Equal Sexes, Equal Races?

There has long been, in certain tribal cultures, debate over whether men and women were equal with one another. The same debate has gone on for eons about whether certain races were equal to one another.

So, this is 2013, nearly 2014 A.D. and these debates still have not been resolved. In fact the more science discovers, the more it appears that trying to categorize groups of humans as inferior or superior to one another is a moot point; there are too many variations, and too many similarities, at the same time.

Aside from scientific evidence, however, there is the question of logic and common sense.

If one is actually inferior to another, then challenging this would not be met with defense, anger, or attempts at punishment or oppression.
IF a natural inferior were to challenge a natural superior, they would be met with no hostility or offense of dignity, but with a knowing nod, a calm smile, and a kind hand. Perhaps a quiet chuckle.
But defensiveness, indignity, anger, rage, annoyance, the desire to punish or to dominate,,,
it simply would not be the reaction.

When a puppy tries to dominate a grown dog, the dog just sits there, letting the puppy jump all over him body, climb his back, nip on his ears, grab his feet and pull his tail. The dog does nothing to the puppy, indeed, he barely moves. Perhaps he'll play with the puppy with a quick jab of his nose, but that's all.

Because there is no threat.

The dog knows that the puppy is inferior, and he is superior. He is there to care for the puppy, protect the puppy, and allow the puppy to learn about the world, and about the puppy's own self, testing limits, testing strength, finding out anything and everything.
That's how superiors treat inferiors, because they are not threatened, they know what the puppy is going to do or not do, because the puppy is inferior.
When the puppy becomes an adult, an equal, then there is more tension, and also more direct companionship. Because now they are equals. Now, if the dog growls or nips, the other dog may react and feel threatened, because they are equals. And when one dog leads, the other follows along, and they switch leading and following all day long. One of them may lead more, but it's not a competition or a hierarchy, it's just their individual personalities; one thinks of things to do and the other is happy to find out what! And then when the other thinks of something, the first dog is equally happy to find out what!
No silliness, no supremacy, no control, no punishment, manipulation, entitlement or pain.

Because dogs have a natural understanding of what superiority really is, and what it entails, and when it's not present. 

Self-Centered and Needy, or a Healthy Reaction?

When we're annoyed and upset that strangers, acquaintances, and not very close friends don't know "important things" about us, we may be either immature or possibly have some kind of disorder or illness (even anxiety or trauma).

But when we're annoyed and upset that those close to us don't acknowledge anything "important" about us, don't seem to know or care about what we do or say (except perhaps to criticize and gossip), and seem very indifferent and dismissive to things we've accomplished, experienced, endured, or just our knowledge base, capability, skill set and character (our real one, not the one in their imagination), we are probably reacting in a realistic way to a narcissistic dynamic.
Not being "paranoid" or "needy".

Only in dysfunctional groups does this dismissive and shunning attitude to certain individuals occur, not in healthy groups where no envy, narcissism, control fixation or ill will is present.

To gauge this in a more accurate way, to see if it's "me" or "them", one can literally observe by comparative observation how much positive attention gets paid TO WHOM, BY WHOM. One MUST include one's self in the observations, relating to all others.
What's really going on?
If one realizes that one does not support or acknowledge or respect others, then find out the underlying reason for this.
Is it just being lazy or self-centered, or is there some kind of codependency dynamic within the system, and being supportive of others actually brings consequences from someone?
Has one backed off because one's SUPPORT or contribution is also dismissed and brushed aside, as if it's unimportant or unwanted, in the same way that their accomplishments, painful experiences, or hardships are ignored?

There is always more going on in any human group, especially in unhealthy groups, than meets the eye.

Once a person has backed away from a group, any group, because they became tired of being treated like they were unwanted, incompetent, unintelligent, unstable, or untrustworthy, it may not be possible to convince them to come back. Healthy minded people can only take so much disrespect before they turn and walk away, detaching and disassociating themselves from the group. Even if the person who wants them to come back wasn't one of the "disrespecters", if the environment hasn't changed, and if no one stands up for them, or acknowledges them, the person in question will probably keep walking. And they probably should, for their own sake.

Stereotypes, Status, Hierarchy, Narcissism, and War

Controllers/Narcissists tend to feel entitled to assign "jobs", "skills" and "innate ability" to OTHER people, and they often base their assignments on specific stereotypes that they grew up with.

So, in their minds, perhaps: ... African American women make good Nannies, nursemaids, or house maids... maybe nurses ... maybe a gospel singer or choir director, maybe a cook, maybe a hairdresser (but often ONLY if she's tall enough or large enough to fit the picture, if she's small, then she's put under a different assigned assumption, maybe she could be a cashier, but certainly not any of the aforementioned things.. either way, she is assumed to live inside of the stereotype, and just wouldn't have the capability of doing anything else.)

In their minds, a Caucasian men who are built a certain way are naturally good at fixing things and building things, or are apparent 'natural heroes" who make heroic civil servants, or who are wonderful because they always help people. But they aren't really permitted to do "cerebral" things like accounting, or sensitive things like caring for very small children or infants, and they "look weird" if they have a tiny dog or love kittens, and Heaven forbid if they don't hunt or have beer and drool on themselves during football season, or if they actually LIKE and RESPECT a woman, or women in general.

In their minds, each person has an assigned stereotype LIFE and PERSONALITY according literally to the way they look.

