Tag Archives: Psychopath Free

Tight Ships Do Sink – New PF Screenshots

Through the kindness of someone who has emailed screenshots of a recent internal debacle at PF, former members who still return to this blog can see the their practices questioned and discussed, and of course justified (quite poorly, I might add).

It appears that a number of long-term members are openly challenging the team’s treatment of them, the response being that they have formed a mutinous clique and there can be no other clique than the one in charge. The sycophancy of some, who accept this authority of PF over their life decisions, is fairly disturbing.

The dispute involved a long term member, admonished for the apparently inexcusable crime of having invited her ex to a conversation… last year. And having maintained a business-related channel for him to contact her, which obviously is related to her livelihood. Arguably, a normal group of friends would not attempt to get this person to overdramatise the presumed danger she has put herself in by simply contacting said ex, let alone chastise her for it. That’s not what emotional support is about. But then again, this is no normal group of friends, but Fahrenheit 451 with a twist of sour lemons.

On the PF mother ship, one is no longer allowed to be human. Being human is a sign of imperfection; a transgression of ideological purity. They cannot see how their attitude of excluding people for normal human interaction with “undesirables” renders them as bigoted as fundamentalist Mormons, who mandate that remaining with a partner/ spouse is an absolute, regardless of other factors. It comes from a need to control what others do, to regulate the details of other people’s lives.

When someone is truly empathetic, they listen. They take your life experience into account and seek to learn from it just as you might learn from them. Throwing the book at people on a constant basis is reserved for preachers and hypocritical moralists; it indicates distance and superficiality, not friendship.


PFnew1  PFnew2    PFnew3 PFnew4   PFnew5 PFnew6   PFnew7 PFnew8


“She received an email and came here to get help and reinforcement to not respond, which was the right thing to do. After several days of pages and feedback form other members, it appeared she was going to ignore the hoover. What happened next though is she popped up in here a couple of weeks later with this dramatic, attention-grabbing thread written in ALL CAPS, as if it were breaking news, bragging about 1000% validation for doing everything she was told NOT to do. (…)

But the arrogance and false bravado with which she bragged about it and took offence with certain members and administrators who didn’t “congratulate” her for her supposed “closure” and breaking NC was a big part of the issue. It was only when she received some feedback from seasoned veterans that she didn’t want to hear, that she wanted her thread taken down. But then she started another thread, thanking members for their support in this thread and passive-aggressively complaining about the members who did not express unwavering support. That thread was taken down.” (Smitten Kitten)

Quick recap here, in more realistic terms. The member sought their advice but did not follow it, as, lo and behold, it was, ultimately, her life. Her choice turned out to work better for her than theirs. Instead of being happy that she was in a better place, they were outraged that she dared to break the community rules. Because in the end, it was all about them, not her, though they wouldn’t benefit or suffer whatsoever as a result of her choice. Them or anyone else on this planet. It was such a terrible affront that they never stopped to contemplate that she was, in fact, feeling better about her situation. You’d think they were trying to dissuade this woman from joining ISIS.

If you read through this admin’s entire account of matters, it’s rather bemusing.

“Honestly I am sick of PF becoming a place where the admins are accused of wrongdoing for reacting in an adult way to non-adult situations.” (Peace)

I recall the numerous cases, on this blog alone (not to mention other platforms), of members banned out of the blue, without an explanation, even after requesting one. An adult would at least dignify a supposed friend of a few years with a quick response. Is that so emotionally straining? What about the way they treated Thomas Sheridan, with a hysterical and vicious smear campaign? Is that an adult way to do things?

“While folks may say or do things out of pain, that doesn’t erase the hurtful effects that those words & actions have on their recipients. Yes, we are all human. That doesn’t make it okay to blame a website or friend for one’s internal discomfort.” (Peace)

How about applying not blaming a friend for one’s internal discomfort when thinking of those “hurtful effects” then? Do some people have more of a right to be hurt by others and act on it? How is it so unbearable to be questioned that you have to exclude this person from the communal entourage, cutting them off from everyone else?

“People here declare abuse or judgement or censorship because they aren’t validated 100% for everything they do.” (Peace)

When you react with such effervescence to common actions they take, and declare them potentially unfit for your group of straight-thinkers, excuse people for taking offence. I’d say a mirror is required here. It’s them who don’t validate you through what they choose to do with their lives in the end, and you find that unacceptable. You find them unworthy of speaking to unless they adhere to your exact guidance. Because you couldn’t possibly find valuable insight in someone else’s experience. You’re way above learning about life.

“That’s not how growth works.” (Peace)

Perpetually failing to address concerns or criticism, by blocking people and running away, is not how growth works either. You might as well cover your ears and start humming. Unless of course, you think in your case growth is no longer required, because you’ve already achieved the status of an all-knowing being.

“PF is not an echo chamber to validate and say “yes you’re right” to everyone all the time.” (Peace)

That’s exactly what it is, only in reverse. Admins and mods have an imperious need to be validated by other people living their lives by each letter in their program. If you fail to comply, you are of no use to them anymore.

“If anyone else would like to leave, they are welcome to do so. Please just contact us privately, instead of these dramatic public exits.” (Peace)

Quite a leap from seeing members off, or even their fellow admins and mods, with a rotten tomato fair-well party, accusing them of being disordered. I assume those were not dramatic exists.

“I 1000% agree with what you all have written here and especially in connection with what I have recently been astonished and confused by in witnessing in connection to the arrogance with regard to PF where some members feel that its theirs and theirs alone so, it might be perceived as “anything goes”. The statement of, “US against the admins” reminded me of a line from Lord of the Flies. REALLY????” (Phoenix)

I don’t know about entitlement to speak your mind on a forum of so-called unconditional friends – I’d worry more about the entitlement of someone else’s life being yours to manage, and the idea that not following your directives and contradicting your perspective is offensive. This person realised she didn’t have to do what they dictated. That she could choose for herself and surprisingly, it could have better results.

“On reflection, and simply put, a moment of strait talking and the resultant shock, can save years of unnecessary emotional abuse after taking a step back and properly “digesting” and evaluating. In my view, PF has always been about “the greater good, for the greater number”, never the reverse.” (Phoenix)

Explain to me how this is different than a fundamentalist religious group. Preemptive saving of the congregation. Do not speak to this person even once because he’ll end up convincing you to go back and you will suffer for years. Do not look at that Playboy as you will end up having orgies and getting HIV. These people don’t know where they themselves will be in five years’ time, let alone someone else.

The crux of the matter is their quest is not to help individuals – otherwise they would at least take a moment to be happy for them when their lives improve. Individuals don’t matter; the cult mentality does.

“We thought closing registrations would help calm things down and make it easier to keep the peace without an influx of new trolls, but of course that doesn’t solve the problem of existing trolls who are already here.” (Smitten Kitten)

She is referring to someone who had been there for years, not a “troll”. Regardless of how well you think these people know you, trusting they would never class you as such, surprise.

“Instead, there seems to be some new kind of arrogance that’s developed in some of the membership, where they act like they’re part of an exclusive club now and they act like that gives them the right to complain about us whenever they feel like it.” (Smitten Kitten)

Pure lese-majeste, which is French for an affront to royalty, or authority, by association. Subversion, no less.

Perhaps said members are connecting privately and starting to realise what really goes on. There should be little doubt with regards to what admins think they’re running there. It has nothing to do with friendship or even consideration towards others, let alone helping vulnerable people, and everything to do with control and self-aggrandisement.


New Evidence Of Disturbing Extremism On Psychopath Free

(Sorry about the size of the images; I simply copied the text on each one.)

It seems the assumption that behind closed doors PF would become even more deranged in terms of its treatment of members (and cult-ish behaviour in general) was spot on.

Someone who still has access to their account was kind enough to take screen shots and send them; they reveal what seems to be a complete lack of sanity.

First off, as seen below, a member wishing to leave and have their account deleted is immediately labelled an impostor and a narcissist/ sociopath/ psychopath, for merely stating they didn’t need the forum anymore.







Seriously, what kind of group outright accuses you of being the worst kind of person imaginable, just for saying you want to leave them? What kind of “sense” does that make? It’s obvious that these people are a joke, as a community anyway, and that they always have been.

If that is their methodology in recognising personality disorders, one that they were very keen on peddling to schools and psychology practices, allow me to assume they wouldn’t have been taken seriously.

Such is their conviction of unchallenged expertise that they aspired to spread it all over the world, only a few months ago.

