Political Correctness Sucks BECAUSE...

Political Correctness Sucks BECAUSE...

Because most people can't handle it.
Most people don't get it, they don't even know what it is, or why it got started in the first place.

And when I say "most people", I MEAN "most people", not just certain people.

It didn't start to become a weapon to use AGAINST people

It wasn't intended to become a shield for anyone with deviant or ridiculously immoral, abusive, or psychotic behavior.

It sure as shoe polish wasn't started as a POLITICAL TACTIC.

But since MOST PEOPLE have such a hard time NOT twisting everything to use for their own personal agenda, NOW "political correctness" has become ALL OF THE ABOVE.

Now, if John Johnson over there stands up for himself against an obviously, blatantly racist hiring practice in the public services where he lives, someone is going to accuse him of trying to be "Politically Correct", as if he's doing something whiny and underhanded.

It's TRULY INCREDIBLE how Control Freaks seem to completely lack LOGIC or SENSE.

Discrimination against a person means:
"WE DON'T LIKE YOU BECAUSE OF YOUR BODY OR YOUR BACKGROUND, AND WE ARE GOING TO MAKE IT VERY DIFFICULT OR IMPOSSIBLE FOR YOU TO GET HIRED HERE, GET EDUCATED HERE, GET PROMOTED HERE, OR SIMPLY FEEL NORMAL HUMAN ACCEPTANCE LIKE WE GIVE EACH OTHER EVERY DAY."

Uhhh, standing up against THAT ridiculous clap trap that belongs locked behind the gates of a third grade playground would be called "A NORMAL RESPONSE", not "extreme leftist politics".

(Are you shitting me?)

Or wait a minute, I'm wrong? Well GOOD! Then when I become Mayor, you'll have no problem when I create a hostile environment for anyone who's not MY SEX, MY ANCESTRY (guess what, I'm Mohawk, Scottish, and Irish, so hope you're one of them...) and goes to MY CHURCH. Not just my religion, but my actual CHURCH.

People who are too tall, sorry, nope, your head might hit the door frame and you might get a concussion, and THEN where would we be? You're probably going to SUE! FORGET IT! I'm not taking the chance, that' would be STUPID!

If I don't feel completely and totally COMFORTABLE WITH YOU on a PERSONAL LEVEL, then YOU ARE NOT GOING TO WORK IN MY TOWN, and I'm just gonna tell you to QUIT WHINING every time you bring ANYTHING UP that you don't like. So you might as well move before the harassment starts.

Y'all are right, screw being fair and non-discriminatory! 
It's a heck of a lot more fun to just try to get more power for ME and my buds! And screw everyone else! 

MY EYES HAVE BEEN OPENED! 

Why Does It Bother You If You're Not A Bigot?

It's only bigots who hate it when people bring up prejudices like sexism and racism; I don't abuse animals, so it doesn't "get on my nerves" when people post about animal cruelty. It gets on my nerves when the Humane Society runs those very, very long commercials in the middle of the show I'm watching, but that's because they are trying to manipulate me into watching their very long commercial by running it in the middle of the show. It's not the CONTENT that bothers me, it's the fact that if I want to watch the show, I'm forced to deal with the long commercial.
When another human being brings up bigotry, and ESPECIALLY when they're talking about something that happened to them personally, what the hell reason would I have for trying to "shut them down", or argue with them? There's only one reason why I'd argue with a person who was upset about getting treated unfairly or with obvious bigotry, and that would be... that I feel defensive. Because I see myself in what they're upset about. I want it to be perfectly okay to treat a man like he's stupid just because he's a man, or a white person like they're arrogant just because they're white, or be dismissive toward Native Americans when they talk about what's happened to them. Maybe it makes me feel powerful, and like I fit in with everyone else who's habitually bigoted. Maybe I like it when I can get a laugh by making fun of women, or women who look a certain way, so I don't want it to change, so I want the upset person to shut up about it, even if they're one of my "friends" or family members.
I don't want it to change because I think it serves ME, I don't give a crap about how it affects anyone else, they're not as real as I am anyway. Right? Right. It's just the way things are... lol.

