UPDATE

AS OF JANUARY 1, 2013 - POSTING ON THIS BLOG WILL NO LONGER BE 'DAILY'. SWITCHING TO 'OCCASIONAL' POSTING.

Thursday, November 13, 2014

Why Can't I Let Go of the Cyberpath?

Many of our victims report a complete lack of understanding from therapists, friends & family why they just can't "get over it." These people are re-abusing the victim because they do not understand (or do not want to understand) the effect a Cyberpath (pathological) has on their victims.

Victims are bonded by fear. Fear of finding out the truth AND fear of losing him. This is called Trauma Bonding. (also, look for information on "Stockholm Syndrome")

Dr. Patrick Carne's book THE BETRAYAL BOND - does a fantastic job of explaining this. This might be the very thing that therapists, friends & family refuse to get. But victims vitally need to understand. - EOPC 


letting go Pictures, Images and Photos


"Exploitive relationships can create trauma bonds -- chains that link a victim to someone who is dangerous to them. Divorce, employee relations, litigation of any type, abuse, family and marital systems, domestic violence, kidnapping, exploitation and religious/ verbal/ emotional abuse are all areas of trauma bonding. All these relationships share one thing: they are situations of incredible intensity or importance where there is an exploitation of trust or power."
- Dr. Patrick Carnes

selected excerpts:

by Dr. Patrick Carnes

About Trauma Bonding:
These people are all struggling with traumatic bonds. Those standing outside see the obvious. All these relationships are about some insane loyalty or attachment. They share exploitation, fear, and danger. They also have elements of kindness, nobility and righteousness. These are all people who stay involved or wish to stay involved with people who betray them. Emotional pain, severe consequences and even the prospect of death do not stop their caring or commitment.

Clinicians call this “traumatic bonding.” This means that the victims have a certain dysfunctional attachment that occurs in the presence of danger, shame, or exploitation. There often is seduction, deception or betrayal. There is always some form of danger or risk.


Some relationships are traumatic. Take, for example, the conflictual ties in movies like The War of the Roses or Fatal Attraction. What Lucy does to Charlie Brown (in the comic strip, Peanuts) every year when she holds the football for him to kick is a betrayal we have grown to expect. Abuse cycles such as those found in domestic violence are built around trauma bonds. So are the misplaced loyalties found in exploitive cults, incest families, or hostage and kidnapping situations.

[Victims] who remain with alcoholics, compulsive gamblers, sex addicts, [or Cyberpaths!] and who will not leave no matter what their partners do, may have suffered enough to have a traumatic bond.


Here are the signs that trauma bonds exist in your life:
  • When you obsess about people who have hurt you though they are long gone from your life (To obsess means to be preoccupied, fantasize about, and wonder about something/someone even though you do not want to.)
  • When you continue to seek contact with people whom you know will cause you further pain.
  • When you go “overboard” to help people who have been destructive to you.
  • When you continue to be a “team” member when obviously things are becoming destructive.
  • When you continue attempts to get people who are clearly using you to like you.
  • When you again and again trust people who have proved to be unreliable.
  • When you are unable to distance yourself from unhealthy relationships.
  • When you want to be understood by those who clearly do not care.
  • When you choose to stay in conflict with others when it would cost you nothing to walk away.
  • When you persist in trying to convince people that there is a problem and they are not willing to listen.
  • When you are loyal to people who have betrayed you.
  • When you are attached to untrustworthy people.
  • When you keep damaging secrets about exploitation or abuse.
  • When you continue contact with an abuser who acknowledges no responsibility.

About shame:
An injury to one’s sense of self forges some bonds. The self-injury becomes part of the fabric of the relationship and further disrupts the natural unfolding of the self. When this involves terror of any sort, an emptiness forms at the core of the person and the self becomes inconsolable. No addiction can fill in. No denial of self will restore it. No single gesture will be believable. Only a profound sense of the human community caring for the self can seal up this hole. We call this wound shame.

