Ever Had a Narcissistic Significant Other?

Post Reply New Topic

Don't apologize, hermit. As you can see, I'm not so good at preventing my own emotions from spilling out into my own arguments, either. Often I will get too engrossed in the other point of view when I make it my own, and forget that it is only a game. I think I let my fondness for the game's machinations, outweigh the game's purpose of freeing the mind's bondage to a single worldview. I actually do agree with you, that narcissicism can be a bad thing. I simply disagree that this makes them bad people.

Narcissism is practically defined as being a bad person—or at least with a bad personality. The closest to positive is that it is received wisdom in many human resources circles that narcissists (at least not extreme narcissists) are fit for corporate leadership positions because of their ability to bring people together to accomplish a task and inspire them to a vision, make the hard decisions without being boggled down in analysis paralysis, fire unproductive employees without being burdened by too much guilt, to aspire to win against the competition, etc.

The only problem with that is narcissism tends to blend into psychopathy, and these human resource managers might actually hire psychopaths who are completely devoid of loyalty and empathy and will only try to help themselves and not help the company by projecting their identity into the corporation.

interesting!

Yes, it's defined as having a "bad" personality, from a closed point of view. Would a gazelle view the lion as a monster? There is always a skewed view when you are looking subjectively, as most humans are prone to do. All interaction is a miniature version of what narcissists do. And yet narcissists are condemned as "bad people" because it's their nature, much as the lion's nature is to hunt gazelles. Narcissistic interactions still require two to play. The manipulation itself is not "bad", because it happens in every interaction, between every person, narcissistic or not. What everyone has to learn, is that narcissists are no different from you and me.

To use the Aspie-NT comparison again, what about when we melt down, turn violent, hurt people? They often have an emotional component, not to mention an additional PHYSICAL aspect that narcissists do not. What about our brutal honesty which can cause emotional pain? It's not manipulation, but it still has some of the same effects as narcissists. Yet we are adamant it doesn't make us bad people, and rightly so. It is no different to Narcissists-NT interactions, except people view it differently and define it differently. You might say, you can teach an Aspie not to go violent, or learn to control the meltdowns. They are not bad people, they don't mean to do it. We say NTs should learn to accept neurodiversity. It seems everyone needs to accept diversity in personality.

What everyone needs to learn, is that narcissists are not bad people. It's just their system of interaction causes them to appear that way, just like our meltdowns can cause us to appear that way. Just like we can learn to control it, so can they be taught. Does anyone here know the dynamics of narcissistic interactions? They need attention, the so called Narcissistic-Supply. The person with NPD has learnt to use tactics to obtain that, which often results in emotional hurt to others. Don't you think it's possible there are the same sorts of people, who have learnt tactics to get that supply by being nice to people? We call them altruists. They are NOT bad people.

Sorry, guys, Aylissa's right; I've lived with it long enough to know. Narcism is very unhealthy for the Narcisist and the recipient of thier manipulation. One of the primary marks of maturity is to become less "self-centered" and more "others-centered". Being a N stunts growth.

Human beings are social animals and live in social units premised on cooperation between individuals.

I don't melt down, and I'm not brutally honest, but I know these are still different from pathological narcissism. Narcissists calculate their actions to get the most out of others for themselves; when they hurt others, it is intentional.

Altruistic individuals often just don't need any kind of recognition for what they do. They are altruistic because they believe that's how they should be and wouldn't want it any other way. Pathological narcissism is not simply an addiction to "narcissistic supply." Narcissists might very well have neurological differences (either inherited or developped through unbringing) that render them incapable of seeing things from other people's points of view, causing them to lack empathy. Many narcissists will delude themselves into thinking they are good people and may let themselves be consciously unaware of the harm they inflict; nevertheless, they are traditionally considered to be bad people if you read all the sites about narcissistic personality disorder.

The same can be said for autism. We can hardly be judgemental on THAT basis.