And if you want to see something even sicker, look no further.

According to a group of devout PF members, a woman can be labelled a “narcissistic mother” for dying one day after her daughter, apparently, to … get attention. The posts below refer to the sad recent passing of Carrie Fisher and Debbie Reynolds, both of natural causes, though it is quite clear that Debbie Reynolds’ death was accelerated by her daughter’s, which is not uncommon within families.

The high calibre humanists and sensitive snowflakes on PF somehow ended up seeing a grief-stricken mother as a “narc” who wanted to “steal her daughter’s moment of fame” by none other than dying.






I’m not sure further comments are even needed…

A big thank you to the member who sent this, as it is a very revealing “inside glimpse”. And though posting these screen shots here might be perceived as intrusive, we can’t forget that these people are playing with the personal details and even sanity of those they have lured.

Later edit: PF banning members for… liking another author, possibly seen as “competition”

Melanie Tonia Evans, also referred to as MTE for short (on their forum anyway) is an author exploring roughly the same topics as they do, from a personal perspective, apparently introducing too many nuances for their liking, versus the black and white view of human interaction they propose. Although her motivation is at least partially financial – which appears to be par for the course in this field – it seems extreme for PF to take such a strong stance that she can’t even be mentioned. After all, what are they selling, if not made-up solutions to the problems of those in need?

The following quotes are from a thread about her (sorry for posting them so late after they were sent), after having previously referred to one of her books as a resource, in 2011.


image4 (1)-0




image4 (1)-2







Three of these posts stand out in my opinion – one claiming not to need other resources but PF, another mandating that members stick to the resources listed on the site and of course, the admin’s power trip display in the end, while banning someone suspected of trolling (I presume) for linking to MTE.

Also notice the language, the venom and contemplate being on the wrong side of PF staff, ever, even through a misunderstanding. Then contemplate having given them your most intimate details beforehand.


New article on Psychopath Free: “What if they’re not a sociopath?”

This post is in response to this new PF article, based on the idea that healing from a hurtful relationship is all that matters, combined with dealing with your own demons – which would normally be true, except for the situations detailed below. Here is the conclusion of the article:

The question “What if they’re not really a sociopath?” loses all of its significance when we come to love ourselves regardless of the answer.

To start with, the article conveys a warm, fluffy and appeasing feeling, detailing doubts which might arise and nuancing an individual’s response to a failed relationship – an introspection which would undoubtedly be positive … were the website not called Psychopath Free, claiming to teach people how to identify  and deal with monsters. Not people who at one point in time displayed toxic behaviours. Soulless, irredeemable monsters.

It matters when you have publicly labelled said person a sociopath

This label is far from a private matter, at one’s discretion to keep or discard, when it was turned into a public accusation, ranging from a circle of friends to the presumed sociopath’s own family. Where exactly does the hipsterism fit in once you’ve damaged that person’s life?

Of course, one might argue that they’ve also damaged yours in ways which are difficult to repair. But still, does that absolve someone of the wrongdoing of tarnishing another’s reputation?

When you broke up with a significant other specifically because you applied this label

Which I’m sure has been the case on PF time and time again – confused people coming across the “life-saving” information which raises their adrenaline, feeling self-righteous beyond the shadow of doubt and making crucial decisions based on it.

The sheer thought that a loved one is impossible to deal with by default has been breaking marriages and relationships apart. At times, had it not been for this black and white thinking, many people would’ve surely reconsidered.

While I believe that education about narcissism and sociopathy are essential to healing and sanity restoration (especially in the early stages as we break the chemical bond and learn to go No Contact), I think there is something very powerful about eventually releasing this duality.

That’s just it – they are essential to those who are genuinely involved with these types, not to the rest, who might think they are in a moment of desolation, to later brood over their assessment and find it impulsive and inaccurate. People can heal from heartache without resorting to this demonisation, which is anything but sanity when untrue.

He is basically saying that this “education”, as well as going no contact, is essential even to those who later question their judgement. In the vein of act now, think later.

With the risk of emphasising this for the hundredth time: even when a lot of heartache was involved, on one or both sides, it doesn’t mean one has to give up on the relationship, as if this were the only beneficial route. Assuming that ending it was for the best regardless, even if the label is later questioned, and that reading about disordered people was just a prop towards the “liberating” break-up even when said person was not necessarily disordered, is absolutely ridiculous.

When you claim to be an expert on sociopathy and coach others on the subject

Basing your entire expertise on your experience, “educating” others with fanatical dedication, influencing their lives (sometimes irreversibly) and suddenly turning around to say that it doesn’t really matter if your judgement was correct regarding said experience just doesn’t fly.

It is basically stating that your cut-in-stone perspective on human interaction just might be based on a murky, questionable situation, in which you just might’ve been wrong. In this case, the smallest of doubts matters a great deal. Because you might’ve – just might’ve – fed lorry loads of horse manure to all the people who regarded your approach as the absolute truth.

One of the most common questions asked during recovery is: “Was he/she really a sociopath?” Survivors ask this question over and over again, because for most of us, the alternative is the sociopath’s reality: “You are crazy, jealous, sensitive, paranoid, unattractive, unwanted.” And so we oscillate back and forth between these two realities: bad other, or bad self.

This binary excludes the middle ground – actual rationality and sanity, which admits the possibility of both individuals being wrong at the same time, to various degrees. One for saying hurtful things and the second  for taking them as the absolute reality of the other’s thinking, prompting them to label the other as a merciless sociopath.

There is no need for this radicalism, as if one were completely incapable of analysing matters beyond “I was right” versus “this person was right”.

This is not a healthy way to look at life and people who tend to think in black and white should not be teaching others how to handle their problems.


The post is followed by quite a few which are glorifying an empath’s ability to love, regardless of their presumed sociopath’s behaviour. I know this will sound cruel on my part, but in this context it seems like a self-gratifying exercise which does not address the real question – what if the people they labelled as such were not actually sociopaths?

This article not only implies but states it is beyond the issue for anyone “recovering” from a hurtful relationship. Is it really though? Is loving yourself enough to obliterate any damage you might’ve done to someone and any afterthoughts about what might’ve been in the absence of this label? And is loving yourself enough to give you confidence to keep “spreading the word” about disordered people, even in the absence of certainty that you have even met one? And regardless of the damage you might do to others who believe you know what you’re preaching?

The answer is logical.

A Link To This Blog On PF


(Sorry for torturing anyone’s eyes with the font size so far; I had no idea how to enlarge the screen shots.)

A couple of days ago, there was some traffic to this blog coming directly from Psychopath Free. The referrer list shows it started with a PM sent by a long time member and reported by an administrator. A thread was then created on the Meta forum (it can’t be accessed unless one is logged in so it must be there).


The number of views is very small and chances are the thread itself is hysterical or venomously derogatory. Or no longer exists. If anyone who reads this blog from time to time still has access to their account on PF, perhaps they can tell the rest of us what is going on; that would be much appreciated.

However, I take it as a good sign; there is a (slight) chance the issues brought up here were briefly discussed or at least seen by some of the new arrivals, who still have a chance to hit the road before they disclose too much.

I’m not holding my breath for an open discussion or public explanation for the unfair treatment of hundreds of people (or more), some of whom were unceremoniously booted right after a donation or book purchase.

As it was truthfully put in a comment by a former member, the blog and other similar information on the web will not be enough to “make a dent in that monster”, but it might make a small difference to individuals.

The biggest danger of all is not even the treatment one experiences on the forum or the data which might not ever be of use to the team. It’s the false certainty they give those who take a seat at the McDonald’s of pop psychology, which PF has metastasised into. The over-processed, artificial junk which cannot be customised or altered even by the passing of time. In fact, it’s safe to compare the PF dogma to the famous cheeseburger with fries which looked exactly the same after four or five months – not altered by time or wisdom. It takes some members weeks to snap out of it and realise they are intoxicating themselves, whereas others have been there since the beginning.

The thread mentioned by Stefan in a comment below shows just how little it takes for someone to be targeted. A bit of doubt, not even blatantly expressed, but only hinted at. For that reason alone it’s worth posting the conversation (with no exposure of anyone’s private story, of course). This is so far removed from their corny PR material, which claims they welcome people with open arms.

Nothing this new member posted suggested they were less of a victim of abuse than anyone else on the forum. And yet…


@sychokarma, not sure what you are asking for clarity on or, in fact, your question? Would you like to elaborate?


