What do you think?
Rate this book
Sociopata: O autobiografie
Goodreads Choice Award
Nominee for Readers' Favorite Memoir (2024)DESPRE AUDIOBOOK
Poate că nimic nu ne pregătește pentru confesiunile brutal de sincere ale unui copil diferit de restul lumii, ajuns la maturitate. Patric Gagne a avut curajul să relateze cu lux de amănunte drumul de la inocență și deznădejde la maturitate și speranță. De la condamnare socială și respingere la prețuire publică și acceptare. Este vorba despre o aventură năucitoare prin labirintul tenebros al unei afecțiuni mintale care oferă, prea des, numai perspective sumbre.
Dar apare o scânteie. Desigur, dragostea. E singura lumină călăuzitoare. Iar Patric Gagne înfruntă dificultatea enormă a acestei călătorii inspiratoare care-i schimbă soarta și care o ajută să-și contureze o viață împlinită.
DESPRE AUTOARE
PATRIC GAGNE este scriitoare, fostă terapeută și activistă în numele persoanelor care suferă de tulburări de personalitate antisocială, psihopatie și sociopatie.
Teza ei de doctorat, Followers of Secondary Sociopathy and Its Relationship to Anxiety, explorează relația dintre sociopatie și anxietate și constituie punctul de pornire pentru autobiografia ei, care a devenit bestseller New York Times. În prezent, face parte din consiliul de administrație al PsychopathyIs și este membră a Society for the Scientific Study of Pshychopathy.
Patric Gagne este căsătorită și are doi copii.
Poate că nimic nu ne pregătește pentru confesiunile brutal de sincere ale unui copil diferit de restul lumii, ajuns la maturitate. Patric Gagne a avut curajul să relateze cu lux de amănunte drumul de la inocență și deznădejde la maturitate și speranță. De la condamnare socială și respingere la prețuire publică și acceptare. Este vorba despre o aventură năucitoare prin labirintul tenebros al unei afecțiuni mintale care oferă, prea des, numai perspective sumbre.
Dar apare o scânteie. Desigur, dragostea. E singura lumină călăuzitoare. Iar Patric Gagne înfruntă dificultatea enormă a acestei călătorii inspiratoare care-i schimbă soarta și care o ajută să-și contureze o viață împlinită.
DESPRE AUTOARE
PATRIC GAGNE este scriitoare, fostă terapeută și activistă în numele persoanelor care suferă de tulburări de personalitate antisocială, psihopatie și sociopatie.
Teza ei de doctorat, Followers of Secondary Sociopathy and Its Relationship to Anxiety, explorează relația dintre sociopatie și anxietate și constituie punctul de pornire pentru autobiografia ei, care a devenit bestseller New York Times. În prezent, face parte din consiliul de administrație al PsychopathyIs și este membră a Society for the Scientific Study of Pshychopathy.
Patric Gagne este căsătorită și are doi copii.
Audible Audio
First published April 2, 2024
10079 people are currently reading
201750 people want to read
About the author
Patric Gagne
3 books553 followersPatric Gagne is a writer, former therapist, and advocate for people suffering from sociopathic, psychopathic, and anti-social personality disorders. She is the author of the New York Times bestseller, Sociopath: A Memoir, which shares her struggle to understand her own sociopathy and shed light on this often-maligned and misunderstood mental disorder.
Patric earned her BA at UCLA and then enrolled at the Westwood, CA, campus of the California Graduate Institute (CGI), a graduate school specializing in psychology, marital and family therapy, and psychoanalysis. She earned a Master of Arts degree in Psychology from CGI and a Doctorate in Clinical Psychology from The Chicago School of Professional Psychology.
Her dissertation — “Followers of Fagin: Secondary Sociopathy and Its Relationship to Anxiety” — explored the relationship between sociopathy and anxiety and became the foundation for her memoir.
Today, she is working to expand the definition of psychopathy to include its status as a spectrum disorder and is a member of the Society for the Scientific Study of Psychopathy.
Patric lives with her husband, David, and their two children.
Patric earned her BA at UCLA and then enrolled at the Westwood, CA, campus of the California Graduate Institute (CGI), a graduate school specializing in psychology, marital and family therapy, and psychoanalysis. She earned a Master of Arts degree in Psychology from CGI and a Doctorate in Clinical Psychology from The Chicago School of Professional Psychology.
Her dissertation — “Followers of Fagin: Secondary Sociopathy and Its Relationship to Anxiety” — explored the relationship between sociopathy and anxiety and became the foundation for her memoir.
Today, she is working to expand the definition of psychopathy to include its status as a spectrum disorder and is a member of the Society for the Scientific Study of Psychopathy.
Patric lives with her husband, David, and their two children.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 12,807 reviews
May 31, 2024
A mediocre memoir of neurodivergence, turned into a major book deal due to the author’s claim to be a sociopath. Having read the book—often sensationalized both in its scenes and its larger claims—I doubt it. My money says she’s autistic, though I believe she believes she’s a sociopath, and this book is a fascinating unintentional examination of the power of labels. That said, despite that “Ph.D.” on the cover (and there are valid questions about Gagne’s credentials, seemingly boiling down to the fact that she attended an unaccredited school and no one can find any of her scholarship), don’t expect any science in this book. As perhaps should be expected from an author who embraces a non-scientific term as her identity.
Gagne’s primary symptom, according to her, is that from childhood she’s rarely felt much, and feels distant from her emotions even when she has them. Though she never uses the world, the term for this is alexithymia, and while it occurs in numerous contexts, it’s particularly common with autism. Gagne appears unaware of this. Certainly, when she was growing up (she’s probably in her 40s) there was little awareness of autism in girls, and her parents had none. She seems like a classic case, though: she describes a desire for solitude, invisibility and avoidance of small talk; not understanding social rules unless they were explained to her, and not always buying into rules if no one would be harmed in the breach; not knowing how to interact with others and having to learn it the hard way in her late teens, by consciously observing social interactions and imitating others’ body language (she calls this her “superficial charm,” but other neurodivergent people would just call it “masking”); and seeming strange to other kids for reasons she didn’t understand.
At any rate, her feeling out-of-place and her mother’s increasing disapproval of her failure to express expected emotions and abide by social rules makes her anxious. Gagne manages her anxiety and gets herself to feel something through thrill-seeking, and her chosen thrill is breaking rules (the other reason she thinks she’s a sociopath). One wonders how different her life might have been had she been introduced to, say, extreme sports, but she settles on clandestine trespassing. She loves sneaking into places she’s not supposed to be, and the solitude and feeling of invisibility this gives her. This can definitely be creepy—she breaks into other people’s houses when they’re gone just to hang out there—but she has a preference for abandoned buildings or houses that are empty while awaiting sale (her mother is a realtor, which makes it easy). She also likes to secretly follow people and stare through their windows at night, and in college she makes a sport of charming drunk frat boys out of their car keys and joyriding in their cars (she fills them up and returns them afterwards). So… maladjusted, definitely a violation of modern American social rules, but not quite the height of criminality.
And that’s pretty much the extent of Gagne’s so-called sociopathic behavior. She claims to have “violent and destructive tendencies,” but this appears to consist entirely of: 1) one time when she was a young child and stabbed a bully with a pencil, and felt great about it, 2) another time when she was a kid and feeling lousy, she squeezed a cat too hard, then let it go, 3) one time in middle school when she locked some other kids in the school bathroom to see what would happen and 4) as an adult, she almost jumped a woman who had just threatened her sister. I’m failing to see the deeply abnormal relationship to violence here.
Meanwhile, despite her claims to not care about people, Gagne… pretty clearly does. She’s closely attached to her mother as a child, dependent on her to explain social rules, and enjoys the bonding experience of confessing wrongdoing to her. (Unfortunately Gagne doesn’t realize that this won’t continue to get a loving response when it keeps happening, and she’s deeply hurt by her mother’s conclusion that she is bad and wrong. The mother’s response definitely leaves something to be desired, culminating in the moment where she excludes Gagne from burying her own pet because Gagne isn’t displaying the expected grief.) She loves and admires her younger sister, and notes that she was never jealous because she didn’t want the spotlight. She has a fairy-tale romance with her husband beginning at age 14, when she apparently immediately knew that he was the one. She reports disappointment at not feeling a rush of love for her own children at their birth, but then not everyone does, and it’s no surprise that she does come to love them, given that even when nannying other people’s she describes “intense feelings for those kids and [an] instinct to protect them at all costs.”
Also, as far as conscience, Gagne clearly doesn’t intuit or have much regard for social rules like private property, but she also does seem to have a moral compass. She thinks it’s important not to hurt anyone even if breaking the law. As a kid, she’s bothered by a neighbor kid who wants to harass her immigrant nanny and upset to see a teacher picking on a minority student. As an adult, she made me bust out laughing by gatekeeping sociopathy even as she reams out a woman (also a self-proclaimed sociopath) for covering up the woman’s dog killing a neighbor’s dog. Gagne feels she should be open about her “personality type” to friends and family, leading those with less compunction to ask her to engage in unethical behavior on their behalf because “you’re a sociopath, you don’t care,” which clearly makes her uncomfortable. Her self-diagnosis seems to work against her, though, because having founded her identity on being a sociopath who doesn’t care, she struggles to work out why she’s uncomfortable. Again, I can’t help thinking that many of her choices result from her leaning in to her own belief in her incorrigible badness: she actually portrays “the sociopath list” as a voiceover playing in her head as she goes through life.
As for the diagnosis itself, Gagne picked up the word young from a prison guard uncle, to describe people who commit crimes and don’t care, and having been convinced that these were her primary traits, seems to have clung to it ever since. When she’s in her 20s her father finally makes her go to a therapist, but Gagne seems to have just demanded a “sociopath test” from the therapist without considering any alternatives. I definitely wondered at the competence of the therapist, who goes along with it despite explicitly noting Gagne’s many differences from the definition. Both Gagne and the therapist seem to interpret the discrepancies as “sociopaths aren’t necessarily what we’ve been told” rather than “maybe you aren’t a sociopath.”
All of which leads us to: what even is a sociopath? Is it even a useful term, or just a media trope? The term is not in the DSM-V, which, okay—if Gagne had provided a reasoned critique of the DSM, I’d be here for it. Our understanding of mental health issues remains in very early stages, diagnosing symptoms as illnesses, guessing wildly at treatments, and generally failing to distinguish between actual pathology, different ways of being that are simply inconvenient for modern society, and adaptive responses to adverse events. Gagne doesn’t offer a critique though: she just identifies with the term “sociopath” and its descriptions far more than the DSM’s “antisocial personality disorder.” She also picks and chooses from definitions of sociopathy: she prefers it to psychopathy because it’s described as more malleable and treatable (on the theory that psychopaths are born while sociopaths are made, so could be unmade?), but fails to identify any environmental source for her own traits. (The only experience she describes as at all traumatic is other people’s reaction to her neurodivergence, which logically can’t have caused the neurodivergence. Though it probably did cause a lot of her behavior.) Also, those same sources seem to indicate that while you can have a well-adjusted psychopath, sociopaths are necessarily reckless and violent—otherwise they wouldn’t qualify for the definition. Gagne, though, just defines “sociopath” as whatever she is. At another point, she suggests it’s essentially “psychopath lite,” which feels right to her as a description of what she is but which does not appear to be used by anyone else.
All that aside, the book is readable, but sensationalized. The TV-movie comparisons are accurate. It’s full of “reconstructed” scenes and dialogue dating back to Gagne’s early childhood, and the writing itself is bland. Overall, fine for a quick read if you’re willing to read between the lines, and I agree with Gagne about the need to stop stigmatizing neurodivergence, but I don’t think this book has much to do with or to say about sociopathy. Skippable.
Gagne’s primary symptom, according to her, is that from childhood she’s rarely felt much, and feels distant from her emotions even when she has them. Though she never uses the world, the term for this is alexithymia, and while it occurs in numerous contexts, it’s particularly common with autism. Gagne appears unaware of this. Certainly, when she was growing up (she’s probably in her 40s) there was little awareness of autism in girls, and her parents had none. She seems like a classic case, though: she describes a desire for solitude, invisibility and avoidance of small talk; not understanding social rules unless they were explained to her, and not always buying into rules if no one would be harmed in the breach; not knowing how to interact with others and having to learn it the hard way in her late teens, by consciously observing social interactions and imitating others’ body language (she calls this her “superficial charm,” but other neurodivergent people would just call it “masking”); and seeming strange to other kids for reasons she didn’t understand.
At any rate, her feeling out-of-place and her mother’s increasing disapproval of her failure to express expected emotions and abide by social rules makes her anxious. Gagne manages her anxiety and gets herself to feel something through thrill-seeking, and her chosen thrill is breaking rules (the other reason she thinks she’s a sociopath). One wonders how different her life might have been had she been introduced to, say, extreme sports, but she settles on clandestine trespassing. She loves sneaking into places she’s not supposed to be, and the solitude and feeling of invisibility this gives her. This can definitely be creepy—she breaks into other people’s houses when they’re gone just to hang out there—but she has a preference for abandoned buildings or houses that are empty while awaiting sale (her mother is a realtor, which makes it easy). She also likes to secretly follow people and stare through their windows at night, and in college she makes a sport of charming drunk frat boys out of their car keys and joyriding in their cars (she fills them up and returns them afterwards). So… maladjusted, definitely a violation of modern American social rules, but not quite the height of criminality.
And that’s pretty much the extent of Gagne’s so-called sociopathic behavior. She claims to have “violent and destructive tendencies,” but this appears to consist entirely of: 1) one time when she was a young child and stabbed a bully with a pencil, and felt great about it, 2) another time when she was a kid and feeling lousy, she squeezed a cat too hard, then let it go, 3) one time in middle school when she locked some other kids in the school bathroom to see what would happen and 4) as an adult, she almost jumped a woman who had just threatened her sister. I’m failing to see the deeply abnormal relationship to violence here.
