The term “Narcissist” and how it might be detrimental to healing past the anger stage
Recently I came across this page for . The dictionary was somewhat helpful in finally understanding the me.
However the site got me pondering the matter of narcissism again. I’m struggling with the term narcissist and have been for a while now. My main bone of contention is how it seems so loosely defined that apparently every abuser is a narcissist to the point that the two terms seem to be interchangeable, so why have both? The core of narcissism seems to be a fundamental lack of empathy which in turn informs their abusive and/or neglectful behaviour. Narcissism and abuse/neglect seem to be causally tied together. Also many people I am reading about seem to permanently use the narcissist label to throw blame, hate and vilification towards whoever hurt them.
I am also curious about male narcissism and how things affect sons. My one grandfather might be classifiable as an enabler, but I’m not so sure about the second grandfather and my father. It feels a bit like autism with gender reversal where you only describe half of the spectrum (the male symptoms in autism and the female symptoms in narcissism) and pass it of as the whole thing.
I have been recently asked how I learnt to go for a walk and the more I wrote about it the more I realised the therapeutic benefits of working on that particular issue of mine so I thought I might as well turn it into a blog post. Maybe some other hurt soul finds a way to lessen a bit of the pain. 🙂
I had a flatmate who i was regularly walking with. Her routes tho and on her initiative. But through such things I was aware of the general idea of walking for the purpose of walking. She now moved away and my new flatmates and I do not get along. Through the walks with my exflatmate I had some idea of how my surroundings looked like. In the beginning I would walk our routes, uphill among houses and alleys. I also began to walk to the the city centre instead of taking the bus. Since my sleep rhythm is somewhat more normal I didn’t always need to hurry to barely arrive at the supermarket at closing hour. So I could take my time take in surroundings. When I have been in a hurry I wouldn’t really notice anything, now I’d maybe see that this way extends to some unknown over there asf.
I love dogs so I would sometimes see dogs and their owners who looked friendly to me and I would ask the owner if I could introduce myself to the dog. Only one person has said no so far. Many people even are happy that they meet a dog lover. I really feel connected to non human animals so that kind of socialisation helped as well. Eventually I began to realise the path to the city which I used (pedestrians only, next to a stream) was part of a bigger path alongside one of the cities streams so I followed it up a little more and eventually began to explore the part of it that were less concrete influenced and more about trees and undergrowth. I grew up near forests so I liked that plus people there are normally rather relaxed walking their dogs (or jogging, pushing their toddlers for their nap, but i do not chat these people up. No doggie, no talkie).
I’d say I always felt people would judge me somehow. I had this obsession about always needing to have an answer to the question no one ever asked me where I was going. I felt “justified” in groups but never alone. Neglect teaches you helplessness and nonexistence. The less you are seen and heard the better for you. Going out for a walk FOR NO REASON is a quite obvious violation of that rule about neglect. Part of it is literally about carving your own path, being a person on a basic level. Existing. I still worry about so many pointless things when going for a walk (what if I go to far and I can’t walk back and my battery has died or I have no reception… blabla) but I plan to gradually overcome this and dare I say it might even increase the area I’m covering by using my bicycle, having picnics… you know getting daring 😛
Some of this might not help you. Maybe you are afraid of dogs of the idea of talking to anyone gives you nightmares or you don’t like nature the same way and would prefer the houses. But in the end the walk is about exploring. It’s mostly about you personally I guess. Another forbidden concept to explore around neglectful people. So you need to find a way to ease yourself into walking that works FOR YOU. The growth I have written about here took me a year. Each new addition to the walk (even the taking more time while walking anyway) took me weeks of anxiety getting myself convinced that it’s OK to do this and then even more weeks to get used to the idea of actually doing, trying to be less jumpy about it.
The walk starts with accepting the idea that YOU determine what is right and wrong for you. You can decide when you walk, where you walk and how long you walk. Who you talk to and what you say. A very complicated concept for me. I guess the best way to start is to open yourself up for experiments and review them, confront your fears little by little.
Today I want to discuss some of the ideas researchers have about the autistic spectrum. As you read this a LOT of money from a certain “charity” organisation claiming to speak for us is used to research a cure which the majority of grown up autistic people do NOT want. In fact many of us say acceptance of our quirks is all the cure we need. And mind you this doesn’t cost a single dollar, euro, pound, yen or whatever currency you want to not spend. But that is again a topic for another post.
Anyhow aside from this assortment of people claiming to do the best for us the holy grail in autism research is the root cause of it. The biggest question these day seems to be (aside from what is broken) if there is one root issue that causes autism (such as the broken theory of mind which I have already about) or if there are multiple causes. The biggest trick with the one cause hypothesis is always that finding only one among this diverse bunch who does not display the root cause already refutes the entire theory altogether. Unsurprisingly I can’t give you an answer to this question. I can only give you my gut feelings and some observations which might hinder current autism research. Continue reading
So I’m sure you know about homophobia, racism, sexism, ageism, ableism, religious discrimination and all the other heinous ways prejudices poison our relationships with each other. With it running so rampant I thought I’m gonna tell you my ideas of why we are that prejudiced in first place.