AND, each person already has a social STATUS assigned to them, also based on the original assigned "self".

The assigned status hierarchy goes something like this:

When one person speaks, you're supposed to listen respectfully and believe them, and feel admiration for them and whatever they say. You don't argue or debate them, you just listen attentively and then perhaps say "ahh" or "ohh", or ask a question. If they make a suggestion, a statement, or give an instruction, it's taken quite seriously as if it hath cometh down from the Heavens.
Gifts and favors are showered upon this person voluntarily.

When another person speaks, you're supposed to afford them decent respect, but it doesn't have to be as much as the other person... They're not at that highest rung, but they're higher than most, so the amount of respect given to them is high but not all the way high. Whatever they say is also taken very seriously, however what they say may occasionally be double-checked with a person who is on a higher rung than they are. However there is no countering or debating permitted. This person is regarded as very intelligent and capable, and knows what he/she is doing, and is very rarely doubted or questioned, but is given lots of credit, recognition and praised. Gifts and favors are often given to this person.

When a third person speaks, everyone listens with relative respect, but does not feel consequence for questioning the person. However they don't interrupt, even after being interrupted by the person. There is hesitation in disagreeing or arguing with them, but it's not out of range to do so, however it IS forbidden to accuse them of doing something wrong, bad, or shameful, or to imply that about them. This person is given praise, credit, and recognition for being a "good person" (regardless of how they really are), and is often given small gifts and favors. This person "knows everyone" and is often invited to parties and functions.

When a fourth person speaks, everyone listens, but not in the way that one listens to one of the "important people" above. Even if the person speaking is extremely knowledgeable, even an expert in the subject, whenever they speak it's treated as a social interaction where there is no "real" information or knowledge being conveyed. The person is very rarely taken "seriously" as if they are "one of the knowledgeable" people like those above, regardless of their actual experience and knowledge. Only those who are respectful individuals will listen to them speak in a respectful manner; others simply turn everything they say and do into a social interaction.

When a fifth person speaks, people pretend to acknowledge them, but talk right over them. Even if the person had an IQ of 200,  was an expert in quantum physics, and was visited by Jesus, everyone would simply talk over them, vying for higher status. Metaphorically stepping on the person. They DO KNOW that they're doing it, because when a person from the first three examples speak, they stop talking and listen to them.

When a sixth person speaks, people don't pretend to acknowledge them, they simply treat the person with disrespect and even contempt, as if they are gracefully allowing the person to be in their company at all. Again, it doesn't matter at all about what the person's actual intelligence, experience, or abilities are. It's PURELY social primate dynamics, and based ONLY on things like appearance, size, sex, adornments, body language, vocal tone, flattery, and social GAMING skills. It has nothing to do with "merit", "intelligence", "experience", or even "Character". This sixth person could easily be the NICEST, most generous, and emotionally STRONGEST person in the room.

Finally, the seventh person... simply receives nothing but contempt. The person is either barely acknowledged that they are present, or completely ignored as if they are NOT THERE. This is one of the creepiest, most disturbing social hierarchy behavior that is seen in humans. This behavior is not done to a person because they are "psychotic" and dangerous (in fact, dangerous psychotics are often treated like one of the top three in many groups). This behavior is done because the humans in the group are lacking in manners, maturity, autonomous thinking and behavior, and literally the function in the brain know as "empathy". It rarely has anything to do with the person being shunned, but everything to do with the mental profiles of the people in the group.
Scary? It can be, yes. Safe? No. Not at all, there is a possibility that someone in the group has psychosis and the group is following along with their social signals; and that if something happens, the "seventh person" will not be protected or helped. There is also the possibility that the "seventh person" might be harmed in some way, directly or indirectly, and most likely will not be assisted by anyone. If possible, it may be good to just leave. 

Hierarchies and Statuses in humans are not real, they're made up, and they are not based on merit, experience, or capability.

If they were, we wouldn't have WAR.
We would not have gangs or organized crime.
We wouldn't have local corruption or bias in schools, government and business.
We'd have a great deal more PROGRESS in all areas of life, including science, the economy, education, mental health, PEACE, and healthcare.

In Response To That Thing You Wrote That Made Me Mad:

Ad Hominem .

Hate Her For Being Pretty?

Hating it when someone does something that displays skill, talent, or knowledge can be seen in several personality disorders, and also in anxiety disorders and codependency.

When a person does something that displays skill/talent/knowledge, it triggers memories, past and recent, that revolve around receiving attention, credit, and acceptance.

So for example if a child was often ignored and neglected while others praised her older or younger sister for being a wonderful dancer, the child may easily associate abandonment with seeing a person dance well, and may instantly worry that others will compare her to this dancer and see her as less worthy, or betray her.

A child may get compared to other children frequently either by adults, peers, or both, and become conditioned to believe that the only way to get positive attention or recognition is to out-perform others, and so when someone else displays ability or is physically attractive, they are seen as an immediate threat: if they get the positive attention and credit, there won't be any left for the child.

These specific types of association can expand into any type of situation where another person might get attention, credit, praise, or recognition for something they do, or for their appearance, or for their possessions. It's a form of envy, but it's not simply "evil", it's based in past trauma and is more fear-based than just plain greed.

Children often bring these types of associations into adulthood, and may develop serious anxiety issues around the performances and appearances of others, or it can turn into internalized resentment, hatefulness, and narcissism.