@Phoenix Oh just kind of wondering if normal people (e.g. ass***) might also have no guilt or shame when they simply want to get away from you or don’t want to be responsible for things?


@sychokarma. IMHO, If you have truly been in a P-type relationship, through education, awareness and resultant knowledge you will be easily recognise and know the difference. 

(I guess the “be” was a simple mistake.)


@Phoenix Hmm ok thanks!~ Be well 🙂


Totally agree. I have met assholes… but a p… omg! Omg! Omg

Hey @Wildfire, so what is the diff. you felt between the ass*** and psychopath?!

Then you’ve answered your own question

@jordy but what is the diff? Normal people might not feel guilt or shame when they want to avoid headache or responsibility.


That’s a very considered response (NOT) and in my book, passive aggressive ending!


Non disordered people DO feel guilt and a degree of responsibility, that’s the difference. Are you claiming to have had a relationship with a disordered person because if you are you really should know the difference

@jordy The thing is normal people can feel shame or guilt but due to ego or avoid responsibility, they might pretend not to show it. In that case, how do we know?

That’s a very considered response (NOT) and in my book, passive aggressive ending!

@Phoenix hmm not sure what you mean but sounds like you are happy 🙂



@Phoenix oh so you have banned him 5 years ago? Good!! Could someone who is normal might also feel no guilt or shame sometimes (just ass***)? Lol

Why are you asking about normal people? Don’t you know how normal people act? And are you suggesting that @Phoenix was possibly talking about  normal person? Lol?


I personally feel that any interaction with @sychokarma may well be heading for the META board any time soon as their username, IMHO, says it all for good reason! As in reverse meaning!


Sorry folks I am going to be in a meeting. Will get back later!


And, do we really need or, want, your apology? Or are we in any way, awaiting your return for some kind of “karma” experience to teach the already converted anything?


Sounds like the xP…vanishing in the middle of a discussion, but stating that he was too busy to stay of course. Not okay.


Lol, very true, lol

@Phoenix @jordy I find it concerning… There is another topic currently going on also started by a new member about the same issue…


If you have any kind of concern about anything on PF, then you have the opportunity of reporting your concern by pressing the black triangle withing that particular post to give and explain your feelings and/ or concerns.


Why are you asking about normal people? Don’t you know how normal people act? And are you suggesting that @Phoenix was talking about a normal person? Lol?

@Victoria assholes are also normal people vs psychopath. So i wonder what is the difference between assholes and psychopath?

You don’t. Trust your gut instinct and if your gut is telling you this is one fu#kd up spunk wipe who thinks playing games is the way to do things, you show him the door, close it and never open it again for him

@jordy what is the diff between assholes and psychopath?

Sounds like the xP…vanishing in the middle of a discussion, but stating that he was too busy to stay of course. Not okay.

@Aurelia I actually do have a meeting and now I am back. But who cares, you guys should be shamed of bullying while crying you are psychopath victims.


And, do we really need or, want, your apology? Or are we in any way, awaiting your return for some kind of ”karma” experience to tech the already converted anything?

No I don’t apologize but I do need to talk to people I want to talk so I am letting them know I will be back shortly. Hehe

This member didn’t even realise he/she was about to be booted. That’s how quick it was.

Any of those who pretended not to notice the absurdity, as one does when they spot a big pile of dog shit on the pavement and just walk past it pretending the air around it smells like roses, could be next. Any of them.

And before they are, they will consider advice on their deepest issues from these people, which is the saddest thing of all.

Yes, it’s their establishment, they can do what they want with it. Except they advertise it as a life-saving, all-embracing community.

People have the right to have the superficiality and gratuitous capriciousness pointed out before they rush to disclose their childhood rapes, court cases or therapy sessions. They think this so-called community will take them seriously. That is clearly not the case.


Akin to other times, a quick peek instantly revealed the latest witch hunt, which can be seen below, as a red flag for those who believe the public image of the website. The recently banned member had given a lot of details (unfortunately) regarding her situation, including legal, all of which were used against her by an admin in the end, in her impromptu psychological evaluation, the admin using words such as “cold” and “lacking empathy”.

All of this, of course, for criticising the website and its lack of seriousness. The member (presumably) had been “supported” by the site until the post below, when they instantaneously turned against her (aside from two  who dared to like the post and probably won’t last long either as a result).

I covered as much as possible of the OP’s personal story; the last post however, by said admin, would not make sense without the quotes left in place. If the banned member ever finds the conversation on this blog and wants it removed, it will be (though I have a feeling she is stronger than the people who posted there put together). So I apologise in advance if this causes any bother.

This case is very relevant to the fact that it is impossible for them to provide “support” for anything but  relationship or family related problems, as what they cannot identify with is irrelevant to them.


All in all: we NED service for:

-victims of psychopath crime. It is a special class, they have over 200% higher chances of better treatment by justice because they manipulate law enforcement agents and I saw how badly prepared these people are

-parents of psychopaths : a mother posted this here. For me, it was the most serious post in this forum. Most people didn’t even pay attention.

-legal advice for psychopaths in the workplace

-education for fraud in business caused by psychopaths

-education for victims’ families: families do not usually understand that targets are not stupid gullible imbeciles. They were targeted by professionals, frequently people who are borderline geniuses. Nobody is immune to them.

Victims of hard-core psychopaths have their whole lives shaken and need help – LEGAL help, financial help etc.

Unlike most of you think, there are no special types of psychopath victims because psychopaths come in all shapes and forms (of behavior). The most damaging are the ones who target the highest prizes. Or the signature killers. But then we don’t need a forum for their victims, do we? They are dead…

The post had followed an infuriating experience with the legal system; one of incompetence and greed; however, they had no empathy at all for her situation.They saw red. Her actual suffering ceased to matter.


I’m confused. When you say “unlike most of you think”, do you mean members of this forum? Or the public, in general?


Uh… well, you see, even your reply shows that these forums are for people who suffer the results o a love relationship with a psychopath. My problem was not love at all.

You see, there so much more related to psychopathy damage… We’re talking about an average of 50 BILLION dollars/year in the USA alone. These crimes destroy lives. It’s not “silent treatment”…

Yeah, yeah… I am resentful: my life and many other lives are totally damaged, we need help, I was asked by my daughter to look for these groups but all I can find is another version of “codependents anonymous”. 


If these forums are for people who suffer the results of a love relationship with a psychopath, then I’ve been in the wrong damn place fr almost two years. I’m here because of a friendship.

So his actions disrupted your life? Guess what? Every person here had their lives DESTROYED by the actions of the psychopaths they knew. You thin you’re the only one left without a past or future? Really? Did you even suffer at the hands of a psychopath? it doesn’t sound like it, based on your words.

You just pissed all over silent treatment, which is one of the worst forms of abuse known to man. You just referred to this site as ”codependents anonymous”. Take your PHD bullshit and piss off. We don’t need crap like that from an “educated” woman.

“Did you even suffer at the hands of a psychopath? It doesn’t sound like it, based on your words.”

Because, according to this member and the admin, as they appear to put it, the only way to <suffer> is to actually have had feelings for said psychopath. It doesn’t matter if they burn your house down, poison your dog, steal your life savings or persecute you at work. If you never had any heartbreak through disappointment, silent treatment, disillusion etc, tough.

“So his actions disrupted your life? Guess what? Every person here had their lives DESTROYED by the actions of the psychopaths they knew.”

By reading between the lines, one sees a clear message of “what happened to us is more serious than what happened to you; your life was disrupted; our lives were destroyed”. Just by the way she is phrasing it, it’s almost like winning a competition. If I’m not mistaking this is the same member who was annoyed at others maintaining their “no contact time” intact although they had slipped and contacted their suspected psychopaths.

“You just pissed all over silent treatment, which is one of the worst forms of abuse known to man.”

I don’t know about others, but if I had to choose between silent treatment and being the victim of actual crime, the choice would be an easy one.

“Take your PHD bullshit and piss off. We don’t need crap like that from an “educated” woman.”

Best suited here would be one of Peace’s quotes describing the loving and respectful atmosphere on PF, where members can safely express their social frustration at someone who simply mentioned having a higher education at some point. Once she has become fair game, everything goes.

Better yet, one of those videos with autumn foliage blowing in the wind and soppy music in the background, describing how angels with broken wings (and no PhD) are welcome to the forum. I’m not trying to make fun of this situation; it’s simply grotesque.


