#compulsive lying

[ame-wa-ame-2]

the issue with getting used to lying due to trust issues is you realize how easy and sort of fun it is to lie so you get stuck in this loop of "lying is my reflex, it must be everyone elses too" → "everyone else must be lying all the time" → "i cant trust anyone because they could be lying" → "i have to lie more to protect myself" (buries myself in a grave of never allowing anyone close enough to understand me, therefore everyone around assumes im being malicious while i assume theyre being malicious, thus worsening my mental state and making myself further dependent on the unhealthy defense mechanism of Lying More)

[echolalialand]

can we talk about autistics who are compulsive/pathological liars

[taxidermy-angel-wing]

happy birthday to arguably the most controversial character in the entire danganronpa series, kokichi ouma. this character has been my favorite since the year of our lord 2020, and i will never stop defending this little shit.

now! an in depth (sorta) explanation as to why he means so much to me below the cut ❤️

I’ve never admitted this out loud actually, but I am a compulsive liar. ive felt isolated and alienated for simply living in the only way I know how to (the lore there is a whole other can of worms). in relation to that, many of the protagonists I’ve seen in many forms of media (not just danganronpa) have an emphasis on telling the truth or doing the right thing always with minimal flaws. lying was seen as this lowly and evil thing that only the villains did. so when i saw kokichi for the first time, I immediately assumed he’d be the type of character to be an irredeemable liar who was simply evil for the hell of it (as the stereotype typically goes). but saying I was happy to be wrong would be a severe understatement. I have not seen a character that embodies my struggles with lying and masking better than kokichi. not before nor after drv3; it is a type of joy I will never forget. to see a character who was so much like me, do good things (with flawed methods ofc, there was nothing good about the deaths of miu and gonta) but while also having the same flaws that have followed me throughout my whole life. kokichi’s character gave me a sense of comfort. not pride in the fact I am a liar, but comfort in the fact that lying didn’t make me all terrible. it’s something I needed to hear, and instead I saw it in abundance.

so, happy birthday to the ultimate supreme leader that made an insecure 13 year old feel much better about himself.

[urfavisacompulsiveliar]

Kokichi Oma from Danganronpa is a compulsive liar 💜

[chronicbackstabbingdisorder]

Everyone stop putting your breakup venting and politics in the complusive lying tags challenge. Stop tagging shit about your ex cheating or politicians lying in a tag that should be for people with a highly stigmatized symptom of trauma and mental illness to find each other and talk about our own experiences.

[fuckpuncher]

I love hyperbole because i'm a compulsive liar and hyperbole is like ethical lying Amen

[waytooobsessedwithmcyt]

I'm like an open book but if it was told by an unreliable narrator

[theravenflies]

My Takes

Consider these

People with personality disorders are not inherently abusive. Yeah, even people with NPD and ASPD (why do I have to say that?) There is no such thing a narcissistic abuse. People with ASPD are not serial killers. They are people, stop putting them down for no reason. People with personality disorders are welcome here. All of them.

Armchair diagnosing is bad. I don't care how shit someone is, if you call them a narcissist, a psychopath, a sociopath, a compulsive/pathological liar, or literally any other disorder that they haven't been professionally diagnosed with, you're a dick. You can't know what's going on in their head. You are not their doctor and are not qualified to diagnose them. And it's just a dick move to diagnose Casey Anthony as someone with a heavily-stigmatized symptom THAT I ALSO HAVE HAD

Stop. Tagging. Your. Writing. With. Disability. Tags. The PTSD tag is nearly unusable because everyone tags their fics as PTSD. Stop it. That space is not for you. It's for us.

People with intellectual, developmental, cognitive, whatever disability deserve to be heard.

As do semispeaking and nonspeaking autistics.

Yes, we do need to listen to caretakers, they're how some people communicate. No one is invalid because they're a caretaker, they're invalid when they're an ableist caretaker.