Jeff Brown: Ascending With Both Feet On The Ground

Nailed it. Humans aren't a bunch of different species, there's only one, unless Sasquatch is alive, and even then we'd have a common ancestor. Trying to separate "males" from "females" and dishonoring the other sex is just a childish conditioning that happens to work really well because it plays on a child's feelings of shame, ego, and belonging, and also happens to allow certain control freaks to stay in control. Duh. Divide Us We Fall... how is that not obvious to people? Quit trying to make men into one thing and women into another, it's boring and tedious, and it's from Hollywood and control freak Royalty who made people believe that dominating and destroying others was "honorable", and that being a martyr was a "virtue". How about let's grow the heck up.

"The armored man is afraid of his heart, he is afraid of the empowered feminine, he is afraid of surrendering his egoic shield to something deeper, truer, more heartfelt. What he doesn’t realize is that we are inextricably linked, so linked that when he denigrates the feminine, he imprisons and denigrates his own consciousness. There can be no victories at the expense of the Divine Mother. None at all. It is time for a new paradigm, one that honors the wisdom of the feminine, one that soulebrates her courageous willingness to remain receptive, relational, and compassionate in the heart of this still mad world. Armored men- bow before her. Sing her praises, dance in her wisdom and her love. She is the path home."

~Jeff Brown

They Are Weak, I Am Strong

Judging others as emotionally and mentally "weak" is a sign of  narcissism, and usually correlates with judging one's self to be very stable, grounded, responsible, and logical, and therefore in no need of self-examination. Unfortunately, these individuals are often the ones most in need of self-review because they are actually hiding from their own past and their own emotions.
Healing is quite possible, but only for those who are willing. They also need to be careful to discern who is actually capable of counseling them. People who suffer from narcissism issues may choose those who exacerbate their symptoms instead of helping them, because they tend to trust and admire only those who they identify as naturally superior, which can mean absolutely anything. They might get lucky and find  someone with humility and real wisdom, but they might also follow someone who aspires only to money and reputation, with no real wisdom at all, just because the person makes them feel good, or looks like their image of a wise person.

Pretend And Narcissism

If as a child you used to set up stuffed animals, action figures, and dolls as your companions at a party, or as the audience for your show, or as any other stand-in for human feedback, you've experienced both sides of a Narcissism dynamic as both the Target and the Narcissist.
There is no circular, neutral, reality-based feedback or connection dynamic between a Narcissist and a Target.

So if the child who's having a party with action figures or stuffed animals as attendees is getting about the same amount of genuine connection as he or she would if they were alive, but Narcissists. The child has to pretend and imagine that they're happy to be there in the child's company, that they're enjoying themselves, that they're talking with the child and one another (about topics other than gossip, other than shooting ridicule or criticism), that they're actually listening to one another politely, and responding to one another genuinely and with good cheer.
It's not real; since there is no real connection, the child's imagination takes over and fills in the blanks. Because of the child's vivid imagination, the wonderful imaginary traits of each doll seems real, and the child can grow to love them. But the child doesn't realize that the personalities are from his or her own mind. Targets receive little or no genuine connection, and the human imagination fills in the blanks in order to make the situation more pleasant and less painful.
We NEED connection as human animals, so when we don't actually get it, we tend to create it where it doesn't really exist, or embellish and add rosewater to weak or unhealthy connections.

With the child in the position of Narcissist, this is how he or she sees others; as dolls that one projects one's own imagination onto. The way the doll looks to the child is the imagined personality they're going to be assigned. Dolls that the child likes get treated well, dolls that the child doesn't like get punished. The reasons that the child likes a certain doll are made-up, based on the child's imagination, and the reasons that the child "punishes" certain dolls are also made-up, again, based in the child's imagination. The child in the Narcissist position feels completely entitled to dictate and orchestrate literally everything that the dolls do or say, and of course, because they're dolls, they're not "real", like the child is. There is no reason for the child to listen to their points of view, to care about their needs, their feelings, their plans, aspirations, or anything else. Their sole purpose is to be whatever the child wants them to be, and do whatever the child wants them to do. Nothing else. They don't have the "right" to do anything else, or anything on their own; they're DOLLS.
The only other "real" person that would exist would be if Mom or Dad walk into the room, because they're "authority" figures, bigger than the child, and have more power.
The day that the child notices that one of them treats the other as a "lesser being" is the day the child (in the Narcissist position) will lose respect for the bullied parent, and try to emulate the bully. So then only the bully parent is "real" and the other becomes a doll.

Finding Your Diamond Self

Finding Your Diamond Self: Confident and Empowered!

http://lovein90days.com/finding-your-diamond-self-confident-empowered/

Hipster Sexism; Just As Asinine As All The Other Kinds Of Bigotry

While actually sexist, of course, hipster sexism is different from what Quart defines as "Classic Sexism." A hipster sexist calls you a bitch and tells you to shut up but in a funny way, while a classic sexist tells you your rape was God's will without a hint of irony. Both are douchebags, but the hipster sexist is a douchebag in enlightened clothing...

 http://bitchmagazine.org/post/hipster-sexism-is-sexist-feminist-magazine-irony-culture-racism-sexism

Cynthia Chase On Healing From The Inside Out

The depth of pain felt by those dis-empowered is extraordinary.  Sometimes people say, “It’s only emotional pain, not physical.”  No scars or black and blue marks are left, but the psychological wounding is profound.  Just because the effects are not physically evident doesn’t mean that it hurts any less.  The hidden twistings and turnings that make up an emotionally abusive relationship can be hard to describe.  The Police won’t arrest the abuser since their ways are hidden behind closed doors and sometimes even the victim doesn’t understand what is happening....    