Whether it involves a psychopathic parent, child, sibling, other family member, spouse, romantic partner, or friend, it always involves a ‘love relationship’. But based on your other posts, you wouldn’t understand that, because you admitted you had no empathy.

Correction, she had “admitted” having no empathy towards the psychopath. Was she supposed to? Would it cross the mind of anyone who had just been robbed by an unscrupulous individual?

You’ve only discussed revenge and retribution and aggressive retaliation.

Again – what attitude would you show, let’s say, a hedge fund crook? Would you describe to them your heartache over the betrayed trust ? Would they care? Would you expect them to?

“one thing we share in common is we cared about the people we discovered were/ are psychopaths. Apparently you don’t”

It seems she is implying the lack of said feelings makes the psychopath’s actions less real and their impact less serious. She seems to doubt the member considered suicide at all, as if no one in human history has, based on circumstances which had nothing to do with heartbreak (political persecution, poverty, debt, harassment, a ruined career, to name but a few).

Again and again, this type of damage is reduced by PF to bad break-ups. As mentioned above, unless you sing their praises and fit into the only narrative they can successfully process (so&so broke my heart), they will not even take you seriously. 

Plus – isn’t the goal of their forum to help members achieve emotional detachment from the psychopath, so they can move on? Don’t they reprimand others for still having or showing feelings for their ex partners? But in this situation it’s somehow wrong to show detachment? What are they playing at?

I can only imagine a dialogue between another normal individual and one of these PF types (again, not making fun of the situation, but just to show how bloody ridiculous they are).

“But he never stole your heart!”

“He stole all my savings; is that good enough?”

“But he never gave you the silent treatment!”

“Yes he did; he took off with my money and I never heard from him again. How’s that for silent treatment?”

And so on.

Psychopath Free And The Cringe Factor

Recently, an excerpt from Psychopath Free was added to its Amazon page (quotes are reproduced here from the website, for non-commercial educational purposes, thus qualifying as fair use). Whilst the entire text screams improvisation and if one properly analyses it they can be sure to find more than a dozen logical errors, the worst parts lie below.

To use their terminology of choice, I might as well class this as triggering to former members of the forum, in good humour of course.


As you frantically share your story, you latch on to the quickest and most sympathetic ear—anyone who claims to understand you. The problem is, these people do not always have your best interests at heart.

Those willing to listen to your psychopathic story for hours on end are, unfortunately, not likely to be people who are truly invested in your recovery. They are most likely “vultures.”

Vultures often seem exceptionally kind and warm at first. They want to fix you and absorb your problems. They are fascinated by your struggles. But sooner or later, you will find yourself lost in another nightmare. They begin drowning you in unsolicited advice. They need constant praise and attention. You are never allowed to disagree with them. They feed off drama and an insatiable need to be appreciated by others. (…)

They do not want you to seek help from anyone except them.

Whether these people are pathological or not, you don’t need this toxic garbage after what you’ve been through. (………)

But real friends won’t be acting as your therapist, and they definitely won’t be rambling on about their ability to empathize and care. Their actions should speak louder than their words.

It takes a long time to start building healthier relationships. It takes breaking old habits, forming new ones, developing your intuition, and finally coming to understand what it is that you want from this world.

So be on the lookout for vultures. In the writing world, there’s a universal rule called “show—don’t tell.” This rule also applies to people. If you encounter someone who’s constantly telling you who they are, how much they want to help you, how they will make things right for you, take a step back and look at their actual behavior. Manipulative people are always “telling” because they have nothing good to show. Their inappropriate and dishonest actions never actually match up with their promising words, causing an overwhelming cognitive dissonance in the people who trust them.

You will find that decent, humble human beings aren’t trying to tell you who they are and what they can do for you. They simply show it through consistent love and kindness. You never need to question them, because their intentions are always pure. Vultures, on the other hand, are really acting out of self-interest; they want to be praised and adored. In an argument, a “teller” will frequently remind you of how well they treat you, even after blatantly hurting you. A “show-er” will simply share their point of view without trying to twist the conversation in their favor. Avoid those who tell you how nice they are, how generous they are, how successful they are, how honest they are, and how important they are. Instead, search for the quiet ones who show these qualities every day through their actions.

Truly cringe-worthy.

No explanation is needed for those who have been given the PF treatment and know what really goes on there, openly and behind the scenes.

When referring to “vultures”, he is describing the behaviour of the Psychopath Free team to a tee.  Not only do they claim to empathise with vulnerable people they couldn’t care less about (as shown on countless occasions); they behave as if those strangers owed them for their brainwashing support; they constantly display controlling, egomaniacal and patronising tendencies.

Whilst behaving in that fashion towards one individual is bad enough, they do so to thousands of people, processing members more diligently than fast food chains process battery farm chickens.

I would strongly urge all survivors to avoid seeking out new friendships and relationships for at least a few months. You must get to the point where you no longer need—or want—to talk about your abuser anymore.

When you do need help, stick to professional therapy or recovery communities and services. These people know what you’ve been through, and you’re going to find that all of them are willing to help—with no strings attached.

I understand the temptation to go out and meet new people. You’re looking to start rebuilding your life. You want to surround yourself with kinder and more genuine friends.

Let me get this straight.

He argues there is a fundamental difference between finding new friends in real life and confiding in strangers on-line, which is what people do in these so-called recovery communities. He places these groups on par with seeing an actual therapist. Not that a therapist is necessarily able to help a hurting soul; regardless, they are guaranteed to be more mindful of their behaviour, as to not leave that person in a worse condition than their original one. They are guaranteed to have more ethics than those who risk nothing when bullying or discarding a vulnerable person on the internet.

No strings attached is a funny one. Let’s see if these qualify as “strings”, aka, in my understanding, issues the group can use in order to manipulate someone into obedience.

  • Tracking members on-line as well as in real life, if they see fit, violating their privacy.
  • Bullying and shaming members to influence their decisions in real life, as opposed to merely providing information.
  • Mandating that in order to participate in simple discussions one has to break all contact with the person who has (presumably) been abusing them, although that rule is not specified when registering.
  • Insisting that members give accurate information regarding their relationships and seeing prospective lies or omissions (again, about the private lives of others) as “security threats” to the forum, posed by “imposters”.
  • Labelling others with variations of ASPD, though they usually skip that part and call them psychopaths directly, to refute their arguments.
  • Mocking members’ sensitive stories in kangaroo courts, using vile language, after having expressed “sincere” empathy for them.

Make no mistake; these people are dangerous.

You register under the impression of posting anonymously, only disclosing what you see fit and being able to leave whenever, which is when a normal forum admin or moderator would cease all interaction with you. That was the whole point of being able to open up on the internet.

If you lived outside the US, were temporarily part of a group like PF, and one day posted about feeling extremely low – as people sometimes do in order to blow off steam – you would think that merely closing the window in your browser was the end of it. Well, guess again. They once tracked down a member from a different country and alerted the police regarding a suicide related post, causing substantial trouble in her life and custody case.

Imagine bringing that on yourself just by clicking “post” on a foreign internet forum. Imagine the absurdity.

So when you feel those things after a relationship, does it really matter if your ex was a psychopath, a sociopath, a narcissist, or a garden-variety jerk? The label doesn’t make your feelings any more or less valid. Your feelings are absolutes. They will endure, no matter which word you settle upon.

YES, it does matter.

Psychopathy is a personality disorder. Being a jerk is a behavioural problem, which needn’t be permanent or affect all sides of an individual’s life. It matters even more in terms of discussing your story on forums based on psychopathy, where the constant use of the word psychopath is encouraged.

There I was thinking the whole “identify the psycho” technique was meant to be accurate; that it was crucial for a “survivor” to apply it correctly. Now we see that the label is just fluff and it’s OK to confuse someone who is a bit of a dick with a deranged, dangerous individual. Pick whatever you want; it’s all the same.

And it certainly matters when you place the word “psychopath” on the cover of your book and market it as such, although it now appears it addresses a much wider audience, some cases having nothing to do with psychopathy whatsoever.

And if you are anything like me, we can agree on this simple truth: good people make you feel good and bad people make you feel bad.

Yup. Never heard that one before. Certainly not in George Orwell’s  Animal Farm, when the sheep would go ‘‘Four legs good, two legs bad! Four legs good, two legs bad!” 

This oversimplification is baffling, really.

The fact that the book mentions it doesn’t solely address victims of genuine psychopaths but people who have been hurt in general is very telling; however, those who read it and join PF end up using the words psychopath and narcissist by default.

