try answer the questions what do you think?
dont think the way anyone answers actually matters in ur experiment. theyre just props ur bending to validate wtv narratives you constructed beforehand. u believe u can read everyone bc of ur self proclaimed high empathy. glam was always gna be read as an empath and schizo was always gna be a ‘sociopath’ regardless of the words they chose.
even if i pretend ur deriving your conclusions solely from the results of those 3 questions, the questions r shallow and flawed. in dms, u told me an empath can never be manipulated. here ur saying its also impossible for them to manipulate, unless to help someone else.
what would happen when 2 empaths attempt to manipulate each other, both for a ‘helpful’ purpose? and who do u think gets to deem it helpful?
manipulator decides:
they can justify any manipulation
ex. “i lied to them for their own good, it was to protect them” (u have done this one to me) meaning every harmful action becomes morally pure by default
victim decides:
as soon as they say the manipulator didnt do any good, the “helpful” part is invalidated, making it just plain manipulation and going against ur rule.
since both ppl are both manipulating and being manipulated, someone is still wronged and someone is still acting selfishly.
ur scenario forces one empath to be:
manipulable (contradiction)
or
manipulative in a malicious way (contradiction)
everything uve been saying is nothing but self serving fan fiction, and labeling urself as an empath under these rules would mean giving urself immunity to any manipulation and simultaneously claiming a moral pass to manipulate as you please, meaning no matter the situation or outcome, u would be able to stay morally clean in every single scenario. very bold claim