Recovery From Narcissism Traits

A lot of people with other illnesses also have Narcissism traits that go along with their underlying issues. Including but not limited to PTSD. These traits and behaviors may serve the purpose of "protecting" the person's very fragile self from the harsh outside world. However when the person is in a safe place and is seeking recovery, the Narcissism traits can keep coming back when they're triggered for any reason, for "good" reasons or for "bad" reasons, and can delay and inhibit recovery a great deal.
It would be very helpful for a person to find a grounded and objective therapist and/or healer to help them along in their recovery. Really, it's a lot to ask from friends, partners, and family to be one's main support in recovery; they are personally connected, and will suffer from the bouts of Narcissistic reactions and behaviors. It's important to have support, and someone to act as a neutral feedback mirror/sounding board outside of one's personal circle (whether one has Narc. traits or not).

Entitlement To Authority

Those with Narcissism traits will inflict their own "rules of conduct" onto others, but will accuse those others of being controlling and rigid for even referring to "rules of conduct", or human social interaction.
Another projection that's related to Narcissistic Injury.

N:
"I'm allowed and entitled to behave rudely according to my moods,  emotions, and whims. I'm entitled to dictate what you can talk about. I'm entitled to treat others disrespectfully, and in a condescending and demeaning way....
"But YOU are NOT permitted to do any of these things, especially to ME. You are also not permitted to stand up to me about the way I treat you or others, because I am entitled to behave in any way that I please. You are challenging my authority, privilege and control over you when you stand up to the way I treat you and speak to you.
"Everything I do and say has a "reason" behind it that is 'innocent', valid, and irrefutable, but everything you do and say must be passed through MY approval, and if I'm not comfortable with it, I will feel entitled to shut you down.
"I am entitled to act and speak of my own volition with no self-checking or feedback from anyone all of the time; you are not, you must be approved of by me, as well as others."

Narcissists feel like they are in the "grown up", "elder", "authority" and "expert" group, and that they get to dictate who is NOT. And, whoever they decide is NOT gets dictated to, judged, punished, and expected to serve and submit to their "authority".

He Doesn't Like Me, But He Won't Let Go

If a person doesn't really like you, doesn't like what you're interested in, counters you when you talk, demeans or dismisses what you say, doesn't want to do things that you want to do, or talk about the things you want to talk about, and isn't motivated to make the effort to spend positive time with you, why would they want you in their life?
Because they can't let go of someone they feel connected to, and they don't care about how the negativity in the relationship affects you.
If they did care, there would be a whole lot of solution seeking, compromise, and genuine communication going on.
They don't want to let go, they don't want to lose the connection, whether they "like" the person or not, but they are not interested in making any effort to maintain or improve the relationship. If they're "content", that's all that matters, there is no worry or care about how the other person feels; the other person is always just "wrong" if they want or need something to change.

This dynamic is very similar to the child (or adult) who adopts a pet, for companionship, for cuddling, for the positive things pets bring, but tries to get out of the daily effort it takes to care for the pet because it's a "pain". They won't give the pet away, but they treat the pet like it's a "burden" that "demands" too much. What they don't seem to understand is that everyone does not share their annoyance with the care of pets; for those who truly care about their pets, caring for them is a joy, and improves their life, it doesn't take away from it.

Pets should not be kept by those who think of them as burdens, as a "pain in the butt", and neither should humans.

More Male Narcissists?

There are more male adult Narcissists than female in modern society for SOCIAL reasons, not simply because of biology.
If the reason was biological, then the social dynamics and belief systems would be a lot more similar from region to region, group to group, and family to family, in much more specific ways. Needing oxygen, needing water, needing food, and needing shelter and warmth are universal. Social beliefs and sex "roles" are not, because they're not biological; we make them up. And then we use biology as a way to rationalize (attach reasons to) our made-up stories.

For example, being protective of the dignity of a woman seems to be swept aside in sexist cultures, but protecting the dignity of a man is considered a "virtue".
The reputation of a man regarding business, ability, achievement and skill is held up by others as "important", but is often diminished and simply ignored when the person is a woman.
It's just conditioning; it's not about reality; it's how we're taught to think from one generation to the next, and from the influence of one culture or another, or from "offshoots" and subgroups of cultures.

Superstition and made-up stories also play a very large role in sexism and gender issues.

It doesn't make logical sense at all, and indeed the imbalance creates serious dysfunction in the culture, which directly affects the children and throws a large wrench in the forward progress of quality of life for all citizens.

It is absolutely more acceptable in most human groups, but not ALL, for people to treat a woman or girl dismissively, disrespectfully, than a man or boy. It is more acceptable in most human groups to micro-judge and "assess" girls and women for everything, from the way they look, to the way they dress, to the way they talk, what they do for a living, what they're interested in, and what they talk ABOUT, than to micro-judge and assess men and boys.
It is more acceptable in most human groups for people to feel entitled to dictate and tut-tut what a girl or woman "should" or "should not be" doing, in pretty much any area of life, from clothing to daily chores, to hobbies, skills, career, and life in general, and even what they're talking about, than to dictate such wheedling, control-freak details to boys and men.