If the autism "cure" were to exist right now, it would mean eugenics. I don't give a shit if you want it, it would mean eugenics. Society is way too anti-autism for us to trust non-autistics with a cure. I won't get into my rant about the concept of a cure unless asked, it doesn't matter. What does matter is that if that cure is created, it will be forced on people, even those who vehemently oppose it, so it can't exist yet without putting people in danger.

Autism Speaks is shit. So is National Autistic Society. So is the Autism Society. ASAN is on thin fucking ice.

Stop tagging political posts with NPD, ASPD, compulsive liar, or no empathy. You're being ableist and armchair diagnosing. And putting that shit on our feeds.

ABA is bad. Yes, always. All of it. I lost a friend to ABA and I will not budge on this. All pro-ABA people will be blocked, I do not give a shit.

I do not care about syscourse. I am not a system and am not qualified to have an opinion on it.

If you point out typos, grammar mistakes, or whatever when the other person hasn't explicitly said it's okay, stop. You're being ableist.

Stop using TBI as an insult. Yes, I was dropped on my head (okay, I fell, but still,) as a baby. Fuck you too.

This is a safe place for systems and I'm firmly anti-Split.

Autistic and intellectually disabled people are allowed to transition, be queer, get tattoos, drink, have sex, whatever, should they so want.

Mental age is bullshit. He doesn't have the mind of a two-year-old, he has the mind of an adult with IDD.

The posts of disabled people are not an excuse for you to trauma-dump. I don't care what your ex did, that person with NPD wasn't talking about them and it's a dick move to bring that up on their unrelated post.

People should not have to work to live. No one. Ever. Period.

Healthcare should be free

Caretakers need to stop killing their disabled charges

Autism Mommies (TM) are shitty people.

Don't even get me started on Fathering Autism (bitch, you aren't fathering autism, you're fathering ABBY)

Disabled people deserve dignity and privacy. All of them. Yes, even those ones. We're still people. You don't need to know how we go to the toilet.

Fiction does not determine morality and sending people anon hate telling them to kill themselves is a shitty thing.

Telling people to kill themselves in general is a shitty thing. What are you gonna do if they actually do it and you get arrested for manslaughter?

Trans kids deserve to transition, intersex kids deserve to not be mutilated and forced onto HRT when they can't or don't consent, children can and will be queer

Actual sex education needs to be standard

Label policing LGBT+ identities is bad

Devotees and "transableds" are not allowed here

Children and disabled people deserve to exist in public, even if you don't like us

Stop. Saying. Retard. Stop using autistic as an insult. Stop it and go to hell.

I'm pro-choice and I know you don't actually care about fetuses with Down Syndrome, you're just trying to guilt me.

I will reblog with more takes as they occur to me

And, most importantly, listen to ALL disabled voices. All of them. Every single one. We stand together or we don't stand a chance.

[januscorner]

Requested by @readingluvzz let me know if you want anything changed

[daffythefox]

I need to get better with compulsive lying. I'll keep saying I did something I didn't so I'm more interesting. What's the difference between making a joke and saying it happened to you because the joke works better in first person and lying? It's so complicated and I hate it. People's definitions of lying are so varied and neurotypical. I don't understand it.

[astroangel-speaks]

SOS SOS SOS

Z FOUND OUT IM A COMPULSIVE LIAR AND I CRACKED AND TOLD HIM BIG NONO SECRETS AGHHHH IM SO SICK SICK SICK SICK SICK HOW COULD I HAVE DONE THIS TO MYSELF

I WAS GONNA BREAK UP WITH HIM BUT HE WAS SO STUBBORN AND TELLING ME HE LOVED ME AND AGHDHGHHHHGH

I NEED OUT GET ME OUT I HATE IT HERE OMG IM TRAPPED HELP HELPPPP

I REGRET TELLING HIM ANYTHING I FEEL SO SICK SICK SICK SICK SICKKKKK

I HAVE MOST OF MY SECRETS HIDDEN BUT AUVBBBB HE KNOWS A FEW BIG ONES AGHHHH I HATE IT HEREEEEE

IM GONNA LIVESTREAM MY FUCKING SUICIDE I CANT AIGSHGEHVGHAHGHHH

what have I done :(((

I may have sprinkled a couple lies in there though.

im the evil twink his momma warned him about.

but yeah it’s safe to say, the illusion of the perfect boy is shattered and now I wanna fucking kms.

why why why why why why couldn’t I have shut my big stupid liar mouth.

why can’t I love normally

why can’t i just stfu

he sees me and it’s disgusting. im pulling my hair this is so gross.