I might be biased—actually, I definitely am—but I think PsychopathFree.com has one of the coolest healing processes out there. We believe in education, open dialogue, validation, and self-discovery. We have a uniquely inspiring user base, full of resilient values and honest friendships.

I’m not sure whether to laugh or cry. Laughing is generally healthier. The only thing open about the place is the back door, through which they constantly (and abruptly) shove others. Many compare the way one relates to the forum to a toxic relationship; by the time you get doubts and want to confront the establishment or leave, you have too much invested already, as they know your details and intimate story, hence you choose to stay on their good side and not draw attention to yourself.

It’s a funny world, isn’t it? We have doctors who kill for a living and key people in corporations working with governing bodies who are supposed to regulate their practice. And we have people with awful ethics writing books about human interaction.

Here is a real gem:

But first, you’ll need to forget everything you thought you knew about people. Understanding psychopathy requires letting go of your basic emotional instincts. Remember, these are people who prey on forgiveness. They thrive on your need for closure. They manipulate compassion and exploit sympathy.

And they’re surprised people keep comparing them to a cult…


After some pondering, I figured posting the conversation I came across accidentally makes sense in order to warn others, with all precautions taken to hide the details of everyone involved (aside from an admin as the way an admin behaves is quite important).

As mentioned in my comment below, a relatively new member questioned the status quo, politely saying he would prefer a quick solution rather than months or years of analysing the difficult relationship. He named the thread ”Our own obsession”. Nothing unusual – unless you’re a devout PF member, reacting to every word with suspicion. Here is what happened next:

PF gang up 2- mod

PF gang up 2- mod

PF gang up 3 - Copy

PF gang up 3 - Copy.1

Still on the good enough side, pretending to try to be helpful, though notice the tone. I covered a few lines giving details of the OP’s personal situation.

PF gang up 7 - Copy

PF gang up 7.1

Notice here the “WE”/ “OUR”, which the OP had been jumped for, is kosher when used by an experienced forum member. Hence while the member felt outraged she was being included into the OP’s “our own obsession”, he should be fine with the “we can be toxic to other people”.

The new member needs to understand the following:

-He has found the ultimate experts in the book and forum. Doubting them is like questioning evolution. He is not on the site to share his views in an equal environment, but to be told what to do.

-The experts know better than he does how long his recovery is supposed to last, even though the human mind is the land of all possibilities.  He has to accept the fact that he’ll be suffering for a year or more; arguing otherwise is like arguing pigs can fly. Imagine the fucking nerve, telling someone what they are supposed to feel and for how long, and discouraging them from trying to recover faster. If anything, this is proof of the concerns from others (that their admin ridicules by calling them “concern trolls”) are valid. They are effectively trying to drill the need to dwell on a bad relationship into people’s heads. They don’t want people to get better as soon as possible.

Still wanting for an apology or acquiescence, the member’s tone changes quickly.

PF gang up 11 - Copy

PF gang up 11 - Copy.1

The member making that accusation also wrote the gems below. How does the term gaslighting even apply to that quote? It’s basically an attempt to find a familiarly-sounding “crime” to pin on the comrade who was undermining the PF revolution with contrary views.

PF gang up 9 - Copy

PF gang up 9 - Copy.1

That about sums it up (the attitude on PF). Notice how polite he was trying to be, while still maintaining his point of view. His politeness was met with disbelief and as a personal attack.

He obviously had  a healthy view on taking one’s life back, meaning stopping the toxic, consuming rumination. Taking one’s life back is impossible without taking one’s mind back. But that’s not allowed on PF; one is never supposed to be better off than the average member, who still ruminates daily. ”I want to get better quickly” is seen as ‘‘ you shouldn’t be ruminating for this length of time”, directed at them, which is visibly a touchy subject since it makes members so angry instantly.

Subsequently, the thread disappeared into the big nowhere.

Like I said, I had just stumbled in there intending to spend no more than a minute, after not visiting the site for weeks.  Who knows how often this actually happens; it’s all erased within hours and members carry on, pretending not to see the nastiness.

Hence… so much for open dialogue, self-discovery and whatever PR speech their admin was giving.

If you register on PF with an open mind and heart, chances are this will happen to you. In fact, it is very common for members to be banned on the first day, after just a few posts.

Note: I am attaching this here to avoid writing yet another blog post about Psychopath Free.

Recently, the interest in speaking out regarding the recovery forum phenomenon has grown, former members seeking to expose it for what it is, namely emotional quackery.

This YouTube video describes it as a mental trap, as many former members have before. The interest in this blog is also growing, judging by the traffic increase, most of it via Facebook (where I don’t have an account so I can’t tell what’s going on). As they spread their propaganda, the importance of shedding some light on matters is significant in environments which constitute rich recruitment pools for them.

I was thinking recently of the amount of information such forums obtain on individuals who are desperate for a friendly ear or for an explanation they cannot realistically obtain from external sources – much like people being approached by quacks in their hour of need, with a miraculous solution for their health problems. This site saved my life, a common expression of gratitude from enthusiastic new members, indicates that some people are literally desperate when they land there.

Today, privacy is a frequently used word, when the reality behind it has almost disappeared. However, one is rarely willing to allow complete strangers full access into their lives, bedroom included.

You have a social life – work, acquaintances, hobbies; people in it only see what you consider safe for the public eye. The you have a private life, populated by family and close friends, who know more about you but not necessarily everything.The rest, you save for those you trust the most.

If you don’t hold back at all it’s normally before a therapist, life coach , a priest you genuinely trust etc. And they all have a few things in common: actual knowledge regarding people, experience with others and most importantly, a policy of confidentiality. Moreover, they have accountability. At least you know who they are.

Think about what you’re giving access to on forums such as PF.

  • Information regarding your family, legal status, children, custody case, other details with legal ramifications.
  • The most problematic relationships in your life.
  • Your current and overall mental health and emotional state.
  • Information regarding your hobbies, habits, preferences, political views, spiritual views etc, down to what you do on a daily basis.
  • Detailed accounts of your most painful memories (all types of abuse), some of which you are most likely revealing for the first time.
  • Detailed accounts of your childhood memories, with an openness to be analysed by others in that sense, to be told how past traumas have affected you.
  • Information regarding your vices, affairs, addictions, phobias and deepest insecurities – which they can use against you later.
  • Information regarding your sex life, past and present.

Basically, all your defences are down. Anything you would normally keep from public view is now in their database. Forever.

On top of that, according to former members with inside knowledge, here is what they can find without your permission, using their forum software, your digital footprint as well as other data you automatically provide when posting:

  • Your Facebook profile (though I’m not sure to what extent) and at least the amount of information which is public by default;
  • Other social media profiles, including on other forums, where you thought you were posting anonymously;
  • Your internet browsing, apparently;
  • Private messages you send to other members.

Obviously, most people would not agree to that invasion of privacy by any group or institution.

But they would agree even less when learning the PF team accesses all this data in order to determine if you are a danger to the forum and potentially a psychopath yourself.  So basically, people who usually clutch at straws to prove others are  “evil” and disordered have full access to who you are, who your family is and maybe even where you work. I wonder what’s wrong with this picture ….


Some people might argue psychology and psychiatry are dodgy in terms of credibility, since they rely on speculation instead of measurable data. But there are certain things you’re not likely to ever hear when turning to a professional, this being one of them:pfnewban3 mod

pfnewban3 mod 2

Granted this person seemed annoyed and quite hostile – however, when starting a community for those who are in emotional distress one should expect some members to be hyper-vigilant and have a difficult attitude. Tact is part of the difference between those who have studied human behaviour for a good few years and those who base their expert status on thin air. Whatever the approach of a professional is when hitting a brick wall, so to speak, I bet it’s nothing like the paragraph pasted above, or the one below, addressed to the same new member.


Not to say that people on forums should put up with any type of attitude; however, the niche they have selected basically implies that some new members will be in a bad place emotionally and even psychologically. So whilst no one is obligated to show endless patience, it surely doesn’t help for them to be called nasty, horrible and vile (the OP ended up with a couple of those labels after being banned), following only a short exchange of replies. The hostility they perceive from the world at large must increase dramatically.

The team shows no worries at all about the high potential of attracting people who are in a troubled state to the forum, to be swiftly booted; they don’t seem to wonder what can happen as a result.