It is more acceptable in most human groups for people to behave  immaturely and childishly toward women than toward men, and women are expected to just "take it" and "deal with it", or they are chastised (the way children chastise one another) for being "too sensitive". Men, on the other hand, (in general), are actually more protected by those same people from insult, humiliation, disrespect, betrayal, and rebellion.

So it's actually women who are LESS protected and helped in most societies, and men who are MORE protected and helped. Not the other way around. It may SEEM like it's the other way around, but when we actually look at real statistics and listen to real facts and real experiences, it's quite evident what the reality of the situation is.

(The fact that so many people will have an emotionally defensive reaction toward the previous paragraph DEMONSTRATES that we keep it "close to our chest" and take it personally, which means we are NOT objective and factual about the subject. We're covering something up.)

Boys witness this large disparity as they grow up, and are of course affected by it. To be a member of the group who does NOT get wheedled, micro-judged and micro-managed by others can feel like one's own group does not DESERVE this micro-management and demeaning treatment because they're so much greater and better, but that the other group DOES, because they're so much lesser and worse.

To exacerbate this further, boys are usually directly taught that they are entitled to be the "boss" and the "leader" over any females whom they're connected to in any way, and that the REASON for this is because men are superior in many ways to women, physically and mentally. These "reasons" are implied to be biological "truths", and are not to be questioned or challenged...

When adults teach children that their group is superior to another group, and then give them "reasons", it's not hard to understand why the children would believe it, and internalize it, make it a part of their identity.

The group that is being conditioned to be the "inferior" group is being taught also to believe that this is all true, even while they're being taught at the same time that it doesn't EXIST, that it's "ALL IN THEIR HEADS".

In racist cultures and groups ,the exact same method is used to condition one group to believe in their own "natural superiority", and to condition the other group to accept being the "inferior" group, thereby mentally conditioning one group to feel entitled to lord over the other, and conditioning the other group to allow it and go along with it.

Both groups, whether it's the two sexes that are being conditioned or two races, will be given "reasons" to explain the imbalance, and most humans will actually just buy into it, because they were raised inside of the fictional zeitgeist.

Amazingly, human groups that have been oppressed by other groups will STILL produce individuals who seek to be included in a "supreme" group. These individuals apparently learned nothing from being on the RECEIVING end of oppression, and now seek to be recognized as a member of a "superior" group, so now THEY can be one of the people who boss other people around.
~
(Imbalance, when not corrected, causes a domino effect, a "ripple effect", and even collapse. Basic physics. If one's goal is REALLY to keep a cart upright, (cart representing human life; society, family, relationship, community, education, government, business, science, "progress"), moving, and functioning properly, then one must make sure to keep the wheels in balance with one another, so they hold up the rest of the cart and roll properly. If one of the wheels is larger, then there is more weight on the smaller wheel because the weight shifts to the lower side of the load, and the whole cart is off balance, ready to topple. The large wheel is carrying LESS weight, not MORE weight, so one can see why a person would want to BE the "larger wheel" instead of the smaller wheel if those are the only two choices; you get to carry LESS real weight, but be more visible, and you appear to be the stronger wheel to those who don't understand basic physics.) The cart topples toward the side of the smaller wheel, or the smaller wheel breaks under the load. and everyone blames the smaller wheel for being "too weak", when what was really happening was that the bigger wheel was throwing off the center of gravity in the cart load, shifting more weight to the smaller wheel. A balanced cart that would get its load safely and efficiently from point A to point B would have the same sized wheels on each side, and both would be carrying the weight equally, in a cooperative fashion. That doesn't mean that the "small wheel" needs to be replaced with a "big wheel" so now there's two "big wheels"... it means, metaphorically, that we as human beings need to quit BEING "small wheels" and "big wheels" that compete for false credit, and who try to shift weight and blame on one another.

Denial and Letting Go

"Denial" is not just pretending something didn't happen, but also the refusal to let it go.
We can be "in denial" about ourselves AND about things that happened to other people, and things about other people.

When we're in denial, we are trying to throw something away, bury it, so we don't have to actually DEAL with it. That means we didn't do anything with it, and we're not letting it go, we're holding on to it.

For example a person may be in denial about their own alcohol use; they are avoiding the subject altogether, even with themselves. They're allowing their brain to pretend it's a "non-issue", because if they acknowledge it, then they'll have to LOOK at it, and feel the emotions that they've been avoiding, and then probably have to make bigger life changes. They would have to deal with why they're using alcohol in the first place, which is probably what they're really avoiding.
If it's because they don't know how to deal with a painful relationship, then acknowledging the alcohol use would mean they would have to also acknowledge that they're in a painful relationship, and therefore might need to either end the relationship, or work on themselves and come to grips with the fact that their partner is not the sole "problem". In order to "let it go", they would first need to admit that it exists.

A person can also be in denial about bad things that happened to other people, or good things about other people. Ironically, people who are in denial are usually the ones lecturing others to "Let It Go!" What they're really saying is "I can't handle it, I don't want to deal with it, cover it over with sand, blot it out so I don't have to look at it." Being in denial about something that happened to someone else means WE are the ones who aren't "letting it go", not the person who's talking about it and trying to deal with it.