I even told him about how I’d rather take my clothes off than talk about myself.

why does he still love me. he’s stupid for loving me.

his mom told him to give up on me and I agree.

give up.

im not good for you.

im not meant for you, im not loving, im not even empathetic.

I am a liar and you are a fool.

please tell me what to do from here.

I have royally fucked myself.

yours truly,

astroangel.

[taxidermy-angel-wing]

how to have hard conversations and be vulnerable while also not lying compulsively because I genuinely can’t control it atp tutorial no glue no borax

[compulsiveconfessions]

is it normal to lie so much that you can’t tell whats a fabrication or an actual memory? Or that you lie so much about your personality that you can’t really tell what parts of yourself are fake or not?

I’m almost 100% sure I am a compulsive and/or pathological liar and I was wondering if it was like this for any other compulsive/pathological liars

sorry I’m just stresssed and scared because I hate feeling this way

.

[wierdgaypanda-blog]

Just finished watching this Smosh Reddit video and I have some thoughts.

I enjoy these fun storytime type videos and I think the smosh reddit videos specifically have some really great commentary and interesting insights into the stories involved. They are both comedic and serious and cover a range of topics with different perspectives and opinions being portrayed in a way that is lighthearted and entertaining.

Unfortunately, the last story in this video is more complex than it seems on the surface and touches a topic that clearly no one on set was qualified to talk about and it shows.

The final story begins at 1:01:50 for anyone interested and details the story of a boyfriend lying to his girlfriend about the fact he volunteers at a homeless shelter on the weekends instead telling her that he has work on those days. The main issue of the story is the fact that he lies about where he is and what he is doing on the weekends for the whole three years of their relationship. The girlfriend discovers he's been lying, thinks he's cheating on her, finds out what he's really doing and is understandably upset and confused about why he didn't just tell her what he was really doing.

It was a confusing and complex situation and I recommend you watch the section of the video for full context.

My issue isn't with either of the people in the story but with both the Smosh team and everyone in the comments reactions to the story.

There was eventually another Update to the story that is not discussed in the video and it turned out the boyfriend in question suffered from a personality disorder.

My issue is with the fact this was not discussed, mentioned or even hinted at in the video. It was clear to me from just listening to Shane read the story that there was something going on here and the guy was clearly neurodivergent in some way. I'm genuinely shocked that no one on the Smosh team picked up on this and thought to mention it or include the final update.

As someone who is neurodivergent and suffers from mental health issues and has friends with severe mental health disorders, I actually sympathise with the boyfriend somewhat. In the end the main issue the girlfriend had was the fact that the boyfriend refused to go to therapy. It was a complicated and messy situation any we don't know everything but from the way she wrote it on the Reddit thread she gave him an ultimatum of go to therapy or we break up and he eventually chose breaking up.

My point I want to bring up is the fact that lot of people with personality disorders or other things that most people would consider severe mental health issues have a genuine, somewhat justified fear of therapists and therapy in general. Society as a whole is incredibly ableist, especially when it comes to mental health and neurodivergents, and so many of us are forced to come up with our own coping mechanisms and try to figure things out by ourselves. There is always the chance if we do go to therapy, we will be misdiagnosed, labelled crazy, or locked up for having a disorder we have no control over.

Don't get me wrong, the lying is not good, but it is a common coping mechanism many neurodivergent people develop in order to fit in and seem normal as part of masking.

Specifically, in this story the guy suffered negative social consequences for trying to help people thus in his brain trying to help people is bad and will result in people not wanting to interact with him anymore. Thus in order to keep interacting with people who he likes and cares about he cannot let them find out that he helps people or they wont want to be associated with him anymore.