Dr. Carnes’ book: The Betrayal Bond: Breaking Free of Exploitive Relationships
~~~~~~~~~~
The concept of
Traumatic Bonding has also been developed to explain the dynamics of domestic violence relationships. Essentially, strong emotional connections develop between the victim and the perpetrator during the abusive relationship. These emotional ties develop due to the imbalance of power between the batterer and the victim and because the treatment is intermittently good and bad.

In terms of the power imbalance, as the abuser gains more power, the abused individual feels worse about him - or herself, is less able to protect him - or herself, and is less competent. The abused person therefore becomes increasingly dependent on the abuser.

The second key factor in traumatic bonding is the intermittent and unpredictable abuse. While this may sound counterintuitive, the abuse is offset by an increase in positive behaviors such as attention, gifts, and promises. The abused individual also feels relief that the abuse has ended. Thus, there is intermittent reinforcement for the behavior, which is difficult to extinguish and serves instead to strengthen the bond between the abuser and the individual being exploited.


ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Monday, October 13, 2014

BEWARE: THE DANGERS OF ONLINE DATING

Beware Physical, Financial Dangers of Online Dating

Many look for love but find scams and threats

For many of the millions of Americans who have tried online dating, it is an exciting new way to look for the partner of their dreams. But there are potential physical and financial dangers lurking, too.

Cat Hermansen said her experience with online dating took a terrifying turn when she invited a man she met online to pick her up at home for their first date.

"I told him to have a seat on the couch and I sat down beside him," Hermansen said.

"And he pushed me back... and started pawing at me and everything, and what he didn't know is that I could reach down and I pulled my gun out and I put it in his face right between his eyes."

Hermansen said she feels she would have been raped if she didn't have her gun.

"He jumped up and ran out the door - didn't even say bye."

Millions Look for Love Online, and Many Find It
The latest research finds more than 1,000 dating sites on the Web, and nearly 9 million Americans say they subscribed to dating Web sites during the last year, according to analysts at Jupiter Research.

A few, such as True.com, try to do background checks on subscribers, but most do not. (THERE IS NO NATIONAL MARRIAGE DATABASE OR REAL WAY TO CHECK ON WHAT PEOPLE SAY ON DATING PROFILES! No matter WHAT they or the dating site tells you!)

True.com is lobbying state legislatures for laws requiring background checks or at least clear warnings that users are on their own. But some executives of other dating sites say meeting people the old fashioned way isn't any less risky.

Roses and Champagne for a Scam Artist
But experts warn online daters to look out for their financial as well as physical safety when using the sites.

After signing up for Yahoo.com's dating service, Julia Abrantes received an e-mail from a potential suitor telling her, "I can promise you my everlasting devotion, my loyalty and my respect for a lifetime." The man told Abrantes he was working in Nigeria and eventually asked to borrow money so he could wrap up his business and fly to the United States to be with her.

"I had roses in every room, a bottle of champagne in the fridge," Abrantes said. She waited for hours at the airport, but the man never showed up. "I got in a cab, and I came home and sobbed hysterically," Abrantes said.

When Abrantes started investigating the incident online, she discovered the discussion group Romance Scams. Founder Barb Sluppick says 243 members who responded to a survey said they had lost a total of $2.2 million - about $9,000 a piece.

Abrantes reported her scammer to Yahoo, and the company removed his profile. But when ABC News asked her to check for the man's profile again, she found the same Web site and the same pictures.

The pictures used by the scam artist were actually of a model in Hawaii who had been swiped from the model agency's Web site, Abrantes learned.

Yahoo personals said it acts aggressively when customers report scams. When Abrantes complained for a second time, Yahoo again removed the profile.

"We take offering the best online dating experience very seriously and we … provide a safe and secure environment for singles," Yahoo said in a written statement.

Play It Safe
Experts say that people who choose to date online should use caution:

  • Plan first dates in public places.
  • Make sure friends know when and where you're going on a date and arrange to call and check in at the end of the date.
  • Get a disposable cell phone to use specifically for online dating. If a suitor starts to harass you, you can ditch the phone and get another.