Also, one is expected not only to have the perfect composure at all times, but to give advice to others (their self-involvement being a red flag according to their main admin), unless they have fallen out of grace by breaking “no contact”, which is when they are unworthy, as they are – try not to spill your coffee when reading this – “projecting a false image that is affecting other members”. I wonder who is really projecting here…

no contact pf- edited

no contact pf- edited2

That, by the way, was in response to members complaining that others were allowed to keep their “no contact” time intact although they had resumed contact at some point. The mere fact that they feel righteous indignation regarding other people’s lives and want others to be “stripped of their badge”, so to speak, says a lot about what they’re really doing there in the first place.

Examples could go on an on, but surely these are enough to provide a glimpse into the overall atmosphere unsuspecting people find there.

And in case some members or staff members ever wonder what gives me the right to post these screen shots here and comment on them, well, it’s the same “entity” or concept giving them the right to hold other people’s information captive, to hunt for thought crimes in their history and hold witch trials for all to see, indulging freely in all types of language and speculation. If they can do it, so can others.


Psychopathy – The New Fad For Social Justice Warriors

Make no mistake – although they come bearing rainbows and think they are empathy incarnate, SJWs are no hippies – they are hippies with a thirst for blood; the flower in “flower power” has turned carnivorous.

Becoming one is quite simple.

First, pick a category which seems to suffer from a disadvantage (even a slight one) compared to another and refer to the issue as oppression. Go as far as you like. You can say women who walk around half-naked are oppressed by the men staring at them; that women are oppressed by man-spreading on the metro (this crowd managed to get a law against it passed somewhere in the US). Anything goes.

Then, “spread awareness”, which, when SJWs are involved, means blow something out of proportion, make it seem more common than it is; make people feel threatened or outraged by it. Of course, real oppression deserves awareness and solutions. Female genital mutilation is an example, as are forced marriages in some communities, especially within cults. Man-spreading on the bus simply isn’t.

Where possible, turn this into the next best thing to a religion. Feminism, alternative lifestyles, you fill in the blank. Get endorsement from vote-hungry politicians, get into schools, get into churches. Make it abhorrent for anyone to express common sense; socially decapitate any dissenters. They are siding with the enemy.

When dealing with genuine issues, where you’d think they finally get something right, SJWs see the world upside-down. Let’s take paedophilia, which is a real societal cancer. Instead of focusing on  wealthy and influential networks existing in the world today, occasionally exposed by the press, they would have us think all men are potential paedos; they target people photographing their own kids in bathing suits by the pool. Any man speaking to a child who is not his own is now a “potential paedo” according to some.

Next on the ”to-do” list, apparently, is psychopathy, for groups such as Psychopath Free.


Like paedophilia, psychopathy is real; for a change, it affects us all, since our world is practically run by psychopaths. They carry out wars and genocides, they displace huge numbers of people across the planet, they impose censorship, brainwash the masses through the media and micromanage them on a daily basis. Lower level psychopaths also exist; some people are truly callous and have no remorse when trying to reach their goals. And yes, the media does glorify them nowadays.


What sites like PF do is trivialise the problem and drag it into the sphere of bitter ex’s recalling the mistreatment of every average Joe, or recalling their childhood difficulties and calling 50% of their family members psychopaths and narcissists. Having seen way too much of this, I’m getting a clearer picture of the great deception in this tidal wave of diagnosing others with personality disorders.

As with many SJWs, some people who believe to have been victimised by a psychopath or narcissist ultimately start blaming every problem they’ve ever had on this modern Nosferatu.

They start with the emotional neglect during their early years, with not feeling cared for and understood by their parents. Of course emotional neglect is wrong and parents should be mindful of how they handle those important years, yet they are only human and such mistakes do not qualify them as disordered.

Looking for information on emotional abuse, I came across very sobering material put out by Dr Pete Gerlach on his site and in many YouTube videos; Dr Gerlach has been a family therapist for over three decades. His conclusions are well explained, non-hysterical and simply make sense, if one is able to have an honest look at themselves and their own lives.


To put it briefly, he explains that most people carry psychological wounds they are not aware of, unwittingly caused by parents who in turn had been wounded as children. These wounds cause adults to behave in similar ways and continue the cycle, without meaning to. By examining their behaviour and practicing self-awareness (not “awareness” of how rotten other people are, while seeing themselves as victims), they can break the cycle and avoid wounding their own children. The other adults we come in contact with also carry these wounds and display difficult behaviour. His videos are not easy listening for those who see themselves as angels of light who are not prone to behavioural problems.

Demonising others and labelling them as psychopaths, while placing oneself on the other side of the fence, is hardly a solution. 

Times are very fertile for the PF campaign. Compared to a few years ago, the internet is now replete with material on abuse, which, while containing a substantial amount of truth, approaches it from the wrong angle, leading to this black-and-white view on human beings. It’s a call to pitchforks and SJW “awareness spreading”.

Sooner or later, if one takes this path, they will fall into awful exaggerations. Radical feminists think men are inherently domineering, disrespectful and want to enslave them. Those who militate for the celebration of alternative lifestyles see traditionalists as neo-Nazis who would hang them if they had the chance. In the same way, the PF crowd argues people with difficult or aggressive behaviour are set on destroying the ones they mistreat.

It’s all about finding an enemy and dedicating one’s energy to fighting them. What is also common among these radical groups is that they can never tolerate a more balanced view. Whilst they were genuinely traumatised at some point in their lives, they are equally deluded and dangerous now.

Through simple word of mouth, we saw PF hit #1 new release for Abuse, Personality Disorders, and Domestic Violence. Books get passed from clients to therapists, from patients to doctors, from defendants to lawyers, and suddenly awareness spreads like wildfire.

Spreading awareness, in this case, refers to actively encouraging people with no psychology or psychiatry background to freely diagnose others with Cluster B disorders, based on a shallow and subjective book, with no credentials, no depth or social responsibility behind it aside from one person’s hurt feelings.

Until now, this information was mainly accessed by those who were searching for it on-line. The oversimplification of the issue will become a weapon to many people with a vendetta against those who have wronged them.

Give it a few years and, if this tendency is not stopped by our inner voice of reason, “narc” or “psycho” will become a common schoolyard slur. There is an enormous difference between calling someone a bit of a jerk and labelling them with the most dangerous personality disorder there is, for the same type of behaviour.

In an insane world, sanity is the most precious thing we have. Please don’t put your minds and lucidity into the hands of these people.

Psychopath Free and Cult/ Utopia Fantasies

I’m not sure how to start this and how to use acceptable words, as I’ve got nothing against the members of PF; generally they are sensitive, empathetic people in need of kindred souls – which is why I can only cringe when seeing the level of idealisation many have reached regarding the forum and its team.

Here you can find a recent thread  describing an imaginary closed community where all PF members would dwell in harmony, among lambs and butterflies. It would be named after the forum’s admin (nope, not a joke, though you’d think that had gone out of fashion after Jonestown).

To sum it up, they describe a country paradise of complete social harmony. Some PF members clearly think the forum is a virtual Heaven on Earth and that if they started a real community it would be perfect, without any unkindness, crime, rudeness or conflicts. The police would have nothing to do there (except look out for the psychopathic ex-partners of the residents, presumably to keep them at bay). It would be a place where they would never fear or distrust others again.

To be unceremonious, it sounds like the Exclusive Brethren on Prozac, minus the inbreeding.

Obviously, I needn’t mention the sheer number of groups which started out that way and had less than idyllic ends.

My intention is not to offend vulnerable people who are trying to find comfort in each other. They must have participated in that fantasy with innocence and enthusiasm, thinking no one but forum members would take an interest in it. They must genuinely believe PF is a place of love and kindness.

I am simply creeped out.

The forum is meant to help people “heal”, as in overcome the trauma of abuse and be able to move on, to have a social life, to trust and to love again, whichever applies.  Some have been there for years, and if the result is they have vivid fantasies of fencing themselves in from the rest of the world, with the idealised versions of strangers they only speak to on the internet, I would say the result has been quite the opposite.

They seem dependent on this group for comfort, emotional balance, enthusiasm. And the irony is they could lose all that in a matter of minutes, as the team they worship (almost literally I see) couldn’t give a rat’s bum about kicking them to the side for the slightest disagreement.

I’ve been on forums and I’ve been a forum admin – and have never seen anything like this. Yes, members meet at some point if they can and develop friendships in real life. That is only natural. The vibe you get from that thread – and PF in its entirety – takes matters to a whole different level. I’ve no doubt some members only feel safe on the forum, while being aware of all the gossip and nastiness behind the scenes.