One wonders what you are trying to say by this. Are you trying to say that people who aren't social animals, and who don't live in social units premised on cooperation, aren't human? Again, the same could be said about autistics. Is that what you're saying?


Methinks you don't quite understand how these things work. Are you familiar with Freud's personality factors? There are three levels of awareness: Conscious mind, preconscious mind, and subconscious mind. One of Freud's findings is that a lot of behavior is driven directly from the subconscious mind. Thus we are largely unable to control our behavior. Narcissistic behavior is basically a defense mechanism, which initiates at the subconscious level. They are largely not aware of it, and they don't generally control it. It can be brought to the conscious mind, but the whole basis of a personality disorder is that it stems from the subconscious. Hence they do not calculate their actions, they don't think to themselves "let's do this and hurt them" anymore than we do (and don't try to say that we don't).

Take a look at the "Would you cure your autism?" thread, and look at the rationales for their answers. "If I could get rid of the sensory overload without doing away with my personality, I'd do so in a heartbeat." "It affects my personality and thats something I am not going to allow to be forcibly changed nomatter what." The only reason someone would not want a cure for autism, is because they feel it's part of who they are, inseparable from each other. Although it affects our conscious thought patterns, they are just the tip of the iceburg. We all know it goes deeper than that. It controls our subconscious processing, and our actions that aren't consciously controlled.


That's the perfect idea of an altruist, yes. But look beyond the limitations of the ideal, look to reality and the dynamics of social interactions. One wonders how the idea that they believe that's how they should be and wouldn't want it any other way has developed. Even were that true, look at it closer! If they truly did believe that that is the perfect way of being, doesn't that smack of grandiosity? Of wanting to be seen as perfect, as altruistic? Take a look at narcissism, for instance. One might think that they just want to be cruel and to hurt people, that it's nothing more. If it hadn't been examined by Freud and prominent psychologists, and theories established as to what they get from it, you would be saying the same thing about them, rather than talking about narcissistic supply. Altruistic supply is present, though it takes a different form and comes from different avenues. Instead of supply-through-manipulation, it's a freely given supply which is facilitated through helping.


Traditionally, blacks are supposed to be slaves, and whites are supposed to be superior and dominant. That it is a traditional view does not make it absolute truth, or correct at all. Should I agree with a traditional view that is based upon a closed mindset that judges everything subjectively? From a white person who is locked in that worldview, they would agree with it. From the perspective of the black person, they find it unfair and unjust. It is this blind following of tradition and failure to question another's truth, this acceptance that THIS is the way things are; it is this that we must be careful of. It is this we must be free of.

Are narcissists bad people? They can be. Are normal people bad people? They can be, too. But because they have the capacity for it, does not make them bad.

Many, many psychiatric (and other medical) disorders interfere with individuals' ability to inmesh themselves into society. This very often engenders harship for them, but it does not make them inhuman, of course. Human beings have simply evolved living in communities: clans, families, tribes, nations, and global communities.

You are right that the vast majority of thinking is subconscious and consciousness is only the tip of the psychic iceberg. However, narcissists have control over themselves in so far as any reasonable person does. Perhaps most narcissists do not usually think, "I want to do this specifically to harm this person," but the fact is they choose their course of action without considering the consequences their behavior might have on others because they focus only on how it benefits them and makes them look good to other people.

My ethics class is going to come in handy precisely now! In Book II of Plato's Republic, the character of Glaucon, Plato's brother, tells the story of a shepherd from Lydia named Gyges. This shepherd discovered a ring that turned him invisible (ring a bell, anyone? ). This man raped and stole because he could get away with it. Glaucon believed this example showed that being just was premised on fear conditioning, and he challenged Plato to prove him wrong. Plato asserted (baldly, remember he's the expert philosopher!) that a just man would behave justly even if he were deprived of all his possessions, his family, and even the respect of his community who might think of him as a bad person (cf., the Biblical story of Job). He contrasted this with the secretly bad man who may have the esteem of nearly everyone in his community but who still acts without virtue in private. Being moral and just—in this altruism can be included—is not, at the heighest stages of moral development, dependent upon community condonances. A virtuous person acts with empathy and fairness because he or she believes it is right. Therefore, he or she is not dependent upon your proposed altruistic supply.