  • Ask a lot of detailed questions. Con artists won't have easy answers and will likely drop out of your life. Do a BACKGROUND CHECK and surf the net for their name, nickname and email address(es) and read ALL the pages!
  • If they tell you, don't speak to "so & so" she's/ he's "obsessed with me, stalking me, scorned, rejected, a wacko", etc. -- MAKE IT YOUR BUSINESS TO SPEAK TO THAT VERY PERSON ASAP.
  • Never send money to somebody you meet online. If someone asks for money, it's time to end the relationship.
  • Don't forward checks or packages to people you meet online. Scammers may be trying to lure you into laundering bogus checks or stolen merchandise.

ABC News' Elisabeth Leamy and Allen Levine reported this story for "Good Morning America."

Wednesday, October 01, 2014

The Four Psychological Stages Of Those Abused by Cyberpaths


Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Stage One ~ DENIAL
The victim refuses to admit even to herself, that she has been 'had' or that there is a problem in her online relationship/friendship. She may call each incident an accident. She offers excuses & rationalizations and each time she is played or insulted firmly believes it will never happen again.

Stage Two ~ GUILT
Victim now acknowledges there is a problem, but considers herself responsible for it. She deserves to be used and lied to, she feels because she has defects in her character and is not living up to her predators's expectations.

Stage Three ~ ENLIGHTENMENT
The woman no longer assumes responsibility for her cyberpaths's abusive treatment, recognizing that no one deserves to be treated badly, used, played or lied to. She is still committed to her online relationship though and stays with her cyberpath hoping they can work things out. During this period she often questions the predator and hopes for "straight answers" because things are starting to not jive or make sense.

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Stage Four ~ RESPONSIBILITY
Accepting the fact that her cyberpath will not, or can not, stop his predatory & manipulative behavior, the victim decides she will no longer submit to it and starts a new life.

Often involves "telling" and no more secret keeping - by which she can achieve validation that she is not alone or stupid.

Saturday, September 06, 2014

INTERNET PREDATOR CHARGED WITH EMBEZZLEMENT & MORE!

WILLIAM JORDAN

The Story... so far

A bigamist who has at least 10 children to four different women and embezzled around £200,000 while claiming to be a CIA agent was jailed for five years yesterday.

William Jordan, 41, who has five children with his first wife, two with her nanny, two with his bigamous wife and at least one other in the US, wove an elaborate web of lies to con his victims, a court heard.

The IT consultant duped his bigamously married wife, Mary Turner Thomson, of Edinburgh, from whom he conned nearly £200,000 ($391,400. US), by claiming he was a CIA agent seconded to the Ministry of Defence on covert business. During his long absences, he was, in fact, tending to his real wife and his girlfriend, from whom he also defrauded £4,500 ($8,600. US).

Jordan was arrested last November in a police sting near Oxford. Yesterday, at Oxford Crown Court, he was jailed for bigamy, a string of dishonesty offences, failing to register his whereabouts as a sex offender and illegally possessing a stun gun.

The court heard he was convicted in 1997 of three indecent assaults on a girl under the age of 13. Judge Thomas Corrie said:

"You are a con man, a convicted paedophile and a bigamist. You are an inveterate exploiter of vulnerable women, not just financially but also emotionally."
Miss Turner Thomson, 41, who once ran her own consultancy business, met Jordan on an internet dating site in November 2000. She attended court to see him jailed.
She said outside the court last night: "I'm glad its over," adding that Jordan was a "very clever predator and sociopath".
He would communicate using CIA web addresses, show her passes to RAF bases and send e-mails from an address registered at the office of the Deputy Prime Minister, she said.

Miss Turner Thomson, who is off work because of stress, said Jordan was able to do this as he once worked as an IT contractor for the government.

She and Jordan split when she was confronted last year by his real wife, she said.
"I'm glad the judge recognised him for who he is. I hope if there are any other of his victims out there, they too will find freedom though this."

A source close to the police investigation said: "Jordan is very intelligent. With a brain like that, he could have made good money through legitimate means."
Jordan, a naturalised Briton, married his first British wife, Julie Cunningham, in 1992, the court heard. Ten years later, he married Miss Turner Thomson.

Unknown to Miss Turner Thomson, Jordan's real wife was living at nearby Gullane in East Lothian. When Miss Turner Thomson found out about the second home, he convinced her it was a CIA safe house and the woman was a fellow operative.