These prejudices are old. Really really old. In fact many mammals are know to shun members of their own species which look different such as say albinos. So in order to understand a concept that has apparently been around for many many years we might benefit from looking how it originated in order to understand it better.
So let’s go back to our sabertooth tiger again. The one I have already invoked . Same situation again: you are faced with this animal. Let’s assume you have never seen it before and you do not know yet that you might benefit from instantly developing the new hobby of running or fighting for your life. Well you won’t make that mistake twice.
The next time you see something huge and alive, especially with protruding canines you won’t ponder whether or not that poor thing is just an orphan looking for a mommy or wants to talk to you about it’s religious beliefs. Once you have made an experience with something as very painful and possibly life threatening you develop fear of it and even things looking like that. You attach a name to it and tell all the members of your social group how they should not mess with the big stripy kitty.
So now they are afraid of sabertooths as well, even if they never had to fight one and life to tell the tale. From then on the sabertooth will be discriminated against as dangerous and it only took one incident, because this one incident was life threatening. Bears and wolves might be considered dangerous by proxy of being big, alive and predatory as well. We overgeneralise what we are afraid of and for many hundreds of generations this has helped us surviving.
Today I want to tackle a problem that seems to be often talked about but rarely if ever analysed in detail.
The starting point is this: something tragic happened and it’s all over the news. Someone got raped, beaten up badly, a child kidnapped or murdered or whatever. Stuff that reflects the darkest human to human violence.
So what happens? We all know under every story online detailing events like this there will always be the one person who is oh so smart to proclaim what could have been done to prevent this tragic event: a longer skirt, no alcohol, watch your children better, do not trust strangers, leave your abusive spouse, all sort of really smartypants no kidding advice. This is my response to people claiming the victim could have prevented the incident:
Even if we stay in our houses, devoid of booze, wearing three burkas, watching our children non stop and being locked up like fort knox: if people really want to hurt us or our loved ones they will find a way. Period. All this advice is only asking for one thing: succumb to your fears. Do not go out, become super paranoid, do not live life, do not express yourself, do not make experiences.
This is so hard to rebuke because partially they are right. If you get raped the fifth time when you drunkenly followed a random stranger to their car the fifth time you might want to reconsider your actions and change your habits to the sixth rape. But there is a difference between stupidly engaging in risk seeking behaviour and living. We all need to make mistakes to learn from them.
So I recently read this where she describes a struggle many people face one way or another. Your brain kinda sorta decided it’s time for you to fret over whether or not drinking coffee right now will mean the end of the world as we know it or you personal early death in gruesome pain. Or it decided you should stay in bed all day in constant pain or completely devoid of energy or whatever have you for no reason other than your brain said so. Or you are hearing those voices again. It’s scary and humans are kinda help- and clueless what to do about it. Some drugs help encounter some effects of mental disorders but by and large it’s a really really hard uphill struggle each and every day.
So why can’t we talk about it? That is the question my fellow blogger asked and I’d like to give my own idea of an answer. Why is “it’s all in your head” a perfectly socially accepted response to any and all kinds of mental problems? Does it being all in your head make it any less real? Shit no! Ask anyone who recently had a nightmare, who is grieving a loved one one way or another, the pain, the fear, the complete and utter intensity is very very VERY real. So what is up with that cute little piece of violent minimisation and gaslighting being thrown at us whenever we voice some sort of grief? Why is showing emotions such a forbidden fruit in so many cultures? Yes no one should be a crybaby, but let’s face it grown up people crying in public or even around friends is really a rare sight. It’s not about not being a crybaby anymore rather it’s about not showing the struggles you go through at all as far as my own experience tells me. And the accusations are always a variation on the theme of do not show what you are feeling or you actually do not feel what you claim you feel. Again minimisation and gaslighting.
It’s true we should not throw our emotional state randomly at everyone to deal with, grieving and pain should be something to be done in selected company, but I have already been openly accused by random strangers on the street for looking like I’m in a bad mood. And this is where the line is firmly crossed. The people who make a very intense show out of their pain normally have a messed up head as well (narcissists out for their supply come to mind). The line is also firmly crossed when seemingly 90% of the population think it’s alright to further hurt the one who needs support because no one knows how to deal with this.
Hello again after a long hiatus. Life has this unfortunate habit of getting in the way. Anyhow here we are with my first requested post! (Hi Raphael!)
So we have been talking about how different people react to someone who is what is considered attractive and why we do that. This blog shall address the second part of this complex question. So here we go… attraction.
As usual I’m prone to look back into nature to see what other species do and why. When it comes down to attraction two examples spring to mind: we consider babies cute and we/other species consider people/members of their species a possible object of sexual desire if they meet certain criteria. Why is either of that? Lets start with babies, because who wouldn’t love puppy pictures?