Ah, I was hoping you would make this argument! I agree with you.

I concur with you to an extent. Narcissists are not inherently bad people and no more, but the nature of their personality disorder means they have a higher probability of committing acts that harm others for their personal gain.

Now would you like to go further and argue that psychopaths are not necessarily bad people, either? Remember some theorists believe psychopathy is just a more extreme manifestation of pathological narcissism.

Have you ever been told that you look at things differently to other people? Perhaps you look at things more logically, or from a different angle. Is there anything you don't understand, can't comprehend, like an abstract? Do you CHOOSE not to understand? Do you CHOOSE to look at it from that angle, or choose to look at it logically? I don't want you to answer yes or no, just think about something that is just YOU, your particular way of looking at things that you can't change, that isn't conscious, it's just the way your subconscious processes things. It's the same for narcissists.
You have a view on some abstract of the world. It's just your view that you believe. You want to let other people know your view, for them to agree or disagree with as they may. But in constructing your description of your view, you unconsciously factor in little bits of manipulation. A specific wording designed to evoke an emotional response, a specific wording to make it sound more intelligent, more appealing to the reader. Perhaps to your sense of logic, it just sounds better. A more accurate reflection of your opinion. Yet instead, it's just added manipulations. In just trying to get your opinions out, the manipulations evoke other emotions: pity, sorrow, compassion. A hint of altruism here, a drop of sincerity there, a jab at the author of contrasting or differing views, the pretence of objectivity.
Now, you're aware of all your manipulations. Something has opened your eyes to the true content of your writing. You can't stop it coming out. It all sounds so logical when you're writing, so much more coherent THIS way rather than that. You finish what you want to write. You read over it, wanting to cut out as much manipulation as you can. But it's there, in every part of your writing. And also in the writing of everyone else, manipulation manipulation manipulation. A comment to make them sound smarter, as if they were expecting you to say this or that. Or that OF COURSE you're right, as if any fool could see it. Why shouldn't you manipulate them? Everyone does it. It's just the way everything is, the way everybody is.


Of course, the idea of a perfect virtuous person would be like that. But I'm afraid you're living in a fantasy world, of perfect ideas and ideals. I don't think your ethics class will be of much help in this area. I don't debate that a perfectly virtuous person would fit the idea of perfect altruism. Discussing the ethics of perfectly ethical people does not come in handy when we are discussing altruism of real and practical application. According to Jung, we all possess a degree of narcissism. Thus we all require a level of narcissistic supply. I should think you are looking at this from the wrong angle; looking first at the preconceived notions of perfect altruism, which are utterly at odds with the preconceived notions of narcissism. Instead, look at the dynamics of narcissism, look at it's etymology. It progresses from a need for narcissistic supply, to also enjoying the means by which they obtain it. The same is true when you use altruism and it's tools to obtain narcissistic supply. The game itself fulfills your feeling of grandiosity, of self-importance: I am deigning to help them/I can control them. Instead of a need of obvious adoration and high-standing in the eyes of others, it changes to behind-the-scenes power, aka the power behind the throne.


I can't argue with you over the first; their abilities are such that most normal people haven't learnt to defend themselves against it. There's one reason why they have a higher probability of harming others emotionally: They're far more likely to encounter people who aren't emotionally capable of defending themselves, than they are to meet people who aren't vulnerable.
As to whether psychopaths are necessarily bad people, I have to disagree. They aren't. From a certain point of view. Suffice to say that I believe in "good" and "bad" as purely relative constructs. From a completely free point of view, free from the influence of morals and ethics (other relative constructs), "good" and "bad" become meaningless. There is only power.

Danlo wrote-

Bland wrote:
One of the primary marks of maturity is to become less "self-centered" and more "others-centered". Being a N stunts growth.