When we refuse to acknowledge and let go of something that happened to someone in our circle, we are helping to delay their recovery, and thwart their resolution.
It's like hiding a piece of rotten food that they're trying to find and throw away. THEY want to find it and get rid of it, but we're hiding it, pretending it doesn't exist. In the meantime because we refuse to acknowledge it and bring it out into the light of day, it's growing more and more rotten, fermenting, stinking up the whole house. We keep denying it, and the other person keeps bringing it up, trying to find the source of the smell.

What do we do then? We BLAME the person for it! We continue our denial by refusing to acknowledge that we are the ones who refuse to let it go, who refuse to bring it into the light. We conveniently "FORGET" how the fruit went rotten in the first place, and that WE were the ones who hid it.
And then we still refuse to admit that we're holding onto it, and keep blaming the person who's trying to find it and deal with it, so the stench gets worse and worse until the person finally just gives up and LEAVES. Then we say something like "They just didn't want to deal with their own problems... that's why they left, they're so self-centered."

The human capacity for denial can be truly astounding.

We can also be in denial about the good qualities, skills, talents, and accomplishments of both ourselves and others.
Why would we do this? Simply because they don't fit in with the story we've created for ourselves to live in.

If Sarah has written her story so that Jeff is the best mechanic in town, then John can't be. and definitely not Susan. In Sarah's story, only men can be mechanics, not women, because that would mess up the other story lines. Like how the reason Sarah can't fix her own car is because she's a woman. If SUSAN can do it, then that storyline would have to be rewritten, and it can't be, because Sarah has it tied in with the rest of her story. Like why she needs Jeff, why Jeff is an important person, and why she went to college to be a teacher. (She doesn't like kids, she wanted to teach because she wrote in her story that women are naturally good teachers, and that if you're a teacher then that makes you a good person, and also that women "have to" do certain kinds of jobs because they "CAN'T" do the other kinds of jobs that men do.)
That's Sarah's STORY, not reality, and she does not want to have to rewrite any of it, because that would mess up the whole fantasy.

When others around Sarah write similar stories to hers (because they grew up inside of other people's similar stories), they compare them and confirm with each other that they're "true" and "correct". So when something or someone comes along that CONTRADICTS how they've written their stories, they try to delete the information, shut it down, bury it, or reject the PERSON. Because it's much easier, THEY believe, to deny information that doesn't jive with their story, than to deal with it in a mature way, and risk having their stories exposed.

To put it simply, anything that doesn't match the story is thrown out. Deleted. Yes, our brains DO "write" our reality, and constantly edit it. Our brains do it continuously, whether we believe it or not. When we blink, for instance, our brains fill in the blank spot from when our eyes were closed, and we think we didn't miss anything. When we hear something we don't think is true, we usually forget it immediately, even if it WAS true. If we didn't fool ourselves into believing that we're actually safe on this planet that whips around the sun (a giant fireball) in the middle of space, with debris whizzing toward us constantly, we would probably never leave the house, or not have enough confidence to build a house in the first place.

So when we don't want a certain person to be GOOD at something, or get CREDIT or RECOGNITION for something, or be knowledgeable about, skilled at, or experienced in something, it's because it would mess up OUR OWN fictional story line about OURSELVES.

It's the same reason we deny bad things that happened to them, or when we deny things about ourselves. If we acknowledged them, brought them into the light, and let them go, we would be giving up "control" over our own fictional story lines about ourselves, and that is terrifying to some people. Without their fictional story line, they fear they'll be accountable, held responsible, have to do more work, or might not keep getting the respect and credit they're used to getting. So they will do pretty much anything, mental somersaults, in order to keep their story line going, and not let anything "mess it up", like actual reality.

So the next time we catch ourselves telling someone "why don't you just let it go?!" we may want to remember the rotten fruit we've hidden under our bed or in our closet. When we tell someone else to "let it go", we're really telling them to stop bringing it up so we don't have to deal with it ourselves, and admit that it's true. WE are the ones who "won't let it go", because we don't want to admit that we're holding it and hiding it in the first place.

Narcissists And Children

An adult with Narcissism who has direct access to a child can wreak havoc on the child's self-esteem, on confidence in her or his own abilities, and on the child's belief in his or her own ability to LEARN and achieve.
An adult with Narcissism who has direct access to a child can wreak havoc on a child's belief that he or she is a good person, and on the feeling that he or she belongs, or deserves to be a member of the group at all, either the small groups the child is a part of (including family), or larger groups, such as sports, dance, or music lesson groups, classes or school in general, the community in general, the child's/ family church, synagogue or other religious gathering group, or the larger human family group.
Narcissistic adults tend to treat children like objects that are there to be judged, as open targets for criticism, as burdens on their lifestyle and resources, as unpaid servants, and as objects to use for their own agendas.

The level of psychosis an individual Narcissist is afflicted with is what dictates the level of abuse or neglect they inflict on children. Some Narcissists are abusive "only" verbally and emotionally, while those with more severe psychosis may wantonly sabotage, gaslight, terrorize, slander, or physically abuse a child. 