It's obviously more complex than this and I could do my best to explain the entire thought process, including the "I'm a bad person" thing the boyfriend mentions, but that's not the point I'm trying to make.

The point I'm trying to make is that most people in our society see neurodivergents as a negative trait. The fact that he had a personality disorder that affected the way he thought and acted means that he is a "walking red flag" and "should not be in a relationship" because of this. This is an inherently ableist opinion but in the world we currently live in it is the common opinion and was the opinion expressed in the video.

I'm not saying the girlfriend's feelings are invalid or that she wasn't justified in breaking up with him. It's her life and her relationship and she is fully justified in doing whatever she feels is best for her and her emotional wellbeing. What I'm actually doing is asking anyone who reads this to examine their own bias. If people as a whole weren't so afraid of and discriminatory against neurodivergent people we wouldn't be so afraid of going to therapy and actually getting treatment and learning to navigate the world in a healthy way with proper communication. If there wasn't the fear of being misunderstood so badly that we end up labelled "crazy" with all of the stigma and stereotypes associated with that then there wouldn't be situations like this.

There should be no reason for a person to be so afraid of someone finding out they like helping people that they feel compelled to lie about it for three years.

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: JLCederblom

Published: Apr 30, 2024

One of the most basic errors you would expect to be caught in peer-reviewed academic literature is plain data errors. They require no real expertise to catch and tend to be trivial to fix. It’s simply part of regular proof reading that any serious article of any sort should undergo.

So why are papers on transition regret rife with ridiculous errors, such as inventing thousands of people out of thin air? And why do those errors occur in the first place?

Let’s have a look at the latest in a long line of peer-reviewed garbage: “A Systematic Review of Patient Regret After Surgery- A Common Phenomenon in Many Specialties but Rare Within Gender-Affirmation Surgery” by Thornton et al.

This piece self-identifies as a systematic review, which it simply isn’t, but that’s rather technical (and, dare I say, academic) compared to the grievous errors in the paper, and will require some back-and-forth with the journal. Going over all of that in detail will take time and isn’t that interesting — although if the paper does get corrected or retracted, it’ll likely be due to such procedural issues rather than overarching problems.

While many individuals report satisfaction and improved measures of mental health after undergoing gender affirming surgery, there is a small but vocal minority who experience regret after their procedures.⁴ De-transitioning, also known as continued gender transition, has been exhaustively covered in the mainstream and conservative media and is an emerging area of study in gender affirming care.

The paper also has a rather noticeable disdain for the subject matter and a clear agenda with the goal of minimizing transition regret as a niche, “exhaustively covered” issue, championed by a “small” but unnecessarily “vocal” group.

Let’s have a look at the sources the paper cites for the rate of regret.

* * *

First up: Wiepjes et al., 2018.

A study performed in Amsterdam retrospectively examined 6,793 patients who attended a gender identity clinic in Amsterdam from 1972 to 2015 and found 0.6% and 0.3% of transwomen and transmen reported experiencing regret after gender affirming surgery, respectively. The authors noted that reasons for regret could be divided into three categories. True regret was defined as regretting having GAS. Social regret involved losing touch with loved ones or being fired from a job because of GAS. Lastly, some participants reported feeling non-binary and no longer feeling satisfied with their surgical result. Average time to experiencing regret was 130 months (more than 10 years) post-operatively.³⁰

This is simply erroneous. The authors make the claim that Wiepjes et al., 2018, measured reports of “experiencing regret after gender affirming surgery”. This is false, as the study first required hormonal detransition, the cessation of cross-sex hormone treatment and going back on your natal sex hormones, at the same clinic. Every time the authors describe this as only measuring “experienced regret” they are not being truthful.

In addition, the number who were investigated for this rather specific definition of regret was not 6,793 but 2,627. I’m not sure what the exact purpose of putting the number of people who visited the clinic, including those who never transitioned whatsoever, is but it certainly inflates the number.

You might ask yourself how it’s possible that the authors read Wiepjes et al., 2018, but did not manage to understand what was investigated, nor how many people were looked at. The most likely answer, to me at least, is that none of the authors, peer reviewers, or editors, actually read the paper.