Meanwhile, despite her claims to not care about people, Gagne… pretty clearly does. She’s closely attached to her mother as a child, dependent on her to explain social rules, and enjoys the bonding experience of confessing wrongdoing to her. (Unfortunately Gagne doesn’t realize that this won’t continue to get a loving response when it keeps happening, and she’s deeply hurt by her mother’s conclusion that she is bad and wrong. The mother’s response definitely leaves something to be desired, culminating in the moment where she excludes Gagne from burying her own pet because Gagne isn’t displaying the expected grief.) She loves and admires her younger sister, and notes that she was never jealous because she didn’t want the spotlight. She has a fairy-tale romance with her husband beginning at age 14, when she apparently immediately knew that he was the one. She reports disappointment at not feeling a rush of love for her own children at their birth, but then not everyone does, and it’s no surprise that she does come to love them, given that even when nannying other people’s she describes “intense feelings for those kids and [an] instinct to protect them at all costs.”
Also, as far as conscience, Gagne clearly doesn’t intuit or have much regard for social rules like private property, but she also does seem to have a moral compass. She thinks it’s important not to hurt anyone even if breaking the law. As a kid, she’s bothered by a neighbor kid who wants to harass her immigrant nanny and upset to see a teacher picking on a minority student. As an adult, she made me bust out laughing by gatekeeping sociopathy even as she reams out a woman (also a self-proclaimed sociopath) for covering up the woman’s dog killing a neighbor’s dog. Gagne feels she should be open about her “personality type” to friends and family, leading those with less compunction to ask her to engage in unethical behavior on their behalf because “you’re a sociopath, you don’t care,” which clearly makes her uncomfortable. Her self-diagnosis seems to work against her, though, because having founded her identity on being a sociopath who doesn’t care, she struggles to work out why she’s uncomfortable. Again, I can’t help thinking that many of her choices result from her leaning in to her own belief in her incorrigible badness: she actually portrays “the sociopath list” as a voiceover playing in her head as she goes through life.
As for the diagnosis itself, Gagne picked up the word young from a prison guard uncle, to describe people who commit crimes and don’t care, and having been convinced that these were her primary traits, seems to have clung to it ever since. When she’s in her 20s her father finally makes her go to a therapist, but Gagne seems to have just demanded a “sociopath test” from the therapist without considering any alternatives. I definitely wondered at the competence of the therapist, who goes along with it despite explicitly noting Gagne’s many differences from the definition. Both Gagne and the therapist seem to interpret the discrepancies as “sociopaths aren’t necessarily what we’ve been told” rather than “maybe you aren’t a sociopath.”
All of which leads us to: what even is a sociopath? Is it even a useful term, or just a media trope? The term is not in the DSM-V, which, okay—if Gagne had provided a reasoned critique of the DSM, I’d be here for it. Our understanding of mental health issues remains in very early stages, diagnosing symptoms as illnesses, guessing wildly at treatments, and generally failing to distinguish between actual pathology, different ways of being that are simply inconvenient for modern society, and adaptive responses to adverse events. Gagne doesn’t offer a critique though: she just identifies with the term “sociopath” and its descriptions far more than the DSM’s “antisocial personality disorder.” She also picks and chooses from definitions of sociopathy: she prefers it to psychopathy because it’s described as more malleable and treatable (on the theory that psychopaths are born while sociopaths are made, so could be unmade?), but fails to identify any environmental source for her own traits. (The only experience she describes as at all traumatic is other people’s reaction to her neurodivergence, which logically can’t have caused the neurodivergence. Though it probably did cause a lot of her behavior.) Also, those same sources seem to indicate that while you can have a well-adjusted psychopath, sociopaths are necessarily reckless and violent—otherwise they wouldn’t qualify for the definition. Gagne, though, just defines “sociopath” as whatever she is. At another point, she suggests it’s essentially “psychopath lite,” which feels right to her as a description of what she is but which does not appear to be used by anyone else.
All that aside, the book is readable, but sensationalized. The TV-movie comparisons are accurate. It’s full of “reconstructed” scenes and dialogue dating back to Gagne’s early childhood, and the writing itself is bland. Overall, fine for a quick read if you’re willing to read between the lines, and I agree with Gagne about the need to stop stigmatizing neurodivergence, but I don’t think this book has much to do with or to say about sociopathy. Skippable.
April 7, 2024
I don't believe a word this woman wrote. I was automatically suspicious of her, so I looked her academic credentials up. She has her MA and PhD from a school called the California Graduate Institute, which is essentially a diploma mill. Whether she is a sociopath or not is moot, she is a fraud.
Read
July 31, 2024THIS is why I love memoirs!! Being able to learn about something new, through the eyes and voice of someone who is living it. This is about Patric and her everyday life being a sociopath. Fascinating, especially as someone who loves all things psychology
April 10, 2024
1% science; 85% very odd mean girl anecdotes/voices; 14% possibly(?) true memoir
This book was so odd. Asking me to have empathy for people who are underserved by the medical community & seeking community support is…easy. I’m ready. But this book did nothing to get me there. Not sure how it serves that community either. TLDr; cognitive behavioral therapy seems to be her current solution.
So many stories with these full fledged conversations recreated beat for beat from when she was like 7 years old. Randomly inserting cruel things she’s said just in the last few years, which do nothing but show she’s probably not a great person to be friends with? Idk it literally read like a grown woman writing a Mean Girls book in her 40s.
If you picked this up expecting citations, studies, even an iota of evidence based science go ahead and turn around.
So many of these elaborately embellished stories from her life -which it’s your memoir go for it- are just how people in her life were trying to love her just as she was then her turning around and blaming her shitty behavior on being a “sociopath”. Which fine but then she defends her shitty behavior not on her condition but turns it around on these people taking advantage of her?
Her dubious medical credentials aside (which is a whole can of worms)-I do hope this community has a support system, I just don’t think I would start here.
🎧: side note for audiobook listeners. She performs the book. And she gives literally every human in the book (except herself) the oddest whiniest voices.
This book was so odd. Asking me to have empathy for people who are underserved by the medical community & seeking community support is…easy. I’m ready. But this book did nothing to get me there. Not sure how it serves that community either. TLDr; cognitive behavioral therapy seems to be her current solution.
So many stories with these full fledged conversations recreated beat for beat from when she was like 7 years old. Randomly inserting cruel things she’s said just in the last few years, which do nothing but show she’s probably not a great person to be friends with? Idk it literally read like a grown woman writing a Mean Girls book in her 40s.
If you picked this up expecting citations, studies, even an iota of evidence based science go ahead and turn around.
So many of these elaborately embellished stories from her life -which it’s your memoir go for it- are just how people in her life were trying to love her just as she was then her turning around and blaming her shitty behavior on being a “sociopath”. Which fine but then she defends her shitty behavior not on her condition but turns it around on these people taking advantage of her?
Her dubious medical credentials aside (which is a whole can of worms)-I do hope this community has a support system, I just don’t think I would start here.
🎧: side note for audiobook listeners. She performs the book. And she gives literally every human in the book (except herself) the oddest whiniest voices.
January 3, 2024
Buckle up, reader. This review is going to be a roller-coaster.
Ironically, Patric Gagne's Sociopath left me feeling a lot of different things. Gagne has written a memoir of her life as a sociopath. She chronicles how she tried to live a mostly non-violent life while trying to fight urges and pressures as she becomes more and more aware just how different she feels from everyone else. There is crime, love, and music. Gagne's memoir is not meant to tell a story, necessarily. It is more of a plea for society to stop looking at sociopaths and thinking, "well, they will probably murder me if they had the chance."
Normally, I start with the good of the book but here I need to start with the bad. One disclaimer: Gagne states in a note at the beginning of the book that she had to change names, timelines, and reconstruct dialogue. What I am about to say is not in any way me questioning her integrity. However, these reconstructed conversations stretch the bounds of believability. Gagne's scenes remind me of a TV show with very good writers who consistently put the perfect words into their character's mouth. It often feels that Gagne applies what she has learned as an adult to her past self. Also, we jump from perfectly timed scene to perfectly timed scene. An episode at the end of the book felt like she was setting up the finale of a movie. I think it's important to repeat that I don't question whether approximations of what we read actually happened. My issue is that Gagne has shined the story so bright that you almost want to look away. Gagne wants the reader to understand her plight and to also see that sociopaths deserve empathy even if they can't provide that themselves. Some of her points are good, but she also has other ideas which show both a lack of accountability for herself and possibly a savior complex.
But.....
Then I kept thinking about what I was reading. It dawned on me that maybe I was holding Gagne to a higher standard than other memoirs I have read. Did I apply my suspicious eye to them or am I more suspect of Gagne because she is a sociopath? After all, don't many people think sociopaths will lie when it suits them? Would I say a cancer patient who simultaneously studies cancer cures has a savior complex? Is any of that the point?
Ultimately, no, the answers to those questions are not the point. The point was that I asked those questions. The book bounced around in my head and made me question my own views and to try and put myself in the shoes of a sociopath (as I am not one, I promise I've been checked).
This is not a perfect book. It has flaws. However, it convincingly accomplishes its goal. That is no small thing.
(This book was provided as an advance copy by Netgalley and Simon & Schuster.)
Ironically, Patric Gagne's Sociopath left me feeling a lot of different things. Gagne has written a memoir of her life as a sociopath. She chronicles how she tried to live a mostly non-violent life while trying to fight urges and pressures as she becomes more and more aware just how different she feels from everyone else. There is crime, love, and music. Gagne's memoir is not meant to tell a story, necessarily. It is more of a plea for society to stop looking at sociopaths and thinking, "well, they will probably murder me if they had the chance."
Normally, I start with the good of the book but here I need to start with the bad. One disclaimer: Gagne states in a note at the beginning of the book that she had to change names, timelines, and reconstruct dialogue. What I am about to say is not in any way me questioning her integrity. However, these reconstructed conversations stretch the bounds of believability. Gagne's scenes remind me of a TV show with very good writers who consistently put the perfect words into their character's mouth. It often feels that Gagne applies what she has learned as an adult to her past self. Also, we jump from perfectly timed scene to perfectly timed scene. An episode at the end of the book felt like she was setting up the finale of a movie. I think it's important to repeat that I don't question whether approximations of what we read actually happened. My issue is that Gagne has shined the story so bright that you almost want to look away. Gagne wants the reader to understand her plight and to also see that sociopaths deserve empathy even if they can't provide that themselves. Some of her points are good, but she also has other ideas which show both a lack of accountability for herself and possibly a savior complex.
But.....
Then I kept thinking about what I was reading. It dawned on me that maybe I was holding Gagne to a higher standard than other memoirs I have read. Did I apply my suspicious eye to them or am I more suspect of Gagne because she is a sociopath? After all, don't many people think sociopaths will lie when it suits them? Would I say a cancer patient who simultaneously studies cancer cures has a savior complex? Is any of that the point?
Ultimately, no, the answers to those questions are not the point. The point was that I asked those questions. The book bounced around in my head and made me question my own views and to try and put myself in the shoes of a sociopath (as I am not one, I promise I've been checked).
This is not a perfect book. It has flaws. However, it convincingly accomplishes its goal. That is no small thing.
(This book was provided as an advance copy by Netgalley and Simon & Schuster.)
April 12, 2024
'Your friends would probably describe me as nice. But guess what? I can't stand your friends.
I'm a liar. I'm a thief. I'm highly manipulative. I don't care what other people think. I'm capable of almost anything.'
In Sociopath: A Memoir, author Patric Gagne offers readers an unflinchingly honest and deeply personal account of her own experiences living with sociopathy. This compelling memoir provides a rare glimpse into the mind of someone grappling with a condition often shrouded in stigma and misunderstanding.
Gagne's narrative is both raw and introspective, as she candidly reflects on the challenges and complexities of navigating relationships, societal norms, and her own sense of morality. Through vivid anecdotes and poignant reflections, she invites readers to accompany her on her journey of self-discovery and acceptance.
While Gagne's story is undeniably compelling, it is her courage and vulnerability as a writer that truly resonate. "Sociopath: A Memoir" is a testament to the power of storytelling as a means of self-exploration and understanding, and it is sure to leave a lasting impression on readers long after they turn the final page.
For anyone interested in psychology, memoirs, or simply the human experience, "Sociopath: A Memoir" is an essential read. Gagne's gripping narrative challenges us to confront our own assumptions about mental illness and offers hope for greater empathy and understanding in our society.
I highly Recommend.
Thank you Macmillan Australia for gifting me an advanced copy of Sociopath for review.
I'm a liar. I'm a thief. I'm highly manipulative. I don't care what other people think. I'm capable of almost anything.'
In Sociopath: A Memoir, author Patric Gagne offers readers an unflinchingly honest and deeply personal account of her own experiences living with sociopathy. This compelling memoir provides a rare glimpse into the mind of someone grappling with a condition often shrouded in stigma and misunderstanding.
Gagne's narrative is both raw and introspective, as she candidly reflects on the challenges and complexities of navigating relationships, societal norms, and her own sense of morality. Through vivid anecdotes and poignant reflections, she invites readers to accompany her on her journey of self-discovery and acceptance.
While Gagne's story is undeniably compelling, it is her courage and vulnerability as a writer that truly resonate. "Sociopath: A Memoir" is a testament to the power of storytelling as a means of self-exploration and understanding, and it is sure to leave a lasting impression on readers long after they turn the final page.