The same can be said for autism. We can hardly be judgemental on THAT basis.




But we can judge. We make judgements all of the time. I tend to think of myself first and the things that effect me. This makes for one-sided conversation. When one of my friends says, "Hey! What about me?", I then am made aware that there is a second party involved and their thoughts and feelings are just as important as mine are. I have learned to be less self-centered. Ditto for my AS son. He generally doesn't consider the other person's thoughts or feelings until they alert him. Then he learns that he isn't the only one who is important. Some people know this intrinsically, and others must learn unless they are content to have no relationships. If I want my son to grow and have fulfilling relationships I must teach him "other" awareness. He desires relationship with people so this is necessary. If a selfish person is made aware of this and decides not to change but still desires relationships, they will be doomed to frustration whether they be autistic or narcissistic or just plain selfish.

A world where there is neither good nor bad will eventually lead to anarchy and destruction. That's not a "good" place to be.

I'm not sure what you're attempting to do. Are you trying to say that Narcissists cannot change and should not be expected to? Are you asserting that there's nothing "wrong" with being a Narcissict?.....or both?

What I was trying to say, is that we can hardly judge them on that basis without being hypocritical. I'm trying to help everyone see that narcissists are basically in the same boat as us. Almost noone ever fights for equality for other people. We all want equality for ourselves, for our demographic, but it's easy to fall back on our human natures and then deny equality when another minority wants it. We want NTs to shed their biased nature and accept neurodiversity, yet we would deny that same thing when another minority wants it.
What you have said is important, and I agree with you. It is important to develop a normal and healthy system of interaction, and it is essential to recognize another person's needs to develop it. While when it comes to narcissism, I am unwilling to look at it in terms of right and wrong, I do not disagree that it is unhealthy. It is unhealthy for everyone; for the narcissist, for the people he manipulates. Secondly, I don't think I explained this, but while good and bad are purely relative constructs and it must be remembered that they are, it doesn't mean they aren't useful constructs. They can have very real applications. But with regards to most narcissists, good and bad simply aren't useful, nor accurate.


I'm not saying there's nothing wrong with being a Narcissist. It is an unhealthy way to live, to obtain your energy. It is better for the narcissist and the people he interacts with had he developed normally. What I am trying to say is that the narcissist is not a monster, he's not evil, he's not a bad person. We, as people, can learn to deal with their problem, can learn to give him what he needs without ourselves being harmed. Are we, as autistics, asking any less from NT's?

Thanks for clearing that up, Danlo. I'll agree to the fact that we're all bent and broken to some degree and can improve if we so desire. Should I print up some T-shirts:

NARCISSISTS ARE PEOPLE TOO! (just kidding)

You are very good at explaining your view.
I still disagree about the "good" and "bad" though. If I came up to you and stomped on your foot, that would be "bad". And if you punched my nose for doing it, that would be "bad", also. But if we forgave each other and made up and had excellent conversations, that would be "good". These things seem elementary.

If morals are relative, they become useless and we're back at anarchy and chaos.
And that's "bad". How can I explain? There are laws of physics. They are fixed. Without them, the earth cannot exist. Ditto for moral laws. Without them, man will eventually cease to exist. There are principles that are fundamental and real and even though we may not always be able to succinctly explain them, they still remain.

Well, i'm a narcissist. I think. I've never been officially diagnosed, but it really seems to fit, and i feel pretty good about it. I like being disorders. It is fun.

I've dated many people who would be considered such. Although I don't think I fit your description of most aspies so that might be why, and I worked in the entertainment industry where egos tend to be a little larger than life. I have to admit though, I find arrogance a little attractive and I have been told I have a rather humbling effect on men I date so it was never really a problem for me. My fiance isn't at all and it kind of bugs me sometimes because I feel like he has reason to be and shouldn't be so self-depricating.

Hey, im curious, wikipedia describes pedophilia as being primarily or exclusively attracted to prepubescent children. What if your attraction is just auxiliary?

What the hell is that post in reply to, Nomaken?