* * *

Next up: Bustos et al., 2021. If you need a primer on this, I’ve written about it before.

In 2021, a systematic review and meta-analysis was completed which assessed 27 studies, including a total of 7,928 transgender individuals. One third of the included individuals underwent transmasculine procedures, while the remaining two thirds underwent transfeminine procedures. Of the 7,928 individuals included in the analysis, 1.0% expressed regret. The most common reason for post-operative regret was “difficulty/dissatisfaction in life with the new gender role.” Another common reason was failure of surgery to achieve their aesthetic surgical goals. The authors hypothesized that the rate of regret established by this metanalysis was lower than a previously established rate from 1993 due to increased rigor in the selection process before gender affirming surgery.

Bustos et al., 2021, pulls together all the greatest hits of gender pseudoscience: erroneous data, fraudulent methods, zero peer-review, irresponsibility (or perhaps hostility) from the journal, and more. It’s a paper where the factual error count is in the triple digits to this day.

However, after wrangling the arms of the journal editors a bit, they put out a partial correction (where they actually introduced some new errors as well as fixed a handful). The lowest possible bar you could hold the authors against in this 2024 paper is that they used that 2022 “correction.”

Of course they didn’t.

An inability to even copy and paste numbers is what we’re dealing with here. From the entire chain, authors through editors. It ties into the previous paper as well—if Thornton et al. had read Wiepjes et al., 2018, they would be entirely equipped to see through Bustos et al., which makes the exact same nonsensical mistakes they did.

I would provide an exact number instead of 7,928 here, but it’s not actually possible to do that because one of the included papers reports contradictory numbers, which Bustos et al. didn’t mention or, more likely, even notice. Another provides an estimate rather than exact figures. They also included papers which did not investigate a regret rate in the review, which is just bizarre.

Either way, out of the claimed 7,928 people, at least 3,400 were not investigated for regret in any way. As previously mentioned another 2,627 had a requirement that you had to hormonally detransition in order to count as regretful. Another didn’t measure regret at all, simply legal sex marker reversals. If you go through the papers and add up the number of people who were explicitly asked about regrets (in any way) you get around 1,300. With unknown loss to follow-up, often very short follow-up, and no uniformity to the way they were asked.

Which apparently to Thornton et al., the peer-reviewers, and the journal editors, is enough to conclusively state that we know the rate of transition regret.

* * *

Next up is Narayan et al., 2021, which was a combined survey and systematic review. See if you can spot the sleight of hand.

Another study surveyed all surgeons registered for the 2016 World Professional Association for Transgender Health and the 2017 US Professional Association for Transgender Health. Most respondents practiced in the United States and had surgically treated at least 100 transgender or gender-nonconforming patients. Of the 30% of surgeons that completed the survey, 61% respondents had treated at least one patient who experienced regret or requested reversal of a procedure. Overall, the calculated rate of regret after gender affirming surgery was 0.2%-0.3%. Of the 62 patients that respondents reported had sought reversal surgery, reasons for reversal included surgical complications, continued evolution of their gender identity, rejection or alienation from social support, and difficulty in romantic relationships.⁵

An anonymous survey of WPATH or USPATH conference attendants with 70 percent non-respondents (fairly catastrophic given the population), asking them to estimate the number of patients they’ve surgically transitioned (somewhere between 18,125 and 27,325) and how many patients they’ve “encountered” (meaning what?) who “regretted their gender transition” (open for a wide range of interpretations) is not a very serious approach.

The paper sometimes treats “regret,” “reversal request,” and “detransition” as the same thing, sometimes not. The authors (both Narayan et al. and Thornton et al.) seem very confused about what the respondents were actually talking about. Usually, when you’re confused, the right thing to do is to slow down and work it out. Not to take the decision to treat 62 patients seeking surgical reversal as “the regret rate”—which is absurd, and reveals the authors’ intellectual, or rather emotional, bias towards presenting as low a number as possible.

* * *

Next up is Bruce et al., 2023.