For anyone interested in psychology, memoirs, or simply the human experience, "Sociopath: A Memoir" is an essential read. Gagne's gripping narrative challenges us to confront our own assumptions about mental illness and offers hope for greater empathy and understanding in our society.
I highly Recommend.
Thank you Macmillan Australia for gifting me an advanced copy of Sociopath for review.
April 12, 2024
I have a lot of thoughts.
If you do not have a background in psychology, this book will take you on a wild ride that you will 100% enjoy. The audio is 10/10.
I have a background in psychology, and it actually hindered my enjoyment of this book. I will forever and always read anything I can get my hands on when it comes to “sociopathy” aka antisocial personality disorder because I am fascinated by human behaviour. That was my driving force for attaining my degree.
So let’s get into it:
“Sociopathic personality disorder” does not exist, as stated in the book. The DSM classification lumps together sociopaths & psychopaths under the description of antisocial personality disorder.
There are reviews floating around saying she’s narcissistic. Absolutely, she is. Antisocial personality disorder holds hands with borderline personality disorder, and narcissistic personality disorder. What does this mean? They operate on a spectrum and traits of each disorder can be displayed in a single personality.
The best part of this book was her childhood. That was where I felt the most empathy for her. I throughly enjoyed and was absorbed in the beginning of this book.
I was most looking forward to her graduate work, and hearing about her position as a therapist, and taking on clients with ASPD. I wanted to see what tools she would utilize with her patients. However, all of that was missing from this book. Which was VERY disappointing.
We could create a new drinking game called: every time she says the word sociopath, take a drink. Because it’s a lot.
At the end of the day, can you trust what she says? Absolutely not. But it definitely was worth a listen.
If you do not have a background in psychology, this book will take you on a wild ride that you will 100% enjoy. The audio is 10/10.
I have a background in psychology, and it actually hindered my enjoyment of this book. I will forever and always read anything I can get my hands on when it comes to “sociopathy” aka antisocial personality disorder because I am fascinated by human behaviour. That was my driving force for attaining my degree.
So let’s get into it:
“Sociopathic personality disorder” does not exist, as stated in the book. The DSM classification lumps together sociopaths & psychopaths under the description of antisocial personality disorder.
There are reviews floating around saying she’s narcissistic. Absolutely, she is. Antisocial personality disorder holds hands with borderline personality disorder, and narcissistic personality disorder. What does this mean? They operate on a spectrum and traits of each disorder can be displayed in a single personality.
The best part of this book was her childhood. That was where I felt the most empathy for her. I throughly enjoyed and was absorbed in the beginning of this book.
I was most looking forward to her graduate work, and hearing about her position as a therapist, and taking on clients with ASPD. I wanted to see what tools she would utilize with her patients. However, all of that was missing from this book. Which was VERY disappointing.
We could create a new drinking game called: every time she says the word sociopath, take a drink. Because it’s a lot.
At the end of the day, can you trust what she says? Absolutely not. But it definitely was worth a listen.
June 9, 2024
In her own words, Patric Gagne is, unquestionably, a fauxciopath. I’m honestly still questioning if this whole “story” isn’t a complete joke; one awaiting reveal once sales are no longer high. I’m being serious.
It’s not because the initial conundrum I thought I was experiencing (and had fully expected to experience, given the nature of the illness). Of course embellishment and lying are part and parcel of a sociopath’s identity, so it it’s important to know and accept that you’ll be dealing with an unreliable narrator.
That’s not what the issue is at all, though. I’ve always been incredibly underwhelmed and annoyed by people who write books, go onto television shows, appear for interviews, under the auspices of being a sociopath.
It just doesn’t add up at all with sociopathic behavior (and believe me, I do know a couple confirmed ones - but they’ll be the last to agree to this label, as they either truly fail to comprehend it, or they prefer not to be questioned about their lack of empathy). Sociopaths seeking the spotlight to discuss their sociopathy is too unbelievable to me.
The strangest part about this all, however, is the fact that she’s “*known* she was a sociopath since the age of seven. Yet for all intents and purposes, she hasn’t really been independently diagnosed by an expert psychiatrist. Unless you count her own therapist (no doubt, extremely well-paid therapist) who is already informed, upon Patric’s first visit, that her patient is a sociopath, and only seeks to confirm this diagnosis. Never once did she look at similar disorders/illnesses which might cause her to act differently from “normal people” she encounters: psychopathy, antisocial personality disorder, autism, narcissistic personality disorder (my own armchair diagnosis), etc.
She knows what she wants, and what she wants is to shout from the rooftops that she’s a sociopath (as is evidenced by the exhausting number of times she references her “sociopathic behavior rearing its head” along with “a harmless stretch of my sociopathic muscle” - phrases like these are repeated ad naseum throughout the entire book, throughout every page). She self diagnoses herself, only “confirming” her sociopathy with the therapist referred to in the preceding paragraph, demanding the test which will determine this diagnosis by the traits she encompasses. (Non)spoiler alert: she lands perfectly on the scale of sociopathy but much below psychopathy!
There’s also a lot - or actually, very little - to be said about her “sociopathic traits.” For someone who claims to be completely apathetic and incapable of feeling love, she somehow manages to love her husband and children, her sister, as well as friends and family. This just isn’t the case in the sociopaths I’ve seen. She didn’t just develop the capacity to love based on her brilliant ability to “learn” and “apply” this behavior. Sociopaths might feel some intimation of love, but never the true connection typically associated with the term. Which means she’s either lying about her ability to love, or she’s lying about being a sociopath. I’m leaning towards the latter.
Her “behavior” and history include: stabbing a childhood bully in the neck with a pencil at the age of 9 I think? - said bully was not seriously injured. It also includes stealing things from people, but this is mostly a childhood behavior and limited to things like hair barrettes, necklaces, backpacks, or anything else a kid might find abandoned. Then I suppose she “graduates” to “stealing cars” as a teenager/college student.
I use quotations for stealing cars, because it’s not at all what you think: hotwiring a random car, taking it to commit a crime, leaving it in a ditch somewhere. It’s not pickpocketing a stranger and then locating their car in the lot, taking off with it, with no concern about getting it back or any damage potentially caused to the car.
No, her “bad habit” of “illegal activities” like stealing a car is actually not illegal at all. Apparently, her coaxing car keys from sleazy drunk frat boys (under the premise that they know her, and she’s just “running to pick up the cigarettes/chips/sandwich they asked her to get them, remember?”) is akin to the behavior I described in the paragraph above. I mean, they’re drunk guys looking at a cute blonde girl and have no idea what they’ve said, but I’m sure they’re thinking it’s true (and that when she gets back, maybe she’ll be down for some sex).
This is literally nothing more than borrowing someone’s car. Are you taking advantage of the fact that they’re drunk and blindly trusting you? There could be an argument made for that if she had malicious intentions for borrowing the car, or you know… actually stole the car and didn’t bring it back for a change.
Instead, she does exactly what she tells them she’ll do. She also mentions “joyriding” but fails to explain in any further detail what she means by that, so I can only take it to mean what she explicitly states. Which is basically that even though it’s not her car, she still drives around for awhile like it is, cruising the town and taking in the sights. Is she driving recklessly? No. Committing crimes in the car? No. I imagine if she had, she’d tell us. Nope, to her, “stealing a car” is persuading someone to let her borrow the keys, while she drives around for a bit on her own… then proceeds to do the very thing she promised the owner she’d do, and heads back. She even effusively tells us of how she “balances” these “bad” acts with good deeds: not only does she return the car after only a short time, but she makes sure to fill it with gas if she uses a lot, or you know, if the owner just happens to be low. Okay…?
Her other drastic behaviors include randomly entering neighbors’ or strangers’ houses and hanging out there for a bit. Again though, she’s acquainted herself with these people, so worst case scenario, they may have been alarmed if they’d caught her, but being young and pretty (and female) has its benefits. Whatever excuse she had at the ready in case she was caught - and let’s be honest, we know she had one - I’m sure would have placated the homeowner. At the very least to the extent that they wouldn’t call the police. She’s even familiar with their dog, who is happy to see her. There’s a good excuse right there - “I was just walking by and I thought I heard your dog whimpering. I’m sorry, I just kind of freaked out because he seemed scared, and I wanted to make sure he was okay.”
She prefaces this book (as well as mentions it plenty of times throughout the story) with the goal of wanting to “shine a light onto sociopathy” in order to “help the other 5% or so of others to realize that they’re not alone”, and allow them to feel seen, understood, and develop ways of coping and understanding that she was never given and just had to figure out on her own.
Yet, what exactly she does to help her “fellow sociopaths” eludes me. The entire book is just very petty and self-centered, which might be expected, again, but… I don’t believe I read anything meaningful that was addressed to other possible sociopaths that might help them process, give them some hope? Even though this is apparently her main objective in writing this memoir.
Instead, as others have pointed out, she does the exact opposite by gatekeeping sociopathy, which is hilarious in its absurdity, to be fair, by prattling on and on to her therapist about how ”SO many people just like, PRETEND to be sociopaths, and they’re not even real sociopaths! It’s SO unfair because they take attention off the REAL sociopaths like me, who need help!” .
This never seems at all to be hypocritical to her. After all, if she can self-diagnose as a sociopath, why should others be made to feel bad about doing the same, especially given that they, like she, often genuinely believe they’re sociopaths, and yet, while they’re often wrong (given sociopathy is one of the most misunderstood and most misdiagnosed disorders) she never makes any conscious effort to consider that she could be wrong as well. Then again, a book about a pretty blond woman with OCD or autism just wouldn’t generate the level of interest that the antiquated use of the term sociopath would, would it?
A major problem I find with her argument about writing this book “to help other sociopaths”, even if one were to truly believe she was a sociopath, is that not only does everyone’s experience vary greatly, but very few will relate to the privilege she enjoyed growing up with a father in the music business, representing internationally renown celebrities, living in and partying at Beverly Hills mansions. She’s obviously a member of the 1%.
What bugs me most though, with as much credit as she seems to single-handedly award herself for her outstanding self-awareness of her own sociopathic behavior, her personal treatment plans, her successful coping skills (so successful that today, she has a lovely home, and is happily married to David with two young children) - she seems to give even more - or at the very least, equal - credit to David, “the love of her life”, her “North Star” whose understanding and acceptance of her (mostly) gave her the confidence she apparently needed to truly better herself.
It’s not just about her needing to find the ability to love in her own way, without his presence. It’s literally about the idea that without David, she seems to believe she never would have made it to where she is now. Without his strong guidance and support, his compassion, his ability to balance her, she likely would have never truly come to understand emotional responses and to fight her inner battles.
Again, this leaves me asking: how exactly, again, is this then supposed to help other sociopaths? Surely a sociopath such as Patric, with an exceptional level of personal experience combined with years of experience in psychology research, would be aware that not only will every other sociopath reading this account not have their own “David” to help guide them, but many may not experience any real desire to have that type of relationship (or may desire to try, but are unable to connect with someone in the same way). This wouldn’t be such a serious problem if Patric hadn’t, again, repeatedly attributed so much of her understanding of self to her partner.
Along with the overtly cringeworthy “reconstructed dialogue” by Gagne (which honestly just reads like a terrible comedic attempt at creating a conversation as to what two people - the “sociopath” Patricia, of course, lest we forget! - and a friend, family member, romantic partner - arguing over their understanding of what a sociopath is and hence how they believe she should behave), it almost seems as if she labels herself a paradox early on in order to justify all of the inherent contradictions and inconsistencies in her claims.
Two examples among countless others?
Well, for one, while she’s in her first year or so of university, she still claims that she is desperate not to be seen as “different”, or “too reckless”, “too indifferent”, “too uncaring”, and the like. She states that because of her fear that people will realize that she’s “not like them”, she often tries to make herself as invisible as possible: mimicking the behavior of others, keeping the attention/conversation on the other person and away from herself.
Yet, despite this desperation to be invisible, she admits to us readers, rather gleefully, just how much she enjoys tormenting her rule-abiding roommate Kimi, a Chinese transfer student who speaks little to no English. Knowing that Kimi is a light sleeper and hates to be awakened in the middle of the night by Patric coming home at 3 AM from parties, Patric not only makes no attempt to avoid Kimi, but explains to us how she enjoys winding her up:
”You broke curfew, you woke me up again, this is inconsiderate,” Kimi states.
“I know,” I replied earnestly, as I shifted slightly in my chair. “But it was unavoidable. I had to return the car I stole.”
Kimi seems not to understand her through the translator box she carries with her everywhere (although, a small box that could instantly translate Mandarin to English and back? In what, the early 2000s or so? Ok, because I haven’t heard of any such devices until very recently, either).
If you’re claiming you want to be invisible, why would you intentionally try to fabricate something extreme that would undoubtedly upset your roommate? And again, we come back to the fact that she doesn’t actually steal cars. It’s even right there in the dialogue. She had to “return” the car. Since when do car thieves return cars? They typically steal them for one of two reasons: one, to commit a crime in and not be identified by their own vehicle; two, to sell quickly either as a whole, or have it immediately broken down into its parts, for profit.
The second example…
On p. 306, she sees David again (who is to become her future husband), for the first time in quite a few months since their breakup and his moving out of their shared home. Here’s how it (supposedly) plays out:
”Then I saw him…
A crush of bodies knocked me off-balance, and I was swept sideways. But not before we locked eyes. He stepped forward and grabbed my hand. Allowing him to rescue me from the sway, I took a second to collect myself. Then I threw my arms around him.