Jordan also slept with his real wife's nanny. In May 2005, he also struck up a relationship with Denise King, then based in Blackpool. It was his undoing.

Jordan had set up a recruitment firm, registered in his bigamous wife's name, and used this to lure Miss King to Kent with the promise of a better job. He began a relationship with her and obtained her credit-card details as she was a customer.

When he failed to repay money he borrowed, she contacted police and a sting centring on his fraudulent use of her credit card was set up.


THANKS TO ONEOFSEVEN FOR THE HEADS UP ON THIS ONE!

MORE

Saturday, August 23, 2014

Online Dating? Never Again


by Claudia Connell

Tempted by online dating? You won't be after reading CLAUDIA CONNELL'S hilarious (and cautionary) account

(U.K.) Single? Starting to despair of ever meeting Mr Wonderful? Well, don’t — because, ladies, the world is full of handsome, charming men with six-figure salaries, who are all queuing up to commit to ­people just like you.

The virtual world, that is, not the real world — don’t be daft: men like that were all snapped up years ago.

I’m talking about internet dating, of course, where millions of singletons (and quite a few marrieds on the make) line up to be selected and rejected in a process that has become ­Britain’s most popular way for couples to get together.

Over half of all single people turn to the internet in their search for love. Apparently, some of them find it. I never did and I’ve never met anyone it has worked for either. In the long-term, that is. A stream of endless dates is ­guaranteed. But lasting love? I’m not so sure.

It was 14 years ago, when I was 30, that I first tried online dating. I was single and not in bad nick, but working long hours in a female-­dominated environment meant I never got to meet anyone. Too young for the dinner party set, too old to be hanging out at nightclubs, it seemed like a hopeless cause until a friend of a similar age took me out and confessed her dirty little secret: she’d started to meet men online. She imparted this information in hushed tones, without making eye contact, and then, on pain of death, swore me to secrecy. I don’t think she could have been more ashamed if she’d confessed to drowning puppies.

Nowadays, the stigma surrounding internet dating has all but gone. So many people partake that it has became an acceptable way to meet the opposite sex.

But when I started it was a bit like train-spotting — you’d heard about it, you knew it went on, but the sort of people who did it were a little bit odd and not the type whose ­company you’d keep.

Today, there are hundreds of ­dating sites to choose from, catering for those with all sorts of criteria: ­vegetarians, Christians, single ­parents, sports fanatics, people who like pets. You name it, there’s a site where you can meet your perfect match who shares the same interest. But, 14 years ago, there were only a handful.

I browsed one site before signing up and handing over my money. I couldn’t believe my eyes when they matched me up with dozens of sexy, ­gorgeous hunks whose ­dazzling smiles beamed out at me from the screen.

Posing by their sports cars, keen to tell any prospective ladies that while they had two homes and earned a salary that could single-handedly pay off the national debt, they were still ­sensitive souls who liked to strum their guitars and do parachute jumps for charity.

They seemed too good to be true. They were.

After submitting my credit card details, the millionaire Brad Pitt lookalikes all mysteriously disappeared and no amount of searching ever uncovered them again.

They were, of course, plants, who were there to lure in naive punters. A man signing up for the first time (and I know this because I tried it) would have been greeted with ­pictures of ­Scarlett Johansson ­lookalikes, ­boasting about their ­cooking skills while posing in bikinis.

The first step when joining a dating site is to complete a profile. As I learned, this is a complete waste of time — especially for women. It doesn’t matter if you have climbed ­Everest in your lunch break and ­discovered a cure for cancer — no one will read it.

Some of the profiles are ludicrous. Match.com, the world’s biggest ­dating site, asks dozens of pointless questions that go on for pages and pages.

When I’m looking for a partner, there are certain things I’d like to know, but I don’t really care when he last went to the cinema or whether he likes biscuits.

I filled out my first profile questionnaire in painstaking detail. And, like everyone else online, I claimed to like travel, theatre and photography.

The truth is that I have hardly any hobbies or interests, but I’ve never yet seen a box I could tick that says: ‘Likes sitting in front of the TV, bitching about everyone on screen.’

One question some sites do ask is if you’d like to have children. What a mean trick. If you say ‘Yes’, you’ll come across as some baby-hungry bunny boiler, but say ‘No’ and you’re Cruella De Vil.

Any online dater will stand or fall on the strength of their photo.

