Professor Nikolai Dvoryanchikov, the Dean of the Faculty of Law, notes a troubling pattern linking cruelty to animals with early trauma in individuals who later engage in serial sexual aggression. With more than a decade of experience at the Forensic Sexology Laboratory of the Psychology Center at MSUPE, he has personally interviewed hundreds of criminals from various backgrounds, including those who manifest such disturbing behaviors. This long-term exposure informs his view that animal cruelty is more than a random act; it often signals deeper underlying distress that can take root early in life.
“Cruelty toward animals serves as a warning sign when a person is in trouble,” the psychologist explains. “If someone wants to hurt others, it frequently traces back to painful experiences that loom large in their own life. In those moments, contemplating someone else’s suffering might momentarily ease their own inner turmoil.”
Dvoryanchikov highlights that individuals who could be described as serial sexual aggressors often carry a history of early trauma, including traumatic brain injuries or birth-related injuries in their first year. Many of these individuals may have themselves endured violence or witnessed violent acts against others, creating a cascade of emotional injuries that influence their later actions. This pattern underscores how early experiences can shape behavioral trajectories in profound and lasting ways.
He adds that such experiences leave a psychotrauma imprint, a kind of imprint that nudges a person toward finding a stable, albeit distorted, stance in relation to the trauma. The effect can be subtle but persistent, guiding decisions long after the initial event has passed, and shaping how the individual relates to others and to themselves.
According to the Karpman triangle, a person’s response to a traumatic event may appear in one of three roles: victim, rescuer, or aggressor. The dynamic works like a feedback loop, where the victim feels overwhelmed and powerless, while the rescuer unwittingly reinforces a pattern of helping that centers on the trauma. Yet there is also the possibility of adopting the aggressor role, where cruelty becomes a way to reclaim a sense of control and power. This theoretical lens helps explain how a survivor of trauma might slip into the position of the oppressor, often without conscious intent, as the unconscious mechanisms take over.
“If the individual occupies the victim position, they become bound by the trauma and struggle to act decisively. If they assume the rescuer role, they might continually seek opportunities to assist others affected by the trauma. But a person may also settle into the rapist or oppressor role, using cruelty toward others as a defense against vulnerability. This pattern reflects a deeper, often unconscious identification with the aggressor, a concept first described by Sigmund Freud and his daughter Anna Freud, which centers on how unresolved trauma can shape behavior at a fundamental level.”
Thus, as Dvoryanchikov emphasizes, an event that leads someone to inflict harm on an animal is frequently present, in some form, during the early years of those who later display maniacial tendencies. The pattern is not universal, but the link between early adversity, coping mechanisms, and later aggression is a risk factor researchers continue to explore across diverse populations.
Readers are invited to explore more on whether all maniacs carry mental illness, whether there is a common thread in the behavior of individuals labeled as maniacs, and how collecting behaviors fit into the broader life history of such offenders. This material is presented by socialbites.ca as part of ongoing coverage of criminology and psychology topics.
previously psychologist explainedWhy do maniacs collect things from their victims?