What they’re doing isn’t healthy. And the PF team seems to love the adulation, encouraging such fantasies which clearly go too far.

Later Edit

If anything, this is proof that the comradery on PF is meant to stay withing the boundaries of imagination and never be transposed into real life connections.


In truth, interaction between members unfolds as follows:

  • They are not allowed to send private messages until they have been on the forum for some time; a standard time is not specified; I therefore assume one is given the green light by moderators at a time of their choice.
  • They are constantly encouraged not to befriend other members too soon, as well as report those they see as “suspicious”.
  • An uninvited attempt to get to know someone better is regarded as harassment, even following positive signals from the other member.
  • Posting certain details about oneself is also forbidden and can result in a ban. This happened recently to someone who posted a link to a dating profile. They see someone revealing their face as an act of aggression, though  that is most welcome in any other online environment, as most people  deem it a sign of trust.


So let’s say there’s a situation where two members, at least one being new, would like to exchange details and communicate with true privacy (email, phone calls or in person), without going through the forum and having every conversation scrutinised by others. There is simply no way they can do so without the permission of those in charge. It’s impossible; there is no bridge or back alley to take.

Does that seem like a respectful way to treat other adults, by not allowing them to connect if they choose to do so? Or is it a good example of infantilising others, deciding who they can form friendships with and at what point, as well as how their interaction is allowed to take place in the meantime? Just imagine how many potential friendships between people with a similar experience never took off and how frustrating it must be in this age of limitless communication. 

Cult-like dynamics are known to only make sense within said communities and this is no exception. Developing a strong attachment to such a closed community, where one has to jump through hoops not to raise suspicion and constantly walk on eggshells, is strange to say the least.

It’s sad to watch, considering the likelihood of some of the most dependent people being booted along the way.


With no intention of mocking these people, quotes such as these show the intensity of the emotional attachment some members have (at least to start with).















“No Victim Blaming” Vs “Tough Love”

Everything generates trends nowadays – even recovery from abusive relationships.

Whereas logic tells us there could be numerous explanations for the way a relationship evolves, even when abuse (or aggression) is present, self-appointed experts in “healing” generally take two approaches – that of tearing the perpetrator apart or that of slapping the enabler around as a helpful wake up call.

Obviously, both are just as wrong and damaging, since they fail to consider human nature – that every individual is different and so is every relationship, regardless of common traits which make some of them comparable.

“Victim blaming”

Putting people down for being too credulous or hopeful is indeed a toxic attitude and those who routinely use other people’s mistakes to feel better about themselves are indeed pathetic. However, as with everything in life, extremes should always be avoided in order to preserve one’s sanity, especially if the person who is turning to such groups for help feels responsible as well for the relationship failing or for starting it in the first place.

Personally, I disagree with the idea of codependency, as people are so complex and evolve throughout life; they may be willing to accept abuse for some time and radically change later, without the need to brand themselves with lifelong personality issues. It has become a plight of our times to label ourselves with all sorts of abstract concepts which cannot be accurately identified and there are plenty shysters lurking to take advantage of our fear of being abnormal.

Then again I may be wrong and this approach may work for some people. It’s not for me to say what their approach should be and I find it totally ridiculous for them to be rejected by a peer support group as if they were “traitors to the cause”.

On Psychopath Free, one is expected to place all the blame on the person who was more aggressive and absolve oneself of it entirely. That cannot lead to realism or growth and can only help momentarily. Whilst not blaming others for their predicament is only fair, one should be given the chance to speak their mind about their own, otherwise support becomes a travesty.

Also, this article is great food for thought regarding one-sided views.

“Tough love”

Whereas persisting in a victim mentality doesn’t do people any favours, being bullied by overconfident (anonymous) “advisers” is just as toxic. This is known to happen especially on Lisa E Scott’s forum, not so much by the founder herself but by the two people who run the site, as seen here in numerous testimonies as well as on complaints.com.

You can read more about similar forums here and here.

A mixture of both

Another aspect I find odd is the refusal of Psychopath Free and The Path Forward alike to support those who cannot break away from the relationship in question (sometimes it’s simply impossible due to living arrangements, children etc., and other times members are understandably confused). These people are so self-righteous they reject anyone who deviates from the  sacred “procedure” they have established.

Of course, it becomes really twisted when they alternate the two approaches; Psychopath Free probably coined the unlikely combination. First they reassure the member to the back of beyond it was not their fault for persisting in the relationship and label those who accused them of being weak as cruel and superficial.

However, if that person refuses or fails to permanently break contact, they are swiftly booted out the back door. Hence someone can be considered normal while rejecting others’ warnings for years, but if God forbid, they do not apply the advice given on PF right away, they must be hopeless. Staff members will treat them with arrogance and disdain, as if they had failed to embrace the ultimate answer, the ultimate revelation. Beyond ridiculous, as usual.

While these two paths might keep a person above water for a while, in the long run they will lead to anything but sanity.

Is This A Support Group Or A Cult?

If you’re asking yourself this question, you probably know the answer.

Many former members of abuse recovery forums use the word “cult” freshly after ending their group experience, in what I believe to be a spontaneous manner. Without connecting with other former members, they leave isolated testimonies on the web, mentioning this uncanny resemblance.

Although unlike proper cults, forums don’t seek to lock you away in a compound so you can spend every waking moment devoting yourself to their cause, they certainly want a monopoly on your view on human relationships, as well as obedience and loyalty. And, of course, some money, if you’re easily persuaded to reward them for their time. A few of them pitch books written by staff members (I know four such groups at least), some ask for donations and one offers paid counselling sessions by people with no training whatsoever in this field.

toilet 2 0806PIppouniformity2(1)

A quick list of strikingly similar features between some support groups and cults (freshly edited as the initial one was very long, poorly written and repeated a few points):

The “guru”

All forums of this type I’ve come across  – described by many as toxic – are built around a charismatic leader, thought to have superior knowledge; there is obvious adulation and never any criticism. The so-called expert has no studies related to psychology or psychiatry but instead has written one or more books about abusers from personal experience. It is not unheard of for them to ask members to discredit the competition (other authors writing on the same topic). The forums themselves are littered with brownie points; it’s little wonder these people get such a big head.

The clique

A tight-knit group around the leader is chosen to maintain order; they never display any originality and act as if they represented an institution. They are always cheered on by sycophants in swarms, regardless of the absurdity of their behaviour. Brownie points in their direction also abound. It is known that once inside a controlling group, one absorbs the leading team’s attitudes and after a while cannot realise how absurd they seem to the rest of the world.

No dissent 

There is a clear demand for complete acquiescence to the group’s understanding of the world, as well as the chosen path to whatever the group aims for (in this case, recovery from abusive relationships) . On PF for instance, a single disagreement means you are one foot out the back door. You will be ”tackled” within minutes for any slightly unconventional opinion, as it will immediately be reported to staff members by the vultures of common orthodoxy, posing as loving, supportive peers. Of course, they are not all like that; many people are truly kind, yet I have to wonder how they can look the other way when others are being mistreated. People are even targeted for making common sense observations, such as the fact that it is preferable for the recovery to be quick as opposed to lasting for months or years. If the group agrees on a standard period of time recovery is expected to last, no other option is considered, as insane as that sounds, since every individual and situation is different. And they expect others to treat their estimations as science, being outraged when contradicted.

The false image

They present themselves as a loving, non-judgemental community while being a gossip-ridden wasp’s nest. People join both support groups and cults in hopes of finding a few all-embracing human beings with a higher capability to love, to connect with others. Just before the people at Jonestown commited mass suicide, they briefly managed to keep up that appearance during the official visit. Initially, they were believed.

Disdain for people with actual knowledge in the field

Akin to so-called Christian cults, who hate it when one of the main denominations exposes their aberrant doctrines as non-compatible with Christianity, such forums have an overt dislike for actual therapists or people who have studied their chosen fields in general. The latter will never last there as it is strictly forbidden to ”profess having higher knowledge”, even when you genuinely have it. Just as a quack would not ask for endorsement from an actual doctor, they know they run an improvised show there and are most likely aware they make tons of mistakes.

The pledge

A pledge is sometimes put before members, which they are encouraged to sign as the symbol of starting a new life. It refers to what they will and won’t do in their private life; very intimate things one should think twice about before jovially signing. And that’s because no stranger has any business interfering with or questioning what you do in your intimate life. It’s one thing to receive advice, and another to adopt a pre-packaged set of rules and morals you  find on a website. Even if they sound sensible, for me it’s a bit much. We are all individuals and should never feel accountable to an internet group for what we do privately.

