin Bryant and a couple of the school shootings in the US whether they had ASD and were bullied/abused alot growing up.

Firstly, I do not believe that there is a correlation between ASD and sociopaths. I think its an unfair correlation and that there can be killers from any group. It just seems that some people find it easier to blame those who have been labelled with some sort of conditions for the problems in society.

However, as a thought, if someone could not speak for themselves if they had ASD, it would be easy for them to be bullied and this could lead to someone being traumatised and becoming extremely angry and not feeling they have anywhere to go with this anger.

I have difficulties verbally and was pretty much the scapegoat in my family growing up. I could never stand up for myself. I would be sitting quietly and my mother would say accusingly 'there's something wrong with you' or 'you're abnormal' etc. She has always done this to me. And each time I find it difficult to reply back and I used to wonder if she was right and I was such an awful person. As I got older I realized it was her issue but I felt very angry for a long time, because she was taking advantage of my inability to fight back. My sisters would also say the same things to me because they learnt from my mother that it was ok.

I would never go out and kill anyone but I could have given my family members a big kick up the backside sometimes especially when the anger built up and had nowhere to go!

Anyway I use this example to say that perhaps if Martin Bryant etc had been verbally abused and/or physically abused etc and they found it difficult to get help etc that a combination of factors could have led them to doing the shootings. If they had ASD, they may have had less power to stand up to bullying.

To me it always struck me that a person either has to have been disempowered in a really abusive way to do these shootings or they were brought up in a violent environment that says it is ok. I think every case is different. I think the primary factor is being abused, exposed to violence or in some cases there may be a physiological reason for violence such as sociopaths who seem to have no history of abuse or exposure to violence.

(Oh, and of course, I'm not saying abuse does lead to violence. Alot of people have been abused and are not violent!)