Narcissists are not always who we think they are, and they are quite often who we think they are NOT. 
Honest observation of others and ourselves, and open communication are the required tools to discern Narcissists from non-Narcissists. It's very difficult because most humans in modern culture are conditioned during childhood to turn a blind eye to it, and to buy into the glossy, or "responsible", or good-person facade that Narcissists tend to use as an image.

Threat Of Ejection and Rejection As A Control Weapon

A favorite weapon of Narcissistic controllers is implying that a target is not contributing enough, and therefore they don't "deserve" to be safe in a home, be included or welcome in their family, or be accepted in a friendship circle.
~
This is a control tool. It's not how healthy families function, and it's definitely not "love".
~
"Punishing" others with the threat of being ejected from SHELTER, ACCEPTANCE, or SAFETY is a serious and flagrant power issue, and can cause huge upheaval and trauma for a target.
~
This is a common practice seen in parents, other "caregivers" (including foster parents), employers, and also platonic "friends" who suffer from Narcissism.
~
The Narcissist uses this weapon with ZERO remorse, and ZERO care about where the person would go, if they have another place to stay, or if they have any resources or support.
~
A Non-Narcissist who needs to change a living situation because of genuine issues, like they need other to contribute more rent, or work more hours, or do more of something in order to sustain the situation, would NOT use threats like that, OR EVER cut straight to actually "ejecting" a person with no remorse, or giving them time to prepare.
Even if a person within the household, family, friendship circle or workplace was behaving in dysfunctional, gluttonous, or abusive ways, unless their behavior was a serious threat, they would be spoken to about it long before there was any reference to "kicking them out", rejecting them, or firing them.
~
Ejection and rejection are LAST RESORTS in healthy human groups, relationships, and situations; they are not "go-to" tools that one pulls out of the arsenal every time one feels overwhelmed, rejected, unappreciated, lonely, upset, or angry.
~
Those with N.P.D. will actually reject and shun a person just because their "plans changed", mood swings and bad feelings don't even have to enter the picture. They might blame the person who's being rejected FOR the rejection, and it might even LOOK like a mood swing to lend credibility, but that's just to divert blame and accountability off of themselves.

Narcissists Get BORED

And yes, they DO blow people off when they get bored, no matter what the actual situation or relationship is.

If you're talking about something that's upsetting you for "too long", and they're hungry, the N's stomach is going to "win"; it won't even occur to them to ask you if you want to eat with them.

They want to get AWAY from you, because they're BORED with you and your "problems", or just bored because they aren't doing something THEY want to do.

It doesn't matter if you're upset about breaking a nail, or upset about the death of your parent. When they're bored, they're GONE, doing something else.

Call it A.D.D. if you want, they probably will... (You can tell it's NOT "A.D.D." when they talk at length about themselves, without any trouble staying on topic, and without seeming to have anything pressing to do.)

When they get bored visiting their child, partner, or other relative or close friend in the hospital, they're outta there.
When they get bored in an important ceremony or tradition, they're out the door.

When they get bored while doing their agreed upon job, paid or unpaid, they don't "keep at it" anyway, they "ditch" it.
When they get bored watching their children's school play, they'll either start talking to someone about something irrelevant to the play, get on their cell phone, or "duck out for a minute"...
If they find their children's soccer games boring, they might not even show up at all.

When they get "bored" with being in a relationship with one person, they FIND SOMEONE ELSE. When they get bored with the new person, they either try to go back to the old one, or they again find someone else.

To a Narcissist, "Boredom" equals "Time to blow off whatever I was doing, EVEN IF it will hurt someone, even if I'm leaving someone in a lurch, even if I'm getting paid, even if it will destroy my marriage, even if it will cause my children pain or trauma, even if I'm under contract, even if I am being relied upon by someone who is in serious need of support or care."

To be sure, if YOU get bored doing something that THEY want you to do, even if it's watching a documentary of "Historic Football Passes", or five sitcoms in a row, or listening to them for an hour straight talk about their golf club or knitting circle (that you of course don't belong to because you weren't invited), or about their past operations, illnesses, injuries, or accomplishments, they will EXPECT YOU to be FASCINATED, or to stay with them, keep doing whatever it is, or listening to them no matter WHAT ELSE you need to do.

It's just another one of those "The world revolves around ME, but definitely NOT YOU" behaviors that Narcissists live their life doing.

Remember that a lot of humans only see, basically, in two dimensions; things, people, and even concepts and ideas look more like cardboard cut-outs to them.
Things, people, and ideas don't appear to have MORE to them than what they see at first glance. 
That isn't to say that they literally see things as line drawings, or as "flat objects" floating in space, it's referring to a lack of ability to understand that there is much more to anyone and anything than one can see.

So when they see a person, whatever their EYES see is all they think is there, just like a cardboard cut-out. Their brains do not wonder ABOUT the person, what more there is to the person, because they don't think there IS any more to the person. They believe they know all about the person from what their eyes see, and also from what they themselves FEEL when they see the person. That's all there is, there just ain't no more.

They will do a similar thing when assessing a person's facial expressions, body language, and speech sounds. They believe they are correct about whatever they think the person is expressing, regardless if it's even CLOSE. It doesn't occur to them that they might be misinterpreting the person's expression, or reading it completely WRONG.
If they see or hear something the person does or says that they want to read as "ignorant", "stupid", "mean", or "crazy", they'll just assume they're RIGHT.
And if see or hear another person's social signals as "contemplative", "authoritative", "intelligent", or "in control", they'll just assume they're right about THAT, too.

