Human Nature with All It's Twists and Turns - Part 3

Part 1

After reading my understanding of how satanism can cripple one's conscience, one might think that my position is that all multiples are not responsible for their actions. However, that is not the case. I believe that would be a very slippery slope, not to mention that such thinking would totally subvert the healing process.

Human nature is just not that black and white. The ways that it can be manipulated by others and from within have an influence over how each person is shaped. What separates the responsible from the not responsible is directly related to those details.

I do believe that there are some individuals who have been so traumatized and manipulated early in their lives that their systems are under the control of others and their "free will" has been compromised. Obviously, I believe that those individuals are not responsible for what they have done under the influences of mind control.

On the other hand, I also believe that multiples are like every other segment of the population. There are good ones and there are bad ones. I think it would be misguided to throw all multiples and/or all victims into the same category. Clearly there are victims who turn into offenders and there are victims who would never consider harming another the way that they have been harmed. Multiples as a subgroup of victims would have the same possibilities.The trick is figuring out which is which.

In simple terms it comes down to good and bad again or how about the givers and the takers. We have all experienced "takers" in our lives but we probably have not stopped to think about them collectively.But I think if you examine that group closely you will find a list of behaviors that are indicators of potential abusers.

The "takers" in life are manipulative. They are never responsible for their behavior unless it works for them. They are always victims, at least in their eyes. They supposedly have no control over anything that befalls them. They always have an angle. The list goes on and on.

I think just as there are clues to identify serial killers (the extreme end of the continuum of abuse) there are clues to tell us whether a person (any person, multiple or not) will be a "taker" in life.For me "takers" are those people who are out there "collecting" everything they can get from life and giving nothing back. But "takers" can be confusing, they can be out there with a smile on their face volunteering for this or that, when it's all a front to hide their secrets, so they can look like they are giving.


It was easy to look back at Ted Bundy killing animals as a child and see he was on the path to be a serial killer. That's pretty black and white - he killed and enjoyed it as a child. John Wayne Gacy, on the other hand. was a clown for children. He gave of himself to the community BUT his chosen whiteface always frightened children. The freaky sharp points on the corners of his mouth were a big "no no" in the clown world for just that reason. Yet Gacy chose his trademark whiteface to carry that feature, was that not a clue that something was amiss?

And, yes, those are serial killers but the examples make a point. Sometimes evil is obvious and sometimes it is not but it is no less evil. John Wayne Gacy certainly did as much damage as Ted Bundy so it's important to be able to see and hear the little things that might tell you that someone is a "taker."

So how did I get from are multiples responsible for their behavior to "takers?" Well, for me it comes down to this. I do think that some multiples should be responsible to the law for their behaviors. I think those multiples come from the category of the 'takers."

The "takers" already had their manipulative behaviors spread across their systems before they were ever split. While compartmentalization may have taken place, it was but another way to not be responsible for themselves. Even if they had never split off, those people would have done whatever they could to suck the life out of those around them. These people clearly made their choices in life before they ever split.

I guess the reason this is important to me comes from this. Back when I was in a therapy group for women survivors of sexual abuse, there were a couple of different women who came through that group who turned out to be offenders (one was a multiple). I remember lengthy discussions about victims acting out that made no sense to me.

If a victim fondled a child inappropriately, how could it so easily be chalked up to acting out? How could there be a victim with no offender? And yet that is what excusing a victim's behavior as acting out implied as far as I was concerned. I was a victim but I didn't ever resort to fondling a child. The thought absolutely never crossed my mind. And yet, here we sat in group with victims who were being told that their behavior was understandable, somehow normal. I vehemently disagreed.

Over time, it became clear that these woman were offenders. The agency I was going to had to admit they had been operating under the false assumption that women don't abuse children. Over the years that followed, there were major changes in the way they saw acting out and determined abuse but not without a lot of discussion on the subject and some unfortunate lessons learned.

I will never forget the multiple I met there. I was one of two people she disclosed the sexual abuse of her daughter to while we were on a weekend retreat. Once the secret was out in the open, there were so many things about her that finally made sense. From that experience I have no doubt that she was as culpable for her behavior as any singleton might be. She clearly made her multiplicity work for her in enabling her behavior.

To be continued...........

Part 4

multiple personality disorder MPD dissociative Identity disorder did ritualistic abuse satanism