Standing there, holding on for dear life, I said nothing. I just allowed myself to be held, plucked from the current, and temporarily resuscitated by David’s existence… gazing up at him, neon lights from the bar casting shadows across his face, it took all the strength in my soul not to confess. To fall into his arms and beg him to save me. To tell him the truth. That I loved him. Needed him. Ached for him. And not just because he was the only person who ever truly made me feel safe. And not just because being in his arms felt like home. But because he was home. David was the best person I’d ever known. The best person I would ever know.
Then, just 24 pages later (p. 330), she seems to completely forget how much she loves being in David’s arms - to the point that they feel like home..
After a long, rambling, and cliched “confession”:
David pulled me into his arms and kissed me. My body relaxed against his chest. Only seconds before, my thoughts had been a jumbled jigsaw puzzle. But now, everything fell perfectly into place. He pressed his forehead to mine as we stood there for a few seconds in silence. Then he wrapped me in another embrace, this one much tighter.
“I love you,” he whispered in my ear.
I kissed his neck. “I love you, too,” I said. I let him hold me for a few more seconds before adding, “but I hate hugs.“
His arms went slack, but he didn’t let go. He looked me in the eyes and asked, “seriously?”
“Yes!” I said, trying to keep things light as I wriggled out of his grasp. “This is what I’m talking about,” I explained. “I love you, but there are things about me that are just different. Not wrong,” I clarified. “And not less. Just different.”
🤯😂
Let’s just call this book for what it really is: “Possible Narcissist Attempts to Make Good Use of Manipulative Behavior by Convincing the Public She’s a Sociopath.” Despite repeatedly stating the very same stereotypes she claimed to despise. Right.
This book was so irritating I couldn’t wait to be finished. How anyone enjoys this nonsense is beyond me, but I don’t want to criticize others for different opinions, other. The whole thing, as I stated from the beginning, just seems to be a joke. Avoid at all costs. Seriously. If you really want to learn about sociopathy, I’m sure you could find something more authentic on YouTube than this ridiculous fantasy of a tale.
(Lol, I’ve realized the more I hate a book, the longer the review. Oops. I’ll really try to edit this one. I badly need sleep!)
It’s not because the initial conundrum I thought I was experiencing (and had fully expected to experience, given the nature of the illness). Of course embellishment and lying are part and parcel of a sociopath’s identity, so it it’s important to know and accept that you’ll be dealing with an unreliable narrator.
That’s not what the issue is at all, though. I’ve always been incredibly underwhelmed and annoyed by people who write books, go onto television shows, appear for interviews, under the auspices of being a sociopath.
It just doesn’t add up at all with sociopathic behavior (and believe me, I do know a couple confirmed ones - but they’ll be the last to agree to this label, as they either truly fail to comprehend it, or they prefer not to be questioned about their lack of empathy). Sociopaths seeking the spotlight to discuss their sociopathy is too unbelievable to me.
The strangest part about this all, however, is the fact that she’s “*known* she was a sociopath since the age of seven. Yet for all intents and purposes, she hasn’t really been independently diagnosed by an expert psychiatrist. Unless you count her own therapist (no doubt, extremely well-paid therapist) who is already informed, upon Patric’s first visit, that her patient is a sociopath, and only seeks to confirm this diagnosis. Never once did she look at similar disorders/illnesses which might cause her to act differently from “normal people” she encounters: psychopathy, antisocial personality disorder, autism, narcissistic personality disorder (my own armchair diagnosis), etc.
She knows what she wants, and what she wants is to shout from the rooftops that she’s a sociopath (as is evidenced by the exhausting number of times she references her “sociopathic behavior rearing its head” along with “a harmless stretch of my sociopathic muscle” - phrases like these are repeated ad naseum throughout the entire book, throughout every page). She self diagnoses herself, only “confirming” her sociopathy with the therapist referred to in the preceding paragraph, demanding the test which will determine this diagnosis by the traits she encompasses. (Non)spoiler alert: she lands perfectly on the scale of sociopathy but much below psychopathy!
There’s also a lot - or actually, very little - to be said about her “sociopathic traits.” For someone who claims to be completely apathetic and incapable of feeling love, she somehow manages to love her husband and children, her sister, as well as friends and family. This just isn’t the case in the sociopaths I’ve seen. She didn’t just develop the capacity to love based on her brilliant ability to “learn” and “apply” this behavior. Sociopaths might feel some intimation of love, but never the true connection typically associated with the term. Which means she’s either lying about her ability to love, or she’s lying about being a sociopath. I’m leaning towards the latter.
Her “behavior” and history include: stabbing a childhood bully in the neck with a pencil at the age of 9 I think? - said bully was not seriously injured. It also includes stealing things from people, but this is mostly a childhood behavior and limited to things like hair barrettes, necklaces, backpacks, or anything else a kid might find abandoned. Then I suppose she “graduates” to “stealing cars” as a teenager/college student.
I use quotations for stealing cars, because it’s not at all what you think: hotwiring a random car, taking it to commit a crime, leaving it in a ditch somewhere. It’s not pickpocketing a stranger and then locating their car in the lot, taking off with it, with no concern about getting it back or any damage potentially caused to the car.
No, her “bad habit” of “illegal activities” like stealing a car is actually not illegal at all. Apparently, her coaxing car keys from sleazy drunk frat boys (under the premise that they know her, and she’s just “running to pick up the cigarettes/chips/sandwich they asked her to get them, remember?”) is akin to the behavior I described in the paragraph above. I mean, they’re drunk guys looking at a cute blonde girl and have no idea what they’ve said, but I’m sure they’re thinking it’s true (and that when she gets back, maybe she’ll be down for some sex).
This is literally nothing more than borrowing someone’s car. Are you taking advantage of the fact that they’re drunk and blindly trusting you? There could be an argument made for that if she had malicious intentions for borrowing the car, or you know… actually stole the car and didn’t bring it back for a change.
Instead, she does exactly what she tells them she’ll do. She also mentions “joyriding” but fails to explain in any further detail what she means by that, so I can only take it to mean what she explicitly states. Which is basically that even though it’s not her car, she still drives around for awhile like it is, cruising the town and taking in the sights. Is she driving recklessly? No. Committing crimes in the car? No. I imagine if she had, she’d tell us. Nope, to her, “stealing a car” is persuading someone to let her borrow the keys, while she drives around for a bit on her own… then proceeds to do the very thing she promised the owner she’d do, and heads back. She even effusively tells us of how she “balances” these “bad” acts with good deeds: not only does she return the car after only a short time, but she makes sure to fill it with gas if she uses a lot, or you know, if the owner just happens to be low. Okay…?
Her other drastic behaviors include randomly entering neighbors’ or strangers’ houses and hanging out there for a bit. Again though, she’s acquainted herself with these people, so worst case scenario, they may have been alarmed if they’d caught her, but being young and pretty (and female) has its benefits. Whatever excuse she had at the ready in case she was caught - and let’s be honest, we know she had one - I’m sure would have placated the homeowner. At the very least to the extent that they wouldn’t call the police. She’s even familiar with their dog, who is happy to see her. There’s a good excuse right there - “I was just walking by and I thought I heard your dog whimpering. I’m sorry, I just kind of freaked out because he seemed scared, and I wanted to make sure he was okay.”
She prefaces this book (as well as mentions it plenty of times throughout the story) with the goal of wanting to “shine a light onto sociopathy” in order to “help the other 5% or so of others to realize that they’re not alone”, and allow them to feel seen, understood, and develop ways of coping and understanding that she was never given and just had to figure out on her own.
Yet, what exactly she does to help her “fellow sociopaths” eludes me. The entire book is just very petty and self-centered, which might be expected, again, but… I don’t believe I read anything meaningful that was addressed to other possible sociopaths that might help them process, give them some hope? Even though this is apparently her main objective in writing this memoir.
Instead, as others have pointed out, she does the exact opposite by gatekeeping sociopathy, which is hilarious in its absurdity, to be fair, by prattling on and on to her therapist about how ”SO many people just like, PRETEND to be sociopaths, and they’re not even real sociopaths! It’s SO unfair because they take attention off the REAL sociopaths like me, who need help!” .
This never seems at all to be hypocritical to her. After all, if she can self-diagnose as a sociopath, why should others be made to feel bad about doing the same, especially given that they, like she, often genuinely believe they’re sociopaths, and yet, while they’re often wrong (given sociopathy is one of the most misunderstood and most misdiagnosed disorders) she never makes any conscious effort to consider that she could be wrong as well. Then again, a book about a pretty blond woman with OCD or autism just wouldn’t generate the level of interest that the antiquated use of the term sociopath would, would it?
A major problem I find with her argument about writing this book “to help other sociopaths”, even if one were to truly believe she was a sociopath, is that not only does everyone’s experience vary greatly, but very few will relate to the privilege she enjoyed growing up with a father in the music business, representing internationally renown celebrities, living in and partying at Beverly Hills mansions. She’s obviously a member of the 1%.
What bugs me most though, with as much credit as she seems to single-handedly award herself for her outstanding self-awareness of her own sociopathic behavior, her personal treatment plans, her successful coping skills (so successful that today, she has a lovely home, and is happily married to David with two young children) - she seems to give even more - or at the very least, equal - credit to David, “the love of her life”, her “North Star” whose understanding and acceptance of her (mostly) gave her the confidence she apparently needed to truly better herself.
It’s not just about her needing to find the ability to love in her own way, without his presence. It’s literally about the idea that without David, she seems to believe she never would have made it to where she is now. Without his strong guidance and support, his compassion, his ability to balance her, she likely would have never truly come to understand emotional responses and to fight her inner battles.
Again, this leaves me asking: how exactly, again, is this then supposed to help other sociopaths? Surely a sociopath such as Patric, with an exceptional level of personal experience combined with years of experience in psychology research, would be aware that not only will every other sociopath reading this account not have their own “David” to help guide them, but many may not experience any real desire to have that type of relationship (or may desire to try, but are unable to connect with someone in the same way). This wouldn’t be such a serious problem if Patric hadn’t, again, repeatedly attributed so much of her understanding of self to her partner.
Along with the overtly cringeworthy “reconstructed dialogue” by Gagne (which honestly just reads like a terrible comedic attempt at creating a conversation as to what two people - the “sociopath” Patricia, of course, lest we forget! - and a friend, family member, romantic partner - arguing over their understanding of what a sociopath is and hence how they believe she should behave), it almost seems as if she labels herself a paradox early on in order to justify all of the inherent contradictions and inconsistencies in her claims.
Two examples among countless others?
Well, for one, while she’s in her first year or so of university, she still claims that she is desperate not to be seen as “different”, or “too reckless”, “too indifferent”, “too uncaring”, and the like. She states that because of her fear that people will realize that she’s “not like them”, she often tries to make herself as invisible as possible: mimicking the behavior of others, keeping the attention/conversation on the other person and away from herself.
Yet, despite this desperation to be invisible, she admits to us readers, rather gleefully, just how much she enjoys tormenting her rule-abiding roommate Kimi, a Chinese transfer student who speaks little to no English. Knowing that Kimi is a light sleeper and hates to be awakened in the middle of the night by Patric coming home at 3 AM from parties, Patric not only makes no attempt to avoid Kimi, but explains to us how she enjoys winding her up:
”You broke curfew, you woke me up again, this is inconsiderate,” Kimi states.
“I know,” I replied earnestly, as I shifted slightly in my chair. “But it was unavoidable. I had to return the car I stole.”
Kimi seems not to understand her through the translator box she carries with her everywhere (although, a small box that could instantly translate Mandarin to English and back? In what, the early 2000s or so? Ok, because I haven’t heard of any such devices until very recently, either).
If you’re claiming you want to be invisible, why would you intentionally try to fabricate something extreme that would undoubtedly upset your roommate? And again, we come back to the fact that she doesn’t actually steal cars. It’s even right there in the dialogue. She had to “return” the car. Since when do car thieves return cars? They typically steal them for one of two reasons: one, to commit a crime in and not be identified by their own vehicle; two, to sell quickly either as a whole, or have it immediately broken down into its parts, for profit.
The second example…
On p. 306, she sees David again (who is to become her future husband), for the first time in quite a few months since their breakup and his moving out of their shared home. Here’s how it (supposedly) plays out:
”Then I saw him…
A crush of bodies knocked me off-balance, and I was swept sideways. But not before we locked eyes. He stepped forward and grabbed my hand. Allowing him to rescue me from the sway, I took a second to collect myself. Then I threw my arms around him.
Standing there, holding on for dear life, I said nothing. I just allowed myself to be held, plucked from the current, and temporarily resuscitated by David’s existence… gazing up at him, neon lights from the bar casting shadows across his face, it took all the strength in my soul not to confess. To fall into his arms and beg him to save me. To tell him the truth. That I loved him. Needed him. Ached for him. And not just because he was the only person who ever truly made me feel safe. And not just because being in his arms felt like home. But because he was home. David was the best person I’d ever known. The best person I would ever know.
Then, just 24 pages later (p. 330), she seems to completely forget how much she loves being in David’s arms - to the point that they feel like home..
After a long, rambling, and cliched “confession”:
David pulled me into his arms and kissed me. My body relaxed against his chest. Only seconds before, my thoughts had been a jumbled jigsaw puzzle. But now, everything fell perfectly into place. He pressed his forehead to mine as we stood there for a few seconds in silence. Then he wrapped me in another embrace, this one much tighter.
“I love you,” he whispered in my ear.
I kissed his neck. “I love you, too,” I said. I let him hold me for a few more seconds before adding, “but I hate hugs.“
His arms went slack, but he didn’t let go. He looked me in the eyes and asked, “seriously?”
“Yes!” I said, trying to keep things light as I wriggled out of his grasp. “This is what I’m talking about,” I explained. “I love you, but there are things about me that are just different. Not wrong,” I clarified. “And not less. Just different.”
