All Narcissists Are Men~?

Once and for all, when someone is talking about "Narcissism" or "Abusers" they are not referring to MALES. Unless the speaker or writer is specifically talking about a male Narcissist or Abuser, assuming that they are referring to MALES just by using the word "Narcissist" or "Abuser" makes no sense. That's like assuming a person is talking about Caucasians every time the word "Racist" is used, or referring to Asians every time the word Genius is used.

No one who has the slightest grasp of Narcissism or abuse believes for a millisecond that it's a "male only" trait or behavior. If you read something that seems biased for one sex or the other, that's THAT ARTICLE. Unless the writer actually says "Narcissists and abusers are male", then he or she is probably NOT saying that! And if he or she IS saying that, then move on! Don't read it! Don't take it seriously!

Writers who project ANY human traits onto either only females or only males obviously has personal bias issues and probably should not be taken seriously, at least while they are apparently writing from that bias. YOU have the ability to discern what you read. Stop assuming that every male writer and speaker is anti-female, and that every female writer and speaker is anti-male. When you open your eyes, you'll be amazed at what you see.

Why Don't They Seem To Want You To Be Successful?

Narcissists do not want their target to receive respect, recognition, or admiration from others. Positive attention from others toward the target is a threat to the oppressive hold the Narcissist is trying to keep over the target, It is a threat to their control, and also a threat to their ego; the Narcissist needs the target to remain at a "lower status" so that there will always be someone they can feel superior to. When others "SEE" the target and treat them like a REAL PERSON in the larger world, the target could realize that they have many more options and avenues in their life, and supporters who are actually nice to them to boot. So preventing the target from achieving accomplishment and success is tantamount to the Narcissist's ability to keep control over them. Also, if the target has supporters, those supporters may be able to see the Narcissist's control tactics, and that is a serious threat to the Narcissist's entire way of life and reputation.

The easiest way to prevent a target from achievement, success, and recognition is to make them believe that they CAN'T achieve it in the first place, that they aren't capable, smart enough, wealthy enough, mentally stable enough, attractive enough, or well liked enough. If the Narcissist can sabotage the target from even TRYING to achieve their goal, or cause enough chaos and pain to make them DROP their efforts, then they have achieved their own goal.

This behavior can be seen in every kind of human relationship there is, from teacher and student to employer and employee, parents and children, siblings, partners, "friends", to a larger scale such as governments and citizens, businesses and customers, between sexes, and between races.

Tolerance For One Mouth, Intolerance For Another

Tolerance and approval for one person and not another is RARELY, if ever, based on their actual behavior or actions. The filters through which human beings assess one another are more like a series of personal prejudices, emotional and mental triggers from childhood and adolescence, and ego inflammations.

This is extremely obvious if you pay any OBJECTIVE attention to the media, and the public's reaction to individuals in the media. That is, if you're capable of objectivity. Many humans are not.

When one political commentator rants on and on, they get a bigger time slot and more fans. When another one rants on and on, they get blasted with criticism and contempt. It's extremely obvious, and yet humans will deny it with their last breath.
Which one gets the time slot and which one gets the criticism and contempt? It's got NOTHING to do with their actual behavior, or what they're saying. It has EVERYTHING to do with the very conditioned and ego based biases that human filter everything through.

Who are your favorite political commentators? What do they have in common, PHYSICALLY?
Who are the ones you can't stand? What do THEY have in common, PHYSICALLY?

What are their ages, their gender, body type, weight, race, skin color, hair color and style, and accent?

We can rationalize all day long that it's about WHAT THEY SAY... but deep down we know that wegive MUCH MORE CREDENCE to what one says than the other. We overlook their bullying and condescension toward others, but we MAGNIFY the bullying and condescension of the commentators we DON'T like.
Therefore we don't actually LISTEN TO what they're saying, whether we like them or not. We filter everything, so if we like the person we excuse and rationalize their negatives, and if we don't, we magnify their negatives. We even make things up! We even idealize and overvalue the ones we like, and devalue the ones we don't!

Since humans have such a hard time with objectivity, it is exceedingly rare for a person to actually take in real information from others. We spin EVERYTHING to make it either BETTER or WORSE than it actually is. We do this with people we know, and people we don't know. It doesn't matter. If we want to listen to others objectively, we have to learn what our own biases actually ARE, and learn the difference between bias and reality. But few humans are willing to do that, sadly.