And as the average person looks, well, average, they have to boost their chances of success by posting totally ­unrealistic images. So it was that on my first date, I found myself ­sitting opposite a very charming man called Patrick.

He’d claimed online he was 35. He certainly was 35, or thereabouts, in the picture he’d posted. But the man sitting opposite me was nudging 50. He had displayed a picture that was at least a decade old — one of the most popular online tricks.

I didn’t fare much better with the next guy. He looked nothing like his photograph — and there was a very good reason for that. It wasn’t him. It was just some ­random stranger whose image he’d scanned. When I questioned him about this, he snapped: ‘Well, I think we look alike.’

I must have had dates with six ­different men before I met someone I clicked with and who appeared to have been reasonably honest. We agreed to meet again and I went home to tell my flatmate, a ­fellow internet dater, that I had a good ­feeling about this one.

She replied cynically: ‘He’s ­probably back online now, lining up the next one.’ I checked his profile online — it was flashing, which meant that he was messaging someone else. She was right.

And that’s the huge stumbling block with internet dating: there’s too much choice.

There are on average seven women to every man, creating the kid in a sweet shop effect.

Why would a man give any woman a ­second chance when they know there’s six others online just ­waiting for his message?

If you’re a man, you can be as fussy as you want. Didn’t like her earlobes? Never mind. NEXT!

I also never made my peace with the fact I was looking for men via my computer. It felt a little bit grubby and, if I’m honest, desperate. Whenever I started to see someone on a regular basis, I could never bring myself to admit where I’d met him to my friends and ­colleagues. So I lied. They couldn’t believe my success in meeting men at the super-
market, the dry cleaners, on the bus, in the park. I even claimed to have met one man at the zoo. The zoo?! Why on earth did I think the idea of a childless woman cruising for men at the zoo was somehow less embarrassing than admitting the truth?

The longest relationship I had as a result of meeting on an internet dating site was seven months. ­During that whole time, I never went to his home; he always came to mine. He insisted this was because he had a flatmate and as I (by then) was living alone, we could have some privacy. It made sense, though I always had a niggling doubt. One day, my suspicions got the better of me. I searched the electoral roll and uncovered the real reason I never went to his home — his wife wouldn’t have liked it very much.

Of course, married men cheated before the internet came along, but online dating is like an adventure playground for philanderers.

Aged 34, I vowed to give up on internet dating for ever and take my chances in the real world. OK, I didn’t have a date every other night, but it was refreshing to meet people without having first to email each other for a week about our favourite films.

Then, a few years ago, I was lamenting my single status with a younger friend who suggested I join an online dating site. When I regaled her with my horror stories, she insisted that times had changed and I should give it another go. After nearly a decade away, she was right: things had changed. There were hundreds of sites to choose from, all with really ­positive, bouncy names that it must have taken marketing executives hours of brainstorming to come up with.

Names such as Soul Mates, Plenty More Fish, Love And Friends. I suppose Oddballs And Social ­Misfits is never going to attract too many customers, is it? The tedious questions were still there and all the men had user names such as Stud4U or Adonis82.

This time around I noticed that the pictures people had posted had taken a worrying turn.

WHO KNEW?

Around 4.7 million people visit dating websites each year in Britain — and one third of online daters admit to lying in their profile Rather than just smiling into the camera, all the men felt compelled to display images of themselves performing some Action Man-like task. Rock climbing and marathon running were particularly popular.

Meanwhile, the women have decided they must all be fun, feisty Sex And The City type gals and post pictures of themselves in little black dresses sipping brightly ­coloured cocktails with a ­coquettish look on their face. Don’t get me wrong — I don’t want to see pictures of men in their pants, picking their teeth with a takeaway menu. But surely a little bit of reality wouldn’t go amiss?

But no one on an internet dating site is ever allowed to be just an ordinary Joe (or Josephine). The impressive sounding ‘psychological and compatibility matching’ is something that’s become big in internet dating since my time away.