🤯😂
Let’s just call this book for what it really is: “Possible Narcissist Attempts to Make Good Use of Manipulative Behavior by Convincing the Public She’s a Sociopath.” Despite repeatedly stating the very same stereotypes she claimed to despise. Right.
This book was so irritating I couldn’t wait to be finished. How anyone enjoys this nonsense is beyond me, but I don’t want to criticize others for different opinions, other. The whole thing, as I stated from the beginning, just seems to be a joke. Avoid at all costs. Seriously. If you really want to learn about sociopathy, I’m sure you could find something more authentic on YouTube than this ridiculous fantasy of a tale.
(Lol, I’ve realized the more I hate a book, the longer the review. Oops. I’ll really try to edit this one. I badly need sleep!)
July 21, 2024
Patric Gagne holds a PhD in Clinical Psychology and was diagnosed with a mild form of antisocial personality disorder - and there are quite a few valuable things she aims to do here: She encourages readers to understand sociopathy as a form of emotional learning disability, meaning that some emotions do not come naturally to neurodivergent people afflicted with it. She also distinguishes deficits in emotional literacy from concrete behaviors, because behaviors entail decisions - and that's a valuable distinction when it comes to determining agency. And of course, Gagne shares personal experiences: In a twisty turn, she tells us what it feels like to be emotionally deprived, how it affected her as a child, a student, a wife, a mother.
But the problem is that this memoir is way too much in love with the assumed shock factor of declaring "I'm a sociopath", and that doesn't carry over ca. 370 pages - the book feels awfully long and frequently does what it criticizes, namely leaning into the stereotypes in order to use them to gain attention. Whether the author's name is a pseudonym or not is debated on the interwebs, and the legitimacy of her academic credentials are questioned - be it as it may, "gagne" is French for "wins". "Patric Wins", the name couldn't be more apt regarding her self-perception. You decide whether that's quirky or annoying. At the end of the day, Gagne is a person with lots of theoretical knowledge and personal experience regarding a highly stigmatized mental disorder, so the constant coquettish "I'm a sociopath" wouldn't have been required. The facts alone, smartly told, would have been enough.
In fact, I think she could have gone more in depth regarding treatments and scientific research on anti-social personality disorder. In short: This book would have needed a strict editor.
But the problem is that this memoir is way too much in love with the assumed shock factor of declaring "I'm a sociopath", and that doesn't carry over ca. 370 pages - the book feels awfully long and frequently does what it criticizes, namely leaning into the stereotypes in order to use them to gain attention. Whether the author's name is a pseudonym or not is debated on the interwebs, and the legitimacy of her academic credentials are questioned - be it as it may, "gagne" is French for "wins". "Patric Wins", the name couldn't be more apt regarding her self-perception. You decide whether that's quirky or annoying. At the end of the day, Gagne is a person with lots of theoretical knowledge and personal experience regarding a highly stigmatized mental disorder, so the constant coquettish "I'm a sociopath" wouldn't have been required. The facts alone, smartly told, would have been enough.
In fact, I think she could have gone more in depth regarding treatments and scientific research on anti-social personality disorder. In short: This book would have needed a strict editor.
April 8, 2024
I have doubts about this author’s claims of expertise. The Chicago School, where she claims to have gotten her PhD, does not have PhD programs in clinical psychology. The term “sociopath” is not used by credible academic psychologists. Most (if not all) credible institutions publish doctoral dissertations, and hers is nowhere to be found.
https://www.thechicagoschool.edu/acad...
https://www.reddit.com/r/askpsycholog...
https://www.thechicagoschool.edu/acad...
https://www.reddit.com/r/askpsycholog...
September 26, 2023
A memoir on the misunderstood mental disorder of sociopathy written by a sociopath who has a PhD in clinical psychology? Um, hell yes. Sign me up.
Throughout her childhood, Patric knew that she was different but she didn’t have the words to explain why. She didn’t feel fear, guilt, and empathy like the rest of her peers and the only way to relieve herself of the intense pressure that she felt in her head was to do something that she knew was wrong: lie, steal, enter peoples’ homes without permission. It wasn’t until she went to college and landed in a psychology class that she learned the word “sociopath” and everything began to fall in to place. From here, Patric began her astonishing journey towards self-discovery.
This memoir is so incredibly well written and is wildly informative. Gagne’s stories and experiences are interesting, shocking and eye-opening, challenging the reader to examine their own views and beliefs of sociopathy. I learned so much that I didn’t know before. Whether you think (or know) that you have sociopathy or whether you don’t, this is an incredible read regardless. I was glad to see that Gagne included how she eventually learned to cope with her sociopathy with the help of CBT and other modalities of therapy. I believe any sociopath (or person who loves a sociopath, for that matter) reaching for this book will find the information helpful. I dare say that anyone out there dealing with sociopathic behaviors and tendencies will feel relief as they read this memoir.
Thank you to NetGalley for my digital copy! Out 04/02/2024!
Throughout her childhood, Patric knew that she was different but she didn’t have the words to explain why. She didn’t feel fear, guilt, and empathy like the rest of her peers and the only way to relieve herself of the intense pressure that she felt in her head was to do something that she knew was wrong: lie, steal, enter peoples’ homes without permission. It wasn’t until she went to college and landed in a psychology class that she learned the word “sociopath” and everything began to fall in to place. From here, Patric began her astonishing journey towards self-discovery.
This memoir is so incredibly well written and is wildly informative. Gagne’s stories and experiences are interesting, shocking and eye-opening, challenging the reader to examine their own views and beliefs of sociopathy. I learned so much that I didn’t know before. Whether you think (or know) that you have sociopathy or whether you don’t, this is an incredible read regardless. I was glad to see that Gagne included how she eventually learned to cope with her sociopathy with the help of CBT and other modalities of therapy. I believe any sociopath (or person who loves a sociopath, for that matter) reaching for this book will find the information helpful. I dare say that anyone out there dealing with sociopathic behaviors and tendencies will feel relief as they read this memoir.
Thank you to NetGalley for my digital copy! Out 04/02/2024!
April 25, 2025
It's actually shocking how terrible this is despite all the hype it got. Did you know Patric Gagne is a sociopath? She will brag about it and about how special she is on every single page! She will also tell you over and over again what a Bad Girl she is for..."stealing cars" aka being handed keys to cars from drunk frat boys and driving them around for an hour and then bringing them back. Girl, you did not!!! We also have to hear about her work as a "music executive" – a job she got because daddy is rich and gave it to her straight out of college – and how amazing she is at her job because she's a sociopath. Sure!
The premise of this memoir is that a real live sociopath is going to tell you about her wild little sociopath life and we're all going to be shocked. The premise is ALSO that this little sociopath got her PhD in...psychology! Because she is the only person who has ever bothered to research sociopathy and decides that she needs to be the one to "cure it." Instead of going on a journey into what she discovers in her research and work, we have to listen to her complain about her coworkers who say they're sociopaths but are NOT (because no one is as special as Patric) and go on very detailed, pages-long car theft journeys to gas stations where she buys chips and then returns the car. With fewer than a hundred pages left, Patric has her one millionth revelation that if no one can treat her, she's going to treat herself and help others! And she tells us she gets really into her research for a minute, but doesn't really share anything about it aside from how annoyed she is that she has to treat patients as part of her clinical requirement. Finally, in the epilogue, she explains that after years of research she has figured out the fix for sociopathy! It took her years and multiple degrees to discover CBT, something any 12-year-old who has been to therapy a few times can discuss in more detail than Patric does in a book she wrote about psychology. I cannot. I truly do not believe this woman took a Psych 101 class in college, let alone completed a PhD program in clinical psychology. But after doing exposure therapy – which she explains as sitting in a car and NOT going for a joy ride I guess? – she's now totally chill.
Not only is her poor little rich girl childhood and nepo baby adulthood boring as fuck, she's also simply not a good writer, especially notable in terms of her dialogues with others, most of which are straight-up painful to slog through. As she recounts hours-long conversations with her therapist, her dad, her professor, a librarian, random friends, her now husband, and everyone else she's ever spoken to, it's hard to believe she has ever witnessed human beings in conversation, with every chat giving Lifetime movie script complete with bad quippy one-liners. The therapist stuff is especially weak as Patric goes on endless tangents during her visits – largely about her 'brilliant' theories in a field she is absolutely not qualified to discuss, though our girl LOVES referencing the Cleckley checklist! – and the therapist is repeatedly described as just sitting there slowly nodding her head, which Patric wants us to believe is because she is so in awe of Patric's genius she has been stunned into silence, but if this is truly how her therapist reacted to her word salad, I'd say it's more because she's bored out of her mind and disassociating until Patric finally shuts the fuck up.
There is no one more insufferable than someone who thinks they're interesting and clever writing a book about how interesting and clever they are when they are the opposite. A swing and a very hard miss.
The premise of this memoir is that a real live sociopath is going to tell you about her wild little sociopath life and we're all going to be shocked. The premise is ALSO that this little sociopath got her PhD in...psychology! Because she is the only person who has ever bothered to research sociopathy and decides that she needs to be the one to "cure it." Instead of going on a journey into what she discovers in her research and work, we have to listen to her complain about her coworkers who say they're sociopaths but are NOT (because no one is as special as Patric) and go on very detailed, pages-long car theft journeys to gas stations where she buys chips and then returns the car. With fewer than a hundred pages left, Patric has her one millionth revelation that if no one can treat her, she's going to treat herself and help others! And she tells us she gets really into her research for a minute, but doesn't really share anything about it aside from how annoyed she is that she has to treat patients as part of her clinical requirement. Finally, in the epilogue, she explains that after years of research she has figured out the fix for sociopathy! It took her years and multiple degrees to discover CBT, something any 12-year-old who has been to therapy a few times can discuss in more detail than Patric does in a book she wrote about psychology. I cannot. I truly do not believe this woman took a Psych 101 class in college, let alone completed a PhD program in clinical psychology. But after doing exposure therapy – which she explains as sitting in a car and NOT going for a joy ride I guess? – she's now totally chill.
Not only is her poor little rich girl childhood and nepo baby adulthood boring as fuck, she's also simply not a good writer, especially notable in terms of her dialogues with others, most of which are straight-up painful to slog through. As she recounts hours-long conversations with her therapist, her dad, her professor, a librarian, random friends, her now husband, and everyone else she's ever spoken to, it's hard to believe she has ever witnessed human beings in conversation, with every chat giving Lifetime movie script complete with bad quippy one-liners. The therapist stuff is especially weak as Patric goes on endless tangents during her visits – largely about her 'brilliant' theories in a field she is absolutely not qualified to discuss, though our girl LOVES referencing the Cleckley checklist! – and the therapist is repeatedly described as just sitting there slowly nodding her head, which Patric wants us to believe is because she is so in awe of Patric's genius she has been stunned into silence, but if this is truly how her therapist reacted to her word salad, I'd say it's more because she's bored out of her mind and disassociating until Patric finally shuts the fuck up.
There is no one more insufferable than someone who thinks they're interesting and clever writing a book about how interesting and clever they are when they are the opposite. A swing and a very hard miss.
July 3, 2024
This was an interesting memoir. I’ve read a review that wasn’t that positive as the reviewer doubts that the author is really a sociopath, and convincingly argued why. That made me doubt some of the claims in the books, but I still think it was a very engaging read. If the author is misdiagnosed it’s still a very enthralling tale about her search for answers, and how that propelled towards studying herself and the behavior of others. I wanted to read on, to see what she learned and discovered next.
July 22, 2024
I don't think I can properly rate this book. Firstly, I am deeply suspicious of any author who has Ph.D attached to their name on the front cover. Secondly, the categorisation that she tries to make is too much of a neat box.
I have many of the emotions and non-emotions described in this book. I avoid people. I am a misanthrope. I hate our western culture. I am a dissident. I am ashamed to be human. I shoplifted small items for most of my life. (I still 'keep myself in practice' in deeply-immoral supermarkets.) I did worse than stick a pencil (remorselessly) in the neck of another child at the age of five - not long after I had been thrown into brambles and nettles by other children.
But I am somewhere on the autistic spectrum. Do the spectra merge ? If so, where ? And does it matter ? Human behaviour is not a simple matter of labelling like Linnaean taxonomy, but people (especially those with PH.Ds) are constantly categorising, labelling, reducing whole phenomena to words - and in the English language which is notoriously bad at abstract concepts, but very good at describing machinery.
As a child I lied at home about anything to do with school – and I don't know why. In our anti-emotional household I couldn't express my misery, so I tried to hide it with lies. Once I left school, I reverted to the aspy behaviour of total frankness – which is to say, saying things that Normals didn't want to hear. I still do it compulsively.
I was a head-banger. I hated school. I hated sports and communal, competitive activity. I never felt the slightest loyalty to any group. I love solitude and now dislike being with or even near people. But I would place myself somewhere on the autistic spectrum. Do the autistic and sociopathic spectra merge ? If so, where ? And does it matter ? Human behaviour is not a simple matter of labelling like Linnaean taxonomy, but people (especially those with PH.Ds) are constantly categorising, labelling, reducing whole phenomena to words - and in the English language which is notoriously bad at abstract concepts, but very good at describing machinery.
'Person with Antisocial Personality Disorder' is no better a description than 'Sociopath' because it uses the vague and biased word 'disorder'. Is it 'disordered' to see other people as stupid, manipulated, manipulative, greedy, bigoted, deeply dishonest in their attitudes and false emotions – and hence to avoid them and feel no empathy for them ? Is it 'disordered' to much prefer pigs and dogs and horses to humans ? Do hermits have sociopathic tendencies ?