Knowing you better than you know yourself

Such people will boldly tell you not only who you truly are (as you are presumably unable to figure it out by yourself), but who your family members and friends truly are, to the point of lambasting you if you disagree. They will make statements about people they’ve never met and expect you to accept their evaluations, or else. They will draw dramatic conclusions from fleeting online conversations, proving their lack of depth and their sole intention of ”converting” you to their ideology.

Targeting vulnerable people

These sites target people who might not think clearly when joining; staff members are well aware of it and take advantage. The same method is used by cults; they prey almost exclusively on those who are at a crucial junction and don’t know which road to take. Some are suicidal and some just want an ideology to embrace, a new system to live by, if their belief in their former one is shattered.

Attachment and fear of exclusion

One’s journey there consists of love-bombing followed by the swift threat of exclusion, and often swift exclusion as well. At first one is made to feel fully accepted and included; they develop a bond with the group and some of the  members in particular, to be coldly reprimanded for trifles and ultimately thrown out. After establishing that the group is the safest environment in the world, the next thing on the list is establishing you might not be worthy of it; you will be permanently scrutinised.

Walking on eggshells around petty tyrants

There is a lot of nit-picking and placing the group’s technicalities above general principles such as compassion and fairness, demonstrating clear pettiness. The examples are countless. Cults are also obsessed with every small rule which helps them believe they re organising themselves according to a well-crafted system.

Former members describe a tightly controlled environment; an overall feeling of walking on eggshells and insecurity about expressing one’s opinion. You just never know when you’ve used too many semicolons.  Even if you agree with their principles they will manage to find fault with your posts. Out of the blue, someone will pedantically tell you ”you’re on a recovery forum” and you’re ”detracting from the sole goal of giving and receiving support”. Whatever that means to them.

Paranoia regarding group members

On PF at least, members are told not to trust each other but to trust the leadership instead. They are advised not to make friends straight away, not to communicate privately and so forth. Trust the leadership only. There is also a constant hunt for people who are lying about their situation and have a hidden agenda; new members are targeted immediately, without their knowledge. While they apparently receive you with open arms, they regard everything you post with suspicion and encourage all members to have the same approach. This is very very common in cults and extremist political organisations, where paranoid leaders are always wary of a threat to their status, as well as ”enemy infiltrators”. However, on a recovery forum, that is even more ridiculous.

Permanent ban for trifles

One is subjected to quick and permanent exclusion, no explanation needed. Some cults operate that way, whilst others hardly ever allow you to leave. Scientology can ”declare you a suppressive person” for reading material they disapprove of and associating with people they don’t like , and once you’re out, you’re out. They claim they couldn’t save you from yourself and are suspisicous of anyone who still keeps in touch with you. So does the PF admin.

The enemy

Both cults and said groups target a particular category of enemies against whom all morality must be dropped. In this case, it is of course the huge army of psychopaths and narcissisits sweeping the world.


Forum staff and members constantly push others to cut ties with various people in their entourage. The few weeks I was active on PF, I never once saw advice such as ”maybe you could try to work things out” when a partner or family member was involved. Moreover, they encourage cutting contact with the suspected psychopath’s family and common friends, even when children are involved, as if that person were radioctive material contaminating everyone they met.

The Stasi and the lack of transparency

Since only parts of a forum are visible to all members, the ”backstage” is full of  reports, suspicions, gossip, false accusations, and they require no proof to be investigated by staff members, who then analyse a member’s posts for clues of  a rotten personality. On PF, there’s reason to believe even  data such as their IP, location, other profile information etc is shared  with other sites to find matching profiles of ”trouble makers” (LE, this suspicion was confirmed and what is more, they track people’s on-line activity). There is no limit. All ”investigations”, or should I say witch trials, take place behind closed doors, often without the person being aware. Staff members are never accountable before other members. Accusers are never accountable before anyone. This creates an atmosphere of distrust, not to mention omnipotence on the team’s part.

Paranoia regarding outsiders

Cults are famous for this, and so are forums like PF. It’s in their policy to obsessively distrust others. They insist there are psychopaths at every social gathering, in every work environment, in every group. The world is  riddled with these monsters and one must always be on guard.

Baseless arrogance and holy literature

The clique has a chip on its shoulder regarding an advanced level of knowledge in the chosen field etc, which is not substantiated by any recognition in real life. They wear their no contact time like a badge of honour, as if they were eerily competing with anyone along those lines. Such groups almost always sell so-called educational material which is improvised, subjective and misleading, usually authored by their guru; in time this material becomes sacrosanct and above all criticism to them. There is a quasi-religious adherence to the principles and rules of the group, forgetting they came out of thin air and are prone to error.


Such groups commonly seek financial support from members, to aid them in their ”sacred mission” of bringing awareness. Some even make a fortune out of it.


Such groups regularly swarm any dissenters or critics with smear campaigns, putting aside all human decency, any positive interaction they had with them and so forth. They gang up on people on the forum and outside of it.

Idealising the group

Even though they’re aware of all the conflicts, drama and complaints, they shamelessly promote their groups as the best thing since sliced bread.In complete denial, they dismiss any reports of negative experiences as unimportant or false, while praising the positive ones. Perhaps they even believe their own lies.

The mission

They seem to truly believe their groups have a special mission on this planet and behave as such (they also behave like others should accept that claim). This, in spite of being aware they are all just improvisers with a strong enough attitude to convince others of their legitimacy. They justify their viciousness through the belief that they are fighting the ”dark side” and everyone they attack is hell-bent on jeopardising their ”sacred mission”; they demonise those who disagree with their actions in order to treat them in any manner.

The lingo

Staff members use slogans and memes, as well as a jargon, and encourage members to use them. Many cults have a specific language, especially those based on space aliens; Scientology must have hundreds of terms. Besides using clinical terms, these groups often use “narc”, “spath”, “P” and so forth, to somehow feel they are in the inner circle of understanding.

Corporate speech

They are no longer acting as individuals but as an institution. Plenty messages reek of corporate PR. ”Here at so&so, we pride ourselves in supporting a creative approach to healing. We take great care to ensure every member benefits from personalised advice…etc”. Besides the hypocrisy, this style is ridiculous through its pretentiousness, since they are only running peer support groups.

Tough love

They claim to put pressure on members and treat them with ”tough love” for their own salvation. Cults do this all the time, applying all kinds of public scoldings and punitive measures to ”save people from themselves”.

The common road from an ideology based group to a cult

a. A few people gather to discuss a subject they are emotionally affected by and develop a common understanding of it. They theorise their view with no science behind it and establish a strict guideline they never deviate from. Any members who show critical thinking and keep an open mind are expelled or leave and the group is now made up of extremists, often led by one person.

 b. They attract proselytes by love-bombing them at a vulnerable time of their lives; they offer answers to confused people who are desperate to be guided, for unconditional support and a space of self-expression; new members develop a high sense of gratitude and attachment to the group. At first they can’t believe their luck, considering the fact that they are improvisers, but the more proselytes they attract, the more arrogant they become.

 c. They market well and gain popularity. They now consider themselves authorities in the matter and there is increased talk about their “mission”; the focus shifts from helping individuals onto the general success of the group, to which members start being sacrificed if they don’t agree 100 per cent with the group view. The initial guideline becomes a fiercely enforced doctrine. Its enforcers become “warriors of light” and anyone who challenges them or disagrees with them is seen as opposing their noble purpose. They start looking down on those who are not “enlightened” enough to fanatically embrace their views as soon as they come across them.

 d. They are now paranoid and see enemies and infiltrators everywhere. They spy on their members and each other; any decision-making goes on behind closed doors. The leaders are too important to be held accountable for any decision they make. They should never be questioned or contradicted. They start using duplicitous tactics to spot infiltrators, while maintaining the facade of a loving family to draw more people in.

e. The leaders have now lost all humility and are absorbed by their self-constructed expert status. They solidify their theories by writing more and more material, building a public image of legitimacy in the field. Among their members, they are know-it-all’s and regularly break the rules of decency they impose on others. They are condescending, dismissive, controlling, secretive and abuse the confidence of the unsuspecting. All their empathy is gone. They quickly stick derogatory labels on all critics in order to silence them and engage in outright manipulation of public opinion to defend their behaviour. They contradict themselves by inflating their role in the betterment of their members’ lives and minimising it when members are negatively affected by their experience with the group.