Basically they just go by their presumptions about "who" and "what" a person is, and then they interpret everything the person does and says through that.

If someone tells them something about the person, they tend to just BELIEVE IT, for the same reasons. No wondering, no doubting, just immediate belief. No filtering anything through "values", "morals", or "ETHICS", no paying attention to their own biases or reviewing their own beliefs. No paying attention to their emotional reactions, or double-checking their motives.

No wondering "Is that even true?"
or "Why does this person seem to want me to LOSE RESPECT FOR this other person?"
or "Am I participating in hatefulness or gossip? Is this right?"
or "Why do I think I know ALL ABOUT another person without actually spending a LOT of time WITH that person?"
or "Am I reading this correctly?"
or "Did I interpret that right?"
or "Do I really know enough information to make a judgment?"

It doesn't seem to register that they would be very upset if people thought about them in such superficial, diminishing, demeaning, judgmental, presumptuous ways.

Nope, none of that. Just going along with whatever, just believing their own cloudy vision, their own assumptions, their own reactive emotions, their own envy, resentfulness, and also their own desires.
There just ain't no more, it's just not there.
~
So when a very large, "tough looking" man with dark skin turns out to NOT be a sports freak, but works for a Florist making bouquets and loves Chopin, and has three cats (instead of what, pit bulls, perhaps) they don't like it. Because they already thought they "knew" all about him, and now his reality is clashing with theirs. So they don't make friends with him, and they doubt his sincerity. They don't give him credit or respect for the things he does, they don't help his reputation, but they do tend to HINDER his reputation and make little sarcastic implications about him.

They don't like HIM because THEY were WRONG.

PLUS, they're envious of him, because he does not live within the same parameters that THEY live in. He's a "free agent" who doesn't seem to care about what other people "expect", and he doesn't seem to care what they think of him.
(And they also know that those qualities are attractive to those of the opposite sex that favor independent thinking and creativity over codependent conformity, so they're jealous, too.)

Maybe one or two of them will start cruel rumors about him in order to make themselves feel "good"... and make sure OTHER PEOPLE DON'T LIKE HIM. Not because he's a bad person, but because they don't want others to know that he's a good person.
~
When a very small, light-skinned, light haired woman turns out NOT to be a fragile waif who's most arduous task is sweeping a floor, or to be a submissive cheerleader who's greatest joy is baking cookies for "her MEN" to enjoy during their sports events (during which she reads all by herself, not minding at all that she's been excluded from her own husband's social life),
but she ACTUALLY fixes cars, runs earth-moving equipment, and works on airplanes and flies them, they FREAK OUT.
Some will find her "extra attractive", and will act like NO OTHER FEMALE HUMAN has EVER done any of those things... she's the ONLY ONE, EVER... OR, they'll do the same as with the large dark-skinned man, they will reject HER as a person, because she didn't fit into THEIR imaginary expectations of her.

Either way, she's a FREAK OF NATURE, as far as their concerned, either to be captured and owned, or to be suspicious of and despised.

In both cases, the large dark-skinned man, and the small, light-skinned and haired woman, the surprised reactions of other people were based SOLELY on the fact that they DID NOT THINK BEYOND the two-dimensional, cardboard-cutouts they had in their heads of them. They did not WAIT TO FIND OUT about either of them, they just ASSUMED that they knew all about them based on nothing more than their appearances.

No matter HOW MANY TIMES "Don't judge a book by its cover" is repeated, humans who only see in two dimensions and believe whatever they see and hear WILL NOT learn what it means. They can't, it's just not there. (That's why they fall prey to advertising and buy so easily and completely into politics and television shows. )
~

It might be hard to fathom, but this two-dimensional thinking is NOT limited to only the diagnosed "mentally ill", or those who have apparent "lower IQs". There are two-dimensional thinkers in every walk of life, and in very high positions of authority, and who have Ivy League degrees.
~
They don't see a sculpture and see the inspiration of the artist, or what the work is attempting to convey. It may not occur to them about the effort and skill the artist put into the work, or why they would even DO it. They just see it as "pretty, ugly, or boring", they only relate to it with "I like it" or "I don't like it", and maybe something about whether the sculptor was a man or a woman, or what ancestry they were. (That matters to them in a big way, usually; if the artist was a man, and they're male-biased, then the work is "genius"; if it was a woman, then that same work is "silly" or "not really that good", or "not as good as so-and-so's".
They'll think the same way regarding any bias they have, if they're female-biased, then it would be the opposite, and if they're ancestry biased, then it's a Great Work Of Art if the sculptor was the "correct" ancestry; if not, the same work will be criticized.)
~

Even harder to fathom, perhaps; a person can be a "brilliant" artist, musician, songwriter, scientist, doctor, healer, psychiatrist, inventor, veterinarian, healthcare worker, teacher, lawyer, coach/instructor, 'leader' in government/ social issues/ religion or spirituality, and yet be a "two dimensional thinker".

Having awareness of the bigger picture, or even the fact that there IS a bigger picture, or that there is MORE to the picture, is apparently NOT a requirement to achieve 'success' in this human realm, even if it SEEMS to be a requirement for one's specific occupation.

Two-dimensional thinkers don't know and don't care that there's more than they can see, or that they might not be seeing what's really there, or that they're interpreting someone or something incorrectly.