Many 'normal' people are bullies in one way or another. Freud was a bully. I would describe bullying as 'sociopathic', but maybe they are entirely 'neurotypical' (what a slippery word!). In which case, I applaud Sociopathic Tendencies, if not their outcomes. The sociopaths who started the invasion of Iraq and the several invasions of Afghanistan, the Israelis who simply confiscated whole Palestinian villages and made their inhabitants refugees are acceptable, even lauded. Is not human civilisation sociopathic ?
I would shout Sociopath! at a homophobe. Are homophobes simply 'wrong-headed' ? Or are they part of a millennia-long movement to extirpate difference in sexual-emotional behaviour ?
French and British governments spent centuries and actually spilled blood in their attempted erasure of 'inferior' languages such as Occitan, Breton, Welsh, Gaelic and Irish. Those governments were sociopathic. The American prison system is sociopathic to an extreme degree.
It seems to me that a person with ingredients or attributes of alleged 'Antisocial Personality Disorder' might well be acting quite rationally. Might honesty and a sense of fairness not be as much 'a good thing' as social acceptability and bonhomie in a world slipping down into catastrophe while all the Normals are ignoring it and desperately, aggressively, internecinely being Normal ?
Is not human civilisation sociopathic ?
An expanded version of this review can be read on http://www.beyond-the-pale.uk/sociopa...
I have many of the emotions and non-emotions described in this book. I avoid people. I am a misanthrope. I hate our western culture. I am a dissident. I am ashamed to be human. I shoplifted small items for most of my life. (I still 'keep myself in practice' in deeply-immoral supermarkets.) I did worse than stick a pencil (remorselessly) in the neck of another child at the age of five - not long after I had been thrown into brambles and nettles by other children.
But I am somewhere on the autistic spectrum. Do the spectra merge ? If so, where ? And does it matter ? Human behaviour is not a simple matter of labelling like Linnaean taxonomy, but people (especially those with PH.Ds) are constantly categorising, labelling, reducing whole phenomena to words - and in the English language which is notoriously bad at abstract concepts, but very good at describing machinery.
As a child I lied at home about anything to do with school – and I don't know why. In our anti-emotional household I couldn't express my misery, so I tried to hide it with lies. Once I left school, I reverted to the aspy behaviour of total frankness – which is to say, saying things that Normals didn't want to hear. I still do it compulsively.
I was a head-banger. I hated school. I hated sports and communal, competitive activity. I never felt the slightest loyalty to any group. I love solitude and now dislike being with or even near people. But I would place myself somewhere on the autistic spectrum. Do the autistic and sociopathic spectra merge ? If so, where ? And does it matter ? Human behaviour is not a simple matter of labelling like Linnaean taxonomy, but people (especially those with PH.Ds) are constantly categorising, labelling, reducing whole phenomena to words - and in the English language which is notoriously bad at abstract concepts, but very good at describing machinery.
'Person with Antisocial Personality Disorder' is no better a description than 'Sociopath' because it uses the vague and biased word 'disorder'. Is it 'disordered' to see other people as stupid, manipulated, manipulative, greedy, bigoted, deeply dishonest in their attitudes and false emotions – and hence to avoid them and feel no empathy for them ? Is it 'disordered' to much prefer pigs and dogs and horses to humans ? Do hermits have sociopathic tendencies ?
Many 'normal' people are bullies in one way or another. Freud was a bully. I would describe bullying as 'sociopathic', but maybe they are entirely 'neurotypical' (what a slippery word!). In which case, I applaud Sociopathic Tendencies, if not their outcomes. The sociopaths who started the invasion of Iraq and the several invasions of Afghanistan, the Israelis who simply confiscated whole Palestinian villages and made their inhabitants refugees are acceptable, even lauded. Is not human civilisation sociopathic ?
I would shout Sociopath! at a homophobe. Are homophobes simply 'wrong-headed' ? Or are they part of a millennia-long movement to extirpate difference in sexual-emotional behaviour ?
French and British governments spent centuries and actually spilled blood in their attempted erasure of 'inferior' languages such as Occitan, Breton, Welsh, Gaelic and Irish. Those governments were sociopathic. The American prison system is sociopathic to an extreme degree.
It seems to me that a person with ingredients or attributes of alleged 'Antisocial Personality Disorder' might well be acting quite rationally. Might honesty and a sense of fairness not be as much 'a good thing' as social acceptability and bonhomie in a world slipping down into catastrophe while all the Normals are ignoring it and desperately, aggressively, internecinely being Normal ?
Is not human civilisation sociopathic ?
An expanded version of this review can be read on http://www.beyond-the-pale.uk/sociopa...
July 20, 2025
This compelling and enlightening memoir offers a rare glimpse into the reality of sociopathy—a condition often misunderstood and frequently confused with psychopathy. Patric Gagne's intimate narrative masterfully weaves personal experience with scientific and psychological insights, challenging readers to reconsider their preconceptions about sociopaths.
Through Gagne's authentic voice, we learn that sociopaths aren't simply "evil" or "cold-blooded" individuals incapable of feeling love, shame, or remorse. Instead, she reveals how sociopaths can develop and grow when surrounded by people who help them learn empathy, managing the internal stress and tension that often fuels their apathy. This memoir could potentially catalyze further research into the condition while encouraging others with similar experiences to embrace their authentic selves rather than hiding within society.
Gagne's decision to be open about her identity isn't reckless—it's an act of courage, marking her first step toward personal growth. While some might attempt to exploit her candor about her dark side, she maintains control of her narrative, using it for positive development rather than allowing others to manipulate it for their benefit.
The memoir's engaging storytelling leaves readers with intriguing questions: What became of her blackmailer? Did she report them to authorities? What happened to her father's identity in the story? The fate of the "faux-sociopath" customer from her workplace remains a mystery. As a romantic at heart, I found myself hoping for a happy ending with David.
While some aspects of the narrative raise questions about authenticity—such as how she avoided consequences for car theft, house intrusion, and stalking—these elements don't diminish the memoir's impact. Like many memoirs, this book likely contains some artistic license, and the glamorous LA music industry backdrop adds commercial appeal. However, the core mission succeeds brilliantly: creating awareness about sociopathy through an engaging and thought-provoking narrative.
This memoir stands out as one of the most fascinating and intellectually stimulating reads I've encountered recently. It offers valuable insights into human nature and the allure of darker impulses while maintaining a gripping narrative style. As a strong contender for the Goodreads Choice Awards, this book comes highly recommended for readers interested in non-fiction, psychology, and human behavior.
This groundbreaking work not only educates but also humanizes a frequently misunderstood condition, making it essential reading for anyone seeking to understand the complexity of human psychology.
medium.com
instagram
facebook
twitter
Through Gagne's authentic voice, we learn that sociopaths aren't simply "evil" or "cold-blooded" individuals incapable of feeling love, shame, or remorse. Instead, she reveals how sociopaths can develop and grow when surrounded by people who help them learn empathy, managing the internal stress and tension that often fuels their apathy. This memoir could potentially catalyze further research into the condition while encouraging others with similar experiences to embrace their authentic selves rather than hiding within society.
Gagne's decision to be open about her identity isn't reckless—it's an act of courage, marking her first step toward personal growth. While some might attempt to exploit her candor about her dark side, she maintains control of her narrative, using it for positive development rather than allowing others to manipulate it for their benefit.
The memoir's engaging storytelling leaves readers with intriguing questions: What became of her blackmailer? Did she report them to authorities? What happened to her father's identity in the story? The fate of the "faux-sociopath" customer from her workplace remains a mystery. As a romantic at heart, I found myself hoping for a happy ending with David.
While some aspects of the narrative raise questions about authenticity—such as how she avoided consequences for car theft, house intrusion, and stalking—these elements don't diminish the memoir's impact. Like many memoirs, this book likely contains some artistic license, and the glamorous LA music industry backdrop adds commercial appeal. However, the core mission succeeds brilliantly: creating awareness about sociopathy through an engaging and thought-provoking narrative.
This memoir stands out as one of the most fascinating and intellectually stimulating reads I've encountered recently. It offers valuable insights into human nature and the allure of darker impulses while maintaining a gripping narrative style. As a strong contender for the Goodreads Choice Awards, this book comes highly recommended for readers interested in non-fiction, psychology, and human behavior.
This groundbreaking work not only educates but also humanizes a frequently misunderstood condition, making it essential reading for anyone seeking to understand the complexity of human psychology.
medium.com
dnf
September 18, 2024DNF @ 25%
I'm sorry, this just doesn't feel authentic. To be clear, I'm not calling the author a liar. I just don't believe anything she says.
No rating.
I'm sorry, this just doesn't feel authentic. To be clear, I'm not calling the author a liar. I just don't believe anything she says.
No rating.
February 26, 2025
Work is going to be so hard because it’s 2:00 am, and I stayed up to finish this book, and I still need to shower before going to bed!!
I was once told there are a lot of sociopaths among us, especially in leadership positions because it’s an advantage to be able to think without feelings. That statement wasn’t backed up with any data at the time, but it made me curious. Then came along this book.
Book starts out with the author asking for us readers to be empathetic and compassionate towards sociopaths. I started out with massive biases and an expectation of an unreliable narrator.
I finished the book feeling a great deal of empathy and compassion towards her and open to feeling the same for others who also share her diagnosis. However, I think I might still be reticent to be in a relationship with one.
I was once told there are a lot of sociopaths among us, especially in leadership positions because it’s an advantage to be able to think without feelings. That statement wasn’t backed up with any data at the time, but it made me curious. Then came along this book.
Book starts out with the author asking for us readers to be empathetic and compassionate towards sociopaths. I started out with massive biases and an expectation of an unreliable narrator.
I finished the book feeling a great deal of empathy and compassion towards her and open to feeling the same for others who also share her diagnosis. However, I think I might still be reticent to be in a relationship with one.
dnf
April 17, 2024DNF’ing @74%. I was genuinely having a good time reading for maybe the first 50%? But then things started to really fall apart plot-wise and storytelling wise. The whole thing felt like fiction written for entertainment despite this being a memoir, and when you Google her, all that comes up is suspicion about her credentials and the validity (or really invalidity lol) of her PhD. Also, everything about this book and ultimately her life screams white woman privilege, which makes it kind of gritting to read oops - her casually getting a high paying job in the music industry straight out of college because of her dad / familial connections, committing LITERAL crimes her entire life to never get caught ONCE (?????). I’m just getting rubbed the wrong way and have no interest in reading more - bummer. Thank you to Simon and Schuster for providing me with a free advanced copy and thank you to LibroFM for the advanced audiobook. I wish I could have enjoyed this more!
April 13, 2024
Semi-interesting. Semi-insufferable. Next to nothing in terms of academic research. Odd for someone claiming a PhD in Clinical Psychology. Extra odd that someone with a PhD in the field uses the term “sociopath” instead of Antisocial Personality Disorder.
Part of me feels like she made a lot of, if not most of, this book out of thin air and embellished memories. I can’t say I trust anything she says. Everything about this “memoir” felt off.
Part of me feels like she made a lot of, if not most of, this book out of thin air and embellished memories. I can’t say I trust anything she says. Everything about this “memoir” felt off.
July 6, 2024
It feels almost wrong to rate a personal life story such as Sociopath: A Memoir. It shocked me how much I related to some of her experiences growing up. A lot of these traits are similar to being autistic. Especially growing up feeling 'weird', out of place, like we don’t fit in, wishing to spend lots of time alone…
However, I’m not one to armchair diagnose, and even if Patric’s diagnosis is incorrect, I took it at face value as I read through her experiences. This reads as her believing that she is a sociopath and doesn’t really mention neurodivergence.
There are reviews on here that have eloquently described this observation of the book already, before finishing I went to see if anybody else was feeling the same way as me and happened across quite a few reviews which further validated my thoughts and opinions here.
As an autistic individual, I too struggle to identify my emotions. It’s hard to tell here where the autistic traits ends and the sociopathic ones begin. I know I can feel emotions a bit too much sometimes that they overwhelm me, and Patric explains how she doesn’t seem to feel those emotions at all. But autism is a spectrum and will affect everybody on that spectrum differently. I feel like I am an empath, but many autistic individuals struggle with being empathetic towards others. As do sociopaths. I think because of my diagnoses with autism and ADHD too, I am bound to look through some of these characteristics and traits with that clouding my judgement.
It’s interesting how Patric discusses that she feels like sociopathy is also a spectrum disorder.
Overall, this is quite a quick read, is well-written, and is interesting to read from this perspective of a diagnosed sociopath (ASPD). I too have a diagnosed personality disorder, BPD, and know how horrible the stigmas surrounding such mental illnesses can be. Raising awareness is never a bad thing! My BPD gives me an overwhelming range, and rapid fire, of emotions, even if I don’t always understand them.
This book reminded me of the young woman, Vic, who makes TikTok videos sharing her experiences of being a psychopath (she opens every video with “hi, I’m a diagnosed psychopath”) which I think shows that people do use the terms “psychopath”, “sociopath”, and “ASPD” interchangeably - I will have to do some further research here, as I always thought the diagnoses met different criteria - this is even mentioned in the book!
I have a lot of thoughts, so I may reflect and come back to this review as I couldn’t help but look at this book from a personal angle.
3.4 Stars
However, I’m not one to armchair diagnose, and even if Patric’s diagnosis is incorrect, I took it at face value as I read through her experiences. This reads as her believing that she is a sociopath and doesn’t really mention neurodivergence.
There are reviews on here that have eloquently described this observation of the book already, before finishing I went to see if anybody else was feeling the same way as me and happened across quite a few reviews which further validated my thoughts and opinions here.