Mental Health Providers and Caregivers, Overworked, Over Pressured, and Under Evaluated

The fields of medicine including the fields of Psychiatry and Psychology require regular practice of humility in order to remain effective. As with any human vocation, when a practitioner or worker sees themselves as a higher class of human than those he or she serves, their ability to perform their job changes. The same happens when one becomes arrogant about one's experience and knowledge, whatever one's vocation is. If one feels like they have mastered all, they no longer seek new information or fresh eyes, and no longer double-check themselves. In the fields of medicine and care giving, arrogance is a huge liability since the price is human life. To place one's self or one's colleagues categorically above clients and patients, to see them and think of them as "Them", as "Other" is not a practice of healthy boundaries. It is simply a denial that "They" and "We" are the same "kind" of human, thus giving the "care giver" permission to treat them without the respect and care that one would treat "one of his/her own kind". Unfortunately few "care givers", regardless of their degree, seem to have reached a plane of maturity that allows them to treat clients and patients as "one of US" instead of "one of THEM". As a result, the quality of health care and mental health care is at an all time low, even though the advances in treatment are incredible.



There are providers out there who do have the capacity for respect toward their clients and patients, and the contrast of quality of care between them and those who do not is quite stark. If the practitioner seems blase toward you, is not interested in doing any testing, or seems to think he or she can assess you in one quick visit, you might want to think twice about going back. Put yourself in the evaluator' shoes; if they were treating someone they RESPECTED who was having as hard of a time emotionally or mentally as you are, or as hard of a time with other people in your life as you are, what would they be asking? What would they be testing? How much information would they want from the person? If you were the evaluator, and your patient was a person you respected, what would you be asking them?

How much information do you think it would take for one total stranger to get a TRUE GRASP on another total stranger's life; their real personality, real history, real family dynamic, and real mental and emotional profile?

If you made an appointment with your doctor because you had a pain in your abdomen, would the doctor ask you a few questions and then send you home with a prescription? Or would he or she do some actual tests to find out what the pain is from? If you have pain in your abdomen and the doctor is not interested in the cause, you need to find another doctor, and quickly.

So why is the BRAIN, the most important organ in the human body, NOT being treated in the same way? The brain is an ORGAN, and is extremely complex. It's literally the organ that allows us to be IN this world, to be conscious beings that are living and functioning as human beings. WHY would a "care provider" behave as if it's the LEAST important organ? As if a couple of questions and a some pills are all you need? OR, why would a "care giver" treat a patient like there's no way to fix what's "wrong" with them anyway, like they're a "lost cause", so why try very hard? Is that how you would treat another human being who came to you for help or care? Even if you were getting paid for helping and caring for clients and patients?

Would you assume that you could assess a person by looking at them; their clothes, their hair, their shoes, their make-up and jewelry, or lack thereof? How about the sound of their voice? How about their speech pattern, or the slang they use or don't use? How about their gender or their race? Would you want someone to assess you that quickly, with so little actual information, and then proceed to TREAT you? Doubtful.

So why does the mental health (and medical health) community do this on a regular basis? Aren't they supposed to be the beacons of professionalism, science, and thoroughness?

They are supposed to be, and a few out there maintain this level of scientific and ethical standard. But you will be hard pressed to find them. What you will find today more often than not is someone who works too many hours, who is paying very high insurance premiums or working for someone who is paying very high insurance premiums, who does not utilize all the evaluation tools available or even a few of them because it's inconvenient, costly, time consuming or sometimes because they don't know how to use them. There is also more than one "school" of psychology; those who receive degrees do NOT necessarily learn them all, and in fact rarely do.There is actually a tendency for students to be taught one "school" of psychology as if it's the "right one" and that the other ones are "wrong", so they don't even consider them. Which sounds very un-academic and unscientific; that's because it IS.

There is even a "school" of medicine that teaches practitioners to treat the SYMPTOMS but NOT the CAUSE. (This way you can take medicine for what ails you forever, until it kills you. If you are cured, then you don't have to buy that medicine anymore, do you?)

A regular dose of humility and an injection of respect for clients. The cure for what ails us. 

Contempt In Families and Relationships

If your partner shows that he or she feels contempt for you, or if you feel it for them, or if you both feel it for each other, that's not normal, and it's not part of a normal and healthy relationship. There's not supposed to BE contempt in a relationship, ESPECIALLY in a so-called "romantic" relationship. Parents are NOT supposed to feel contempt for their child, that's not normal or healthy, it's an indication of mental illness. And "romantic partners" are not supposed to feel contempt for one another either. Contempt is right next to hatred. Hatred is not a normal part of any relationship, EVER. If you have contempt for another person, you either need to get help for that specifically, or you need to be far, far away from that person and NOT be in contact with them.