Recently, research from the University of Michigan demonstrated low levels of regret after gender-affirming mastectomy in a cross-sectional study. On average, respondents underwent surgery 3.6 years before the survey. The median Decision Regret Scale score was 0.0. Further, of the 139 respondents, zero requested reversal procedures.³²

The respondents certainly reported low decision regret. Of course, 3.6 year mean follow-up is less than most studies put the average time to regret at, and a 40 percent non-response rate is… an issue. It’s also exclusively following mastectomy, and that this often provides (at least) short term relief from breast-related distress seem highly plausible.

If Thornton et al. was a systematic review rather than a literature review with a (very poor) systematic search, these issues would be explored and Bruce et al. would take its rightful place as low quality evidence for potential short term benefits. Presenting it as evidence of a low regret rate, however, is ridiculous.

On a side note, Bruce et al. also cites erroneous data from Bustos et al., this time regarding follow-up times rather than sample sizes. It truly is the gift that keeps giving in terms of academic misinformation.

* * *

The final thing referenced is the 2022 USTS Early Insight report.

In February 2024, the 2022 US Transgender Survey Early Insight report was published, providing data from 92,329 binary and nonbinary transgender people. This report noted that 97% of respondents who had undergone gender-affirming surgery reported that they were “a lot more satisfied” or “a little more satisfied” with their lives.³³

This was an anonymous online survey recruiting participants via advocacy groups, and described as “a survey for trans people, by trans people.”

When Thornton et al. describe it as “92,329 binary and nonbinary transgender people” they actually get that wrong as well, as the report describes it as “38% nonbinary, 35% transgender women, 25% transgender men, and 2% crossdressers.” This may seem like nitpicking, but it actually describes the inconsistencies of the worldview that Thornton et al. champion.

Other than poking fun at them, there isn’t much more to say here. The Early Insight report doesn’t discuss regret, which is why they didn’t claim it did. Which would make it odd that they put it under the heading “Regret After Gender-Affirming Surgery” if you’re operating under the assumption that Thornton et al. are writing an academic paper, but that’s clearly not the intention.

* * *

Human writing has many purposes. The most obvious is communication, to convey thoughts and ideas to others. But we also do it for fun, or to assist ourselves, to organize our thoughts, all sorts of ways. Academic papers of this sort, however, are supposed to have a single purpose: to inform others.

When people write falsehoods, figuring out why they do so is interesting. It tells us something about them. For example, when Thornton et al. repeat erroneous data about papers, it tells us that they didn’t care. Despite using emotive language about regret, it tells us that they don’t care enough about the reality of regret to even read a six page paper (a very low bar), but they were happy to write a paper about it.

So why did they write this paper, despite not caring about the topic?

Research on regret after gender-affirming surgery poses unique challenges, as patients may fear that their regret could be weaponized against the transgender community. Those who seek to limit access to GAS often use regret as a key element in their arguments and in proposed legislation.

The aim of Thornton et al. appears to be to muddy the waters and push their own narrative, as the errors are not random but rather all go in the same direction. They are concerned with the consequences of regret, not regret itself. They simply aimed to distract people, and to breathe some new life into old misinformation, and they accomplished that.

There’s a steady stream of blatant garbage flowing through journals in this field. It’s not the replication crisis of science at large, or publication bias, and it’s not about large scale matters out of control—although structural vulnerabilities in the publishing process of journals is of course an issue.

In the end it comes down to emotionally driven choices by the individuals involved allowing falsehoods to be printed. The paper is a thinly veiled ideological document masquerading as science, but whether it highlights the complicity or just the illiteracy of the peer-reviewers and editors is yet to be determined.

*This article was originally published on JLCederblom’s blog on Medium.

==

They don't care about protecting people, they only care about protecting the cult. The point is to portray the cult as infallible, that the dogma and the doctrine is never wrong, it's only the members following the doctrine and dogma that are wrong. They don't have enough faith. They were never a true Scotsman. All the usual stuff.

[thecanadianweeb]

Guys I can’t stop lying help me.