As an autistic individual, I too struggle to identify my emotions. It’s hard to tell here where the autistic traits ends and the sociopathic ones begin. I know I can feel emotions a bit too much sometimes that they overwhelm me, and Patric explains how she doesn’t seem to feel those emotions at all. But autism is a spectrum and will affect everybody on that spectrum differently. I feel like I am an empath, but many autistic individuals struggle with being empathetic towards others. As do sociopaths. I think because of my diagnoses with autism and ADHD too, I am bound to look through some of these characteristics and traits with that clouding my judgement.
It’s interesting how Patric discusses that she feels like sociopathy is also a spectrum disorder.
Overall, this is quite a quick read, is well-written, and is interesting to read from this perspective of a diagnosed sociopath (ASPD). I too have a diagnosed personality disorder, BPD, and know how horrible the stigmas surrounding such mental illnesses can be. Raising awareness is never a bad thing! My BPD gives me an overwhelming range, and rapid fire, of emotions, even if I don’t always understand them.
This book reminded me of the young woman, Vic, who makes TikTok videos sharing her experiences of being a psychopath (she opens every video with “hi, I’m a diagnosed psychopath”) which I think shows that people do use the terms “psychopath”, “sociopath”, and “ASPD” interchangeably - I will have to do some further research here, as I always thought the diagnoses met different criteria - this is even mentioned in the book!
I have a lot of thoughts, so I may reflect and come back to this review as I couldn’t help but look at this book from a personal angle.
3.4 Stars
May 5, 2024
It’s giving “I’m the only person in LA with a personality disorder”
I cannot recommend this book when so many things didn’t add up both within this book and with her questionable credentials.
I cannot recommend this book when so many things didn’t add up both within this book and with her questionable credentials.
April 8, 2024
I was really excited about this book, and I did enjoy it… however… I did some research and her credentials seem to be a little fuzzy. Her name change, whether she has a PsyD or PhD (like the book says), and ya know the little thing about her personality that allows masking and lying easily…
I could not give more than 2 stars due to the questions the book left. Also, regardless of the accuracy of her education and history- she got away with A LOT due to PRIVILEGE- pretty privilege, white privilege, rich privilege, power privilege, female privilege… even getting this book deal is due to privilege. What if some of these stories were being told by a creepy ugly man? Would we be eating it up?! Food for thought :)
I could not give more than 2 stars due to the questions the book left. Also, regardless of the accuracy of her education and history- she got away with A LOT due to PRIVILEGE- pretty privilege, white privilege, rich privilege, power privilege, female privilege… even getting this book deal is due to privilege. What if some of these stories were being told by a creepy ugly man? Would we be eating it up?! Food for thought :)
May 9, 2024
I'm always interested in learning about what makes people tick, so this was absolutely fascinating to me, and certainly broadens your understanding of what a sociopath is or can be.
A couple of good interviews that give a feel for the content:
https://cupofjo.com/2024/04/04/what-i...
https://www.latimes.com/entertainment...
Note that she uses the term "sociopath," which has fallen out of favor rather than the generally accepted antisocial personality disorder as listed in the DSM-5, with her reasoning outlined early in the book. I've seen a lot of discussion questioning her claims and even her credentials; I acknowledge that you probably have to take anything an admitted liar says to you with a grain of salt, but human behavior is not a monolith and she explicitly states that these are her experiences and anyone seeking further diagnostics or treatment should refer to other sources.
I also really appreciate the rare case of the author writing this as someone who lived these experiences who later became a therapist--it offers unique professional insight and context combined with personal anecdotes, much in the way Scared Selfless did. The descriptions of her observing social norms, her anxiety, her triggers, and her unusual coping mechanisms were riveting and I blew through this in a day. As a fellow Angeleno, I also enjoyed traveling through the city with her and dropping in on familiar places. And I appreciated her acknowledging, very early on, the position of privilege she occupies even as she learns to adjust to living in a world that she doesn't always understand, and that rarely understands her.
Audio Notes: This is also one of the rare cases when an author narrating her own life is very well done. (She has a background in entertainment, which helps!) She's calm but engaging, and I couldn't have asked for a better audiobook experience. Hat tip to the editor too, who insisted on an epilogue because he wanted readers to leave feeling a little more hopeful about life. The original ending would've left us in emotional limbo.
A couple of good interviews that give a feel for the content:
https://cupofjo.com/2024/04/04/what-i...
https://www.latimes.com/entertainment...
Note that she uses the term "sociopath," which has fallen out of favor rather than the generally accepted antisocial personality disorder as listed in the DSM-5, with her reasoning outlined early in the book. I've seen a lot of discussion questioning her claims and even her credentials; I acknowledge that you probably have to take anything an admitted liar says to you with a grain of salt, but human behavior is not a monolith and she explicitly states that these are her experiences and anyone seeking further diagnostics or treatment should refer to other sources.
I also really appreciate the rare case of the author writing this as someone who lived these experiences who later became a therapist--it offers unique professional insight and context combined with personal anecdotes, much in the way Scared Selfless did. The descriptions of her observing social norms, her anxiety, her triggers, and her unusual coping mechanisms were riveting and I blew through this in a day. As a fellow Angeleno, I also enjoyed traveling through the city with her and dropping in on familiar places. And I appreciated her acknowledging, very early on, the position of privilege she occupies even as she learns to adjust to living in a world that she doesn't always understand, and that rarely understands her.
Audio Notes: This is also one of the rare cases when an author narrating her own life is very well done. (She has a background in entertainment, which helps!) She's calm but engaging, and I couldn't have asked for a better audiobook experience. Hat tip to the editor too, who insisted on an epilogue because he wanted readers to leave feeling a little more hopeful about life. The original ending would've left us in emotional limbo.
October 13, 2025
So many confusing feelings about this book.
I appreciate that she is trying to shed light on sociopathy and show that there are people who live (or are trying to live) normal lives. But I found the book was full of contradictions and there were things that really confused and/or irked me. She constantly talks about how they are people too and deserve empathy and treatment. I don't disagree, but honestly listening to her book I didn't feel she was the best example of this. Yes, the book is about her being a sociopath but she is obsessed with the label. She wants to know she is not alone but constantly gatekeeps use of the term and is offended when she meets people who also believe they are sociopaths but are in fact in her eyes "just terrible people." And she attributes everything in her life to being a sociopath. The second she gives birth she doesn't want to hold the baby right away and is like, "OMG ITS BECAUSE IM A SOCIOPATH" I mean, maybe, but I also felt the same. I really didn't feel that immediate rush of connection and love and the tears of joy in that moment I expected to happen. I was TIRED and literally remember thinking, "please just take the baby so I can lie here in peace." And then felt guilty I felt that way. The extreme bursts of love and crying tears of joy all came eventually for me. While I doubt because of her diagnosis that she ever shed tears of joy as I did, it seems pretty safe to say based on what writes that she does come to love her child!!
I never felt like we got to know her beyond this identity of sociopath. Everything was very surface level except her deep analysis of her sociopathic traits and her two romantic(ish) relationships. Although. Conflicted feelings, as I said. I guess feeling no connection to her or feeling like there's not much...to her is kind of the point because she says she feels a near constant feeling of apathy about literally everything. I do want to empathize with her. I just found it very hard as she lacks almost every trait that makes humans....humans. It was very eerie to read things from her point of view. I feel bad saying it because I don't want to "other" her but it was a challenge. Even the things she tries to frame as positives of sociopathy I was like....."Is...is that really a positive?" She says at one point it has brought her experiences, places, and people that others would do anything for. Then mentions the view from a balcony of an abandoned hotel. I....am not motivated or interested by that and would not do anything for that. I suspect others would feel similarly. Her diagnosis seems to have understandably brought her a lot of pain and misunderstanding and she never really touched on great things it brought her until this point. It felt like she was trying to convince herself there were positives. Which, I probably would be too, but it just felt forced.
I'm also still confused by the fact she even wanted to be in a relationship and have kids. And I really wondered if it was fair to make this choice. Of course we can't police people's lives unless they are a danger to others, but she admits she can't love so it feels misguided to bring a child into the world. As much analysis as she did on her relationships, I was still left scratching my head. Again, I'm not saying she should be cast out of society and shunned. She can make her own choices. But she said multiple times she can't feel what other people feel, she can't care in the way others do (I think at one point she told one love interest she 'can't love at all', but I don't want to misquote and don't have a hard copy) She's not motivated by any of the things most people are, so what is in these relationships for her? If she said it, I missed it. I also questioned the motives of the people she dated (which to be fair, she did too). A constant cycle of manipulation and confusion in both relationships, although one did seem to improve.
Finally, I was bothered that we never heard much about how she helped others with this. She kept referencing and foreshadowing the whole book wanting to have patients like her she treated. I was interested to hear how that would work, since she admitted herself that she can't feel much, if any compassion. And how would she guide them if this in an unchangeable part of them as she seems to believe? Of course she can't get into patient specifics, but give us something. It never really comes up. It seems to be this book is standing as the work she's doing for other sociopaths. And while it's a valiant effort and I really respect what she wants to do, I'm not sure I'm convinced it works.
However...this is a book that makes me keep thinking and then arguing with myself. Maybe I'm not meant to understand or be convinced--simply because sociopathy is so wildly different than how I exist. Maybe it's enough to empathize and listen. But I still can't help feeling like I wish she would have pushed herself more, revealed more, and made some things more clear. She seemed to revel in the mystery and negative light her diagnosis has, while at the same time arguing for her acceptance in society.
I appreciate that she is trying to shed light on sociopathy and show that there are people who live (or are trying to live) normal lives. But I found the book was full of contradictions and there were things that really confused and/or irked me. She constantly talks about how they are people too and deserve empathy and treatment. I don't disagree, but honestly listening to her book I didn't feel she was the best example of this. Yes, the book is about her being a sociopath but she is obsessed with the label. She wants to know she is not alone but constantly gatekeeps use of the term and is offended when she meets people who also believe they are sociopaths but are in fact in her eyes "just terrible people." And she attributes everything in her life to being a sociopath. The second she gives birth she doesn't want to hold the baby right away and is like, "OMG ITS BECAUSE IM A SOCIOPATH" I mean, maybe, but I also felt the same. I really didn't feel that immediate rush of connection and love and the tears of joy in that moment I expected to happen. I was TIRED and literally remember thinking, "please just take the baby so I can lie here in peace." And then felt guilty I felt that way. The extreme bursts of love and crying tears of joy all came eventually for me. While I doubt because of her diagnosis that she ever shed tears of joy as I did, it seems pretty safe to say based on what writes that she does come to love her child!!
I never felt like we got to know her beyond this identity of sociopath. Everything was very surface level except her deep analysis of her sociopathic traits and her two romantic(ish) relationships. Although. Conflicted feelings, as I said. I guess feeling no connection to her or feeling like there's not much...to her is kind of the point because she says she feels a near constant feeling of apathy about literally everything. I do want to empathize with her. I just found it very hard as she lacks almost every trait that makes humans....humans. It was very eerie to read things from her point of view. I feel bad saying it because I don't want to "other" her but it was a challenge. Even the things she tries to frame as positives of sociopathy I was like....."Is...is that really a positive?" She says at one point it has brought her experiences, places, and people that others would do anything for. Then mentions the view from a balcony of an abandoned hotel. I....am not motivated or interested by that and would not do anything for that. I suspect others would feel similarly. Her diagnosis seems to have understandably brought her a lot of pain and misunderstanding and she never really touched on great things it brought her until this point. It felt like she was trying to convince herself there were positives. Which, I probably would be too, but it just felt forced.
I'm also still confused by the fact she even wanted to be in a relationship and have kids. And I really wondered if it was fair to make this choice. Of course we can't police people's lives unless they are a danger to others, but she admits she can't love so it feels misguided to bring a child into the world. As much analysis as she did on her relationships, I was still left scratching my head. Again, I'm not saying she should be cast out of society and shunned. She can make her own choices. But she said multiple times she can't feel what other people feel, she can't care in the way others do (I think at one point she told one love interest she 'can't love at all', but I don't want to misquote and don't have a hard copy) She's not motivated by any of the things most people are, so what is in these relationships for her? If she said it, I missed it. I also questioned the motives of the people she dated (which to be fair, she did too). A constant cycle of manipulation and confusion in both relationships, although one did seem to improve.
Finally, I was bothered that we never heard much about how she helped others with this. She kept referencing and foreshadowing the whole book wanting to have patients like her she treated. I was interested to hear how that would work, since she admitted herself that she can't feel much, if any compassion. And how would she guide them if this in an unchangeable part of them as she seems to believe? Of course she can't get into patient specifics, but give us something. It never really comes up. It seems to be this book is standing as the work she's doing for other sociopaths. And while it's a valiant effort and I really respect what she wants to do, I'm not sure I'm convinced it works.
However...this is a book that makes me keep thinking and then arguing with myself. Maybe I'm not meant to understand or be convinced--simply because sociopathy is so wildly different than how I exist. Maybe it's enough to empathize and listen. But I still can't help feeling like I wish she would have pushed herself more, revealed more, and made some things more clear. She seemed to revel in the mystery and negative light her diagnosis has, while at the same time arguing for her acceptance in society.
February 5, 2024
Briefly - Parts of this were outstanding - brutally honest and even funny at times.
In full
This book starts with a fairly long "contents/chapters" list and the line "The story you are about to read is true". It's fair to say that I didn't really know quite what to expect of this. This is a personal memoir about the author's struggle with, and understanding of, her sociopathic behaviour. Patric Gagne realised very early on in her life that she made others feel uncomfortable. It seemed to me that for quite a while that was only part of the problem - Patric really didn't understand or have much wish to engage with other people. She felt very little and some emotions were simply not part of her make-up. In particular, empathy, guilt and fear were alien to her. To avoid the pressures she felt would make her "explode" she stole and lied to avoid being violent.