It’s particularly favoured by newcomers eHarmony, who vow that their unique formula will match you with your ideal partner. But given that no one online ever tells the truth, how is that going to work? You might as well match up Pollyanna with ­Hannibal Lecter. In the end, none of these changes mattered because I was breaking one of the cardinal sins of internet dating. I was over 40.

In my younger days, an average 70 men would look at my profile in a day. And that was before online dating was massively popular. Aged 42, I was lucky if I got two. Even men ten years older than me clearly stated in their profile that 39 was their cut-off age.

As I’ve already said, they could afford to be selective. If the same man tried to approach a girl in her 20s in the real world, he’d probably be sent packing but, online, well, he might just be in with a chance.

I quickly realised that when it comes to online dating, there are three age brackets: 18 to 29; 30 to 39; and 40 to 110. During my three months online, I didn’t go on a single date and the only interest I had was from men over 60. I did briefly flirt with the idea of signing up to a site that targeted the more mature dater, but something in me balked at the idea.

I am no spring chicken, but I’m not ready for a life of early-bird ­suppers and cosy nights in watching re-runs of Murder She Wrote. So I logged off and I haven’t looked back.

And unless I hear that George Clooney has joined Match.com and is looking to shack up with a ­British woman over 40 with ­absolutely no hobbies or interests, then I doubt I’ll be tempted back.


original article found here

Saturday, July 05, 2014

NLP, Mind Control and Seduction



We talk a great deal on this site about the seduction techniques used by cyberpaths. Similar techniques are used by seducers offline as well. Anyone - we mean ANYONE - irregardless of how smart or savvy you are - is a potential target.

This doesn't make you stupid, gullible or irresponsible.

These techniques are used by Advertisers, Marketers, Politicians, even Con Men and Success Seminar Gurus. We are exposed to it every day - so much so that we no longer see it. NLP can be a powerful tool -- but in the hands of exploitative pathologicals? LOOK OUT!

Here's some clickable links we hope you read to learn more about the science of everyday seduction:
NLP = NeuroLinguistic Programming
Review of The Art of Seduction
Influence at work -- Site that explains the different tools of influence and how they're used. Based on Cialdini's 7 Principles of influence.
Encyclopedia of NLP -- Defines key terms in NLP, a collection of psychological influence and therapeutic techniques.
Neurosemantics.com -- great online resource for NLP, state control and modelling.
How to Become an Irresistible and Hypnotic Communicator.
Cognitive Dissonance - A definition and how it works. (Something we all do everyday!)
Image hosting by Photobucket

Influence Women With the Power of a Cult Leader! - sound like a joke? Then why do all the cyberpaths sound so much ALIKE??
Seduce Women Using Seduction Techniques
Don Juan Discussion Forum Yes, you were right ladies - they DO discuss how to do it! and this is not the only forum where these predators discuss this stuff

Make Any Woman Sexually Addicted to You - one of Sammy Benoit aka yidwithlid's (first profiled in Feb. 2005) playbooks; verified to us by law enforcement
Life of Brian Not only does he blog about it - he makes a living giving how to seminars.

Erotic Hypnosis & Hypno-Seduction - "
The state of arousal is created to overcome resistance or, even better, to lead the victim of the seduction process to apparently take control of the situation, by performing the physical action ultimately desired by the seducer or the seductress."

The Sage of Seduction are we starting to get the picture here?


Conditions for mind control:
Psychologist Margaret Singer described in her book "Cults in our Midst" six conditions, which would, she says, create an atmosphere where thought reform (online predators 'groom' their prey using thought reform) is possible. Singer sees no need for physical coercion.
-- controlling a persons time and environment, leaving no time for thought (sweeping you off your feet??)
-- creating a sense of powerlessness, fear and dependency ("need")
-- manipulating rewards and punishments to suppress former social behavior ("if you... then I will")
-- manipulating rewards and punishments to elicit the desired behavior (disappearing offline without warning or when you have trouble and need them the most? all TALK no actions to back it up?)
-- creating a closed system of logic which makes dissenters feel as if something was wrong with them (making you feel guilty or that you don't 'love' or 'care for' them if you go against the cyberpath's wishes?)
-- keeping recruits unaware about any agenda to control or change them (comments like: "I would never hurt you, I would never lie to you, I can't believe you think I am lying/ using you...." etc)

(sounds like abuse..... doesn't it?)