The whole concept of "sociopath" is a bit tricky. This starts with some comments on it as Patric found that the word is not really defined well and is missing even from mental health dictionaries. Indeed ultimately the test she takes to get a diagnosis is actually that for a psychopath and it's fair to say she isn't pleased! Initially she explains the "why" of this book in that it really is a quest for answers for her. Despite its absence from medical handbooks, it is believed that there may be 30 million people who are sociopaths in the USA somewhere on the spectrum.
Moving from her childhood years to teens and college the focus shifts a little as she comes to terms with and is more understanding of her mental state. For example she states that she went to college parties to "find out how to play emotional and to steal cars" (yes that was one of the points that made me laugh!). After that there is work and relationships. There are highs and lows here. She is in therapy (if not always honest with her therapist). I guess she is being more careful with various aspects of her life. She also realises that she has to be someone who studies her mental condition rather than simply lives it. There is something of a quest here on how to fit in and be "normal" and then realisation that that is not possible/the right path.
This story of a real life dealing with this condition is a roller coaster ride and brutally honest. There is humour at times though some will find it quite dark however I did laugh out loud more than once. She has a wish, desire, compulsion to feel emotions that are alien to her. Turmoil is almost the standard condition in this book! More mundanely though importantly this is well written to me. It strikes a balance between academic and easy reading that I appreciated and felt worked. I certainly commend her bravery, not just in writing this but in living so intelligently (mainly) with this condition. While I am not aware I am on the sociopathic spectrum I do think many of us are on spectrums of one form or another. I also think that many people would find this a very interesting and powerful read.
Note - I received an advance digital copy of this book from the publisher in exchange for a fair review
In full
This book starts with a fairly long "contents/chapters" list and the line "The story you are about to read is true". It's fair to say that I didn't really know quite what to expect of this. This is a personal memoir about the author's struggle with, and understanding of, her sociopathic behaviour. Patric Gagne realised very early on in her life that she made others feel uncomfortable. It seemed to me that for quite a while that was only part of the problem - Patric really didn't understand or have much wish to engage with other people. She felt very little and some emotions were simply not part of her make-up. In particular, empathy, guilt and fear were alien to her. To avoid the pressures she felt would make her "explode" she stole and lied to avoid being violent.
The whole concept of "sociopath" is a bit tricky. This starts with some comments on it as Patric found that the word is not really defined well and is missing even from mental health dictionaries. Indeed ultimately the test she takes to get a diagnosis is actually that for a psychopath and it's fair to say she isn't pleased! Initially she explains the "why" of this book in that it really is a quest for answers for her. Despite its absence from medical handbooks, it is believed that there may be 30 million people who are sociopaths in the USA somewhere on the spectrum.
Moving from her childhood years to teens and college the focus shifts a little as she comes to terms with and is more understanding of her mental state. For example she states that she went to college parties to "find out how to play emotional and to steal cars" (yes that was one of the points that made me laugh!). After that there is work and relationships. There are highs and lows here. She is in therapy (if not always honest with her therapist). I guess she is being more careful with various aspects of her life. She also realises that she has to be someone who studies her mental condition rather than simply lives it. There is something of a quest here on how to fit in and be "normal" and then realisation that that is not possible/the right path.
This story of a real life dealing with this condition is a roller coaster ride and brutally honest. There is humour at times though some will find it quite dark however I did laugh out loud more than once. She has a wish, desire, compulsion to feel emotions that are alien to her. Turmoil is almost the standard condition in this book! More mundanely though importantly this is well written to me. It strikes a balance between academic and easy reading that I appreciated and felt worked. I certainly commend her bravery, not just in writing this but in living so intelligently (mainly) with this condition. While I am not aware I am on the sociopathic spectrum I do think many of us are on spectrums of one form or another. I also think that many people would find this a very interesting and powerful read.
Note - I received an advance digital copy of this book from the publisher in exchange for a fair review
dnf
August 5, 2024I won’t write a review because a memoir is the author’s story as she chooses to tell it
But, for many reasons, this was not the book for me. I wish only the best to the author
But, for many reasons, this was not the book for me. I wish only the best to the author
April 12, 2024
I have read so many memoirs by therapist-patients, and this doesn't work as a memoir or as piece of advocacy for those with mental health disabilities. Her PR suggests she wrote the book to "help other sociopaths" but the writing itself suggests otherwise. She doesn't mention knowing a single other sociopath, and she seemingly believes herself to be the only authentic one in all of Los Angeles. Typical, I guess. Everyone else, as noted in the book review, is a borderline "fauxciopath" or a "douchebag casserole" - yikes.
In the book, "Syd" and the aforementioned "douchebag casserole" both showed ASPD behaviors that enraged Patric. She stabbed one of them in the neck and lifted the other guy's car. Also who cares what her friends in the biz think of riding her "dark coattails." I want to hear from doctors, or anyone in her life other than her husband. As for the plot she sets up, where is the resolution in the story? What happened to her mother? Her sister appears out of nowhere and they instantly became BFFs again? What about her dad? The creepy photos? And are we really supposed to feel satisfied that her husband saved her psychosocial sanity and is competent to be her "True North" if she gets negative book reviews?
In terms of sheer reading experiences, the lead-up and length were rude too to those of us who pre-ordered looking for a good long memoir to kick of the spring season! I agree she should be allowed to change private info for almost any career path. But not as a therapist or grief counselor. It's a conflict of interest. She would have to report herself. Speaking of which, Cagle and Caglin (her previous name and the "doctor" who diagnosed her) = super fishy. It's important to ask if she's a narcissistic grifter in the mental health space - claiming to be an expert in a field she doesn't work in (I mean thank god she doesn't but still). What an alarming waste of time. I hope the clinical community responds and that people save their $ for the therapy they'll need after being emotionally jerked around and intellectually gaslit by "sociopath; a memoir".
In the book, "Syd" and the aforementioned "douchebag casserole" both showed ASPD behaviors that enraged Patric. She stabbed one of them in the neck and lifted the other guy's car. Also who cares what her friends in the biz think of riding her "dark coattails." I want to hear from doctors, or anyone in her life other than her husband. As for the plot she sets up, where is the resolution in the story? What happened to her mother? Her sister appears out of nowhere and they instantly became BFFs again? What about her dad? The creepy photos? And are we really supposed to feel satisfied that her husband saved her psychosocial sanity and is competent to be her "True North" if she gets negative book reviews?
In terms of sheer reading experiences, the lead-up and length were rude too to those of us who pre-ordered looking for a good long memoir to kick of the spring season! I agree she should be allowed to change private info for almost any career path. But not as a therapist or grief counselor. It's a conflict of interest. She would have to report herself. Speaking of which, Cagle and Caglin (her previous name and the "doctor" who diagnosed her) = super fishy. It's important to ask if she's a narcissistic grifter in the mental health space - claiming to be an expert in a field she doesn't work in (I mean thank god she doesn't but still). What an alarming waste of time. I hope the clinical community responds and that people save their $ for the therapy they'll need after being emotionally jerked around and intellectually gaslit by "sociopath; a memoir".
March 30, 2024
I think what Gagne does here is extremely interesting. She is a self diagnosed (by and large) sociopath who proceeds to learn all she can about sociopathy. Her investigation ultimately enables her to accept herself and her perceived differences from other people.
I mostly struggled with accepting the fact that Gagne is labelling herself, and I wonder about the wisdom and necessity of that. She describes serious anxiety that seems to arise from her own lack of feeling - - and this anxiety drives her to do bad things which then creates a feeling of release and relief. As a reader, it was a bit hard to really wrap my arms around a person who claims to be apathetic also having anxiety. If you claim to have minimal feelings, what is anxiety other than a feeling. There's something about her description of herself that seems as though maybe she's on the autism spectrum. Or has a compulsion disorder.
At any rate, her story has a narrative arc that seems a little "made for tv movie", but it also is satisfying in that regard. It felt uplifting in a way that many memoirs (often stories of messy lives that just can't be completely resolved) do not.
I mostly struggled with accepting the fact that Gagne is labelling herself, and I wonder about the wisdom and necessity of that. She describes serious anxiety that seems to arise from her own lack of feeling - - and this anxiety drives her to do bad things which then creates a feeling of release and relief. As a reader, it was a bit hard to really wrap my arms around a person who claims to be apathetic also having anxiety. If you claim to have minimal feelings, what is anxiety other than a feeling. There's something about her description of herself that seems as though maybe she's on the autism spectrum. Or has a compulsion disorder.
At any rate, her story has a narrative arc that seems a little "made for tv movie", but it also is satisfying in that regard. It felt uplifting in a way that many memoirs (often stories of messy lives that just can't be completely resolved) do not.
April 29, 2024
First of all, I rated this 5 stars because I rarely rate books that are so personal and intimate under that. Having said that, I’ve read other reviews that allude to the fact that the author’s credentials may not be worthy of doctorate degree status. I’m not going to delve into accreditation or lack thereof. My focus is primarily on the content of this book.
Patric Gagne, PhD offers a view as a child who has parents (mostly her primary caretaker, her mom) that are oftentimes frustrated that there is something off about her. She routinely reflects back on what stark differences in personalities with her peers and sister. I found this to be incredibly compelling as it was not only frustrating to her parents, but as well as frustrating to herself.
I found myself teetering between empathy to the author herself and sympathy for the people that love her. I don’t want to call her effort to bring light to this misunderstood diagnosis “brave”, but it is important and imperative to recognize that we quickly look at someone’s diagnosis with jarring disbelief and diminish their value. I felt this same kind of empathy stir up in Lucinda Berry’s, Saving Noah. When do people become more than a label? And why are we so hesitant to find ways to treat them only to just ostracize them?
I want to also add that there’s going to be a variation of responses to this book. None of them are wrong or bad, but it does start unraveling important conversations. Can we look past labels and see the humanity? Food for thought.
Patric Gagne, PhD offers a view as a child who has parents (mostly her primary caretaker, her mom) that are oftentimes frustrated that there is something off about her. She routinely reflects back on what stark differences in personalities with her peers and sister. I found this to be incredibly compelling as it was not only frustrating to her parents, but as well as frustrating to herself.
I found myself teetering between empathy to the author herself and sympathy for the people that love her. I don’t want to call her effort to bring light to this misunderstood diagnosis “brave”, but it is important and imperative to recognize that we quickly look at someone’s diagnosis with jarring disbelief and diminish their value. I felt this same kind of empathy stir up in Lucinda Berry’s, Saving Noah. When do people become more than a label? And why are we so hesitant to find ways to treat them only to just ostracize them?
I want to also add that there’s going to be a variation of responses to this book. None of them are wrong or bad, but it does start unraveling important conversations. Can we look past labels and see the humanity? Food for thought.
October 19, 2024
4,5 ⭐
✨ Resenha disponível no youtube: https://youtu.be/rLBRq4YKNNY
Você leria um livro escrito por uma sociopata? Ou melhor ainda, você acreditaria em um livro de memórias escrito por uma sociopata?
Esse é um livro que nos coloca em um impasse.
A palavra "sociopata' vem carregada de um significado que ao longo dos anos foi cada vez mais repetido pela mídia. Mas é como se a gente só conhecesse aqueles que, de fato, viraram vilões. O que acontece com as outras pessoas? O objetivo da Patric Gagne com esse livro é trazer luz para um diagnóstico que merece mais atenção para estudos e tratamentos. Mas ela mesma diz no começo do livro que É uma mentirosa, como deixar isso completamente de lado e acreditar na história que ela conta sobre a sua vida?
A experiência de leitura desse livro é muito intensa e eu achei incrível! Não cheguei à conclusão alguma sobre a própria Patric, mas com certeza plantou a semente da curiosidade. Além disso, abriu a minha mente para buscar entender um pouco mais sobre o assunto.
Afinal, ignorar uma coisa que parece "feia" não ajuda em nada. Na verdade, só atrapalha a busca por soluções.
PS: O termo "sociopata", mesmo em desuso, é usado pela autora para salientar a importância de um diagnóstico mais específico. Para ela, utilizar o termo "transtorno de personalidade antissocial" para explicar várias pessoas diferentes impede que pesquisas e opções de tratamento mais específicos sejam feitos.
✨ Resenha disponível no youtube: https://youtu.be/rLBRq4YKNNY
Você leria um livro escrito por uma sociopata? Ou melhor ainda, você acreditaria em um livro de memórias escrito por uma sociopata?
Esse é um livro que nos coloca em um impasse.
A palavra "sociopata' vem carregada de um significado que ao longo dos anos foi cada vez mais repetido pela mídia. Mas é como se a gente só conhecesse aqueles que, de fato, viraram vilões. O que acontece com as outras pessoas? O objetivo da Patric Gagne com esse livro é trazer luz para um diagnóstico que merece mais atenção para estudos e tratamentos. Mas ela mesma diz no começo do livro que É uma mentirosa, como deixar isso completamente de lado e acreditar na história que ela conta sobre a sua vida?
A experiência de leitura desse livro é muito intensa e eu achei incrível! Não cheguei à conclusão alguma sobre a própria Patric, mas com certeza plantou a semente da curiosidade. Além disso, abriu a minha mente para buscar entender um pouco mais sobre o assunto.
Afinal, ignorar uma coisa que parece "feia" não ajuda em nada. Na verdade, só atrapalha a busca por soluções.
PS: O termo "sociopata", mesmo em desuso, é usado pela autora para salientar a importância de um diagnóstico mais específico. Para ela, utilizar o termo "transtorno de personalidade antissocial" para explicar várias pessoas diferentes impede que pesquisas e opções de tratamento mais específicos sejam feitos.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 12,807 reviews