"The descendants of Casanova of our time are called Ross Jeffries, Major Mark Cunningham, Rob Johnson and David De Angelo. They organize seminars and then sell audio- and videotapes on which their techniques for the allure and capture of worthy specimen of the female gender are taught.

For our purposes, especially the material by Ross Jeffries is interesting, since his "Female Psychic Attack" - techniques often tap into the power of NLP for eliciting states of arousal. One of the techniques used by Jeffries for states elicitation is the use of metaphors to stimulate images of sexual nature by bypassing the filtering of the conscious mind. [...]

[...] elements that are necessary for creating an emotional basis for a sexual act, really anticipating it, while he is apparently talking about a documentary he saw, and therefore cannot be blamed for explicit sexual talk. The real information gets through the filtering of the conscious and is perfectly understood by the subconscious of the target, who then creates the desired images of sexual content in her mind, intensifying therefore the state elicited through the embedded commands that Ross speaks out.


Our Speed Seducer has developed hundreds of patterns like the one mentioned before, all ready to be used by his students. But these scripts are not the only interesting aspect of Ross' work: Weasel phrases like "if I were to say to you", for example, tend to introduce a daring compliment or proposal while contemporarily providing a step-back path. Ross provides his students with many of these conversational tools. [...]

A folkloristic note about Mr. Speed Seduction: the guy interpreted in Magnolia by Tom Cruise is based on the character of Ross Jeffries, though you will find in that movie no valuable information in regard of his taught material and his seminars (as well as his behaviour on stage) are much different than the one seen in the movie, though he surely is proud of his masculinity. [...] - [quoted from: Keys To Erotic Hypnosis]



Just keep all this in mind when dealing with a cyberpath or anyone online. And realize that while we don't believe in or espouse not taking responsibility - how can anyone be themselves or make informed decisions when they are being coercively controlled & manipulated?

Remember this next time you say "I was so stupid to fall for it" or wonder what red flags you missed or didn't see or even 'what's wrong with me?'.

Like slight of hand - these predators are good at getting you reeled in before you know what hit you. - EOPC

Tuesday, July 01, 2014

WHY DO CYBERPATHS PREY ON OTHERS?

(This is merely an attempt to answer the question "WHY did they do this?" This explanation is speculative & by no means final or complete. - EOPC)

excerpted from: "Why Do People Abuse?"

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Understanding Abuse
People have difficulty understanding the motives of people who are involved in abuse. Why people choose to abuse other people is a common question.

Abuse situations must be lived in and experienced before their internal logic makes any sense. However, we can try to do our best to understand.


Why Do Cyberpaths Abuse?
The first question, "Why do people abuse other people?" has multiple answers. Some people internalized a particular relationship dynamic, namely the complementary roles of "abuser" and "victim". They are familiar with and fully understand the terror of being the helpless victim from their own childhood experience. The opposite of being a victim is not simply opting out of abuse; it is instead, to be abusive. Given the choice between being the out-of-control victim, or the in-control abuser, some of these people grow up to prefer the role of the abuser.

As they become adults, they simply turn this relationship dynamic around and start acting out the "abuser" side of the relationship dynamic. By choosing to be the aggressor and abuser, they may get their first sense of taking control over their own destiny and not being at the mercy of others. And the anonymity and disinhibition the internet provides feeds that.

Besides, online - others are only objects, not real people.



Still other people who abuse end up abusing because they have an empathy deficit, either because of some sort of brain damage, or because their innate empathic abilities never developed properly.

Such abusers cannot or will not relate to other people as people, choosing instead to treat them as objects. In effect, they confuse people for things. They treat people as though they were there solely for their convenience and do not otherwise have an independent, important life. Far too easy to do online!

Abusers who treat people in this manner are very likely psychologically ill, incurably so. They may have an antisocial, sociopathic or narcissistic personality disorder, and they may have anger or impulse control issues and addition (internet, sex, love & drama) issues on top of that!

Such cyberpaths may abuse via the net because of the benefits they receive from doing so, for instance, sexual or financial gratification, or the simple allure of power over other people's lives.