"What's she writing about now? Something else that I feel defensive about?!? How dare she post stuff that I don't like! Who does she think she is, a real person like me???! I shouldn't have to read things that make me uncomfortable!!!" lmbo.

Good Leadership

Being an arrogant leader is easy. Being a genuine leader is hard.
The first lives inside of ego, and the second inside humility.
The first always believes he or she is correct, righteous, and stronger than all others, simply blaming others for discomfort, for anything that doesn't "line up" correctly, or when there are complaints.
The second is aware that all humans are filled with flaws including themselves, and that he or she does not have all the answers, is not always the best or the brightest in the room, and has not always judged others or the situation correctly.
While the first rarely if ever feels compelled to self-reflect, make adjustments, seek counsel, or re-visit his or her judgments about others, the second knows that there is always reason to self-reflect and do all of these other things.
The first will find that it makes life easier to follow along with hierarchy and the egos of others. The second will find that his/ her humility, truth seeking, and solution seeking will challenge and insult the hierarchy and inflated egos of those around her/him.
Maintaining a sense of self-confidence is easy with arrogance as a companion. Maintaining it with humility as a companion is not so simple.
Being an arrogant leader is easy for the leader, but he or she does little good for those following. Being a good leader is hard, and takes a long time to learn, some say a lifetime.

Form Of Projection: Elaborate Denial Of Another's Trauma or Tragedy

"Projection" comes in different forms, and is done for different reasons by those with p.d.'s or mental illness.
It's most often, however, done in order to cast negativity onto another person in order to cast it off of one's self. Albeit in the realm of fantasy, still, it often works to quite an extent.

One such form of projection that is not spoken of very often is when an N. sufferer will talk about something terrible that happened to someone ELSE... how awful it is, how cruel, how traumatic, how serious, etc., the "projection" part is because the  thing that they're talking about is the very thing that they either DID THEMSELVES, or that they REFUSED to acknowledge or help with when it happened to a person in their family, friend, or work circle.
To add salt to the punch, they will especially do this WHILE TALKING TO the person who it was done TO, who it happened TO.
If the event was honestly unknown to the Narcissist, that would be a different story, however if the person is a family member or a "close friend", chances are the Narcissist is fully aware.

This is a different form of the kind of projection where the disordered person accuses a target of doing the things the N. actually did. (Cheating on a partner is a common one; the cheater will accuse their partner of cheating, but N's will accuse their partners, friends, or family members of pretty much anything they've done, said, or felt.)

So for example, the Narcissist will talk about how awful it was that someone on Television was attacked and raped, "and by someone they KNEW, no less, and how AWFUL it must have been, and can you even IMAGINE what that must have been like?!? The poor woman!"
But they will be saying all this TO THEIR FRIEND WHO IS TRYING TO RECOVER FROM PTSD FROM BEING ATTACKED AND RAPED.

This kind of projection may be one of this individual Narcissist's defense mechanisms, OR another way to hurt and dominate another, depending on the individual N.'s mental profile. (It's not necessarily one or the other, it really might be a defense mechanism, but the damage it can cause is real either way.)

It can be an attempt to DELETE INFORMATION.

It can be an attempt to EDIT REALITY, and re-write the story, making the N. into one of the people who are appalled, concerned, empathetic and caring, which makes them NOT one of the people who "don't care".

It's basically the same behavior N's display when they treat a person like a NOVICE, a BEGINNER, or CLUELESS, when they want to pretend that the person is NOT knowledgeable or skilled about something. (This can be seen quite often in Western culture fields of work and study.)

Again, for example, the Narcissist may have heard that a relative is emotionally/mentally abusive to their child. Amazingly, the Narcissist will convey the tragic news in detail, TO their own child that they treated in exactly the same way.

Now, if the person was NOT a Narcissist, and they actually just FORGOT about the other person's traumatic events due to perhaps stress, age, or just a memory lapse, then when the person said something like "Yes I'm all too familiar with that", the Non-Narcissist would almost certainly feel something like chagrin, embarrassment, guilt, and sympathy, and then make verbal apologies, and invite the person to talk about it.

When the person IS a Narcissist, if the other person said something like "Yes I'm all too familiar with that", then the N. would immediately become defensive, invalidate them, GO SILENT, go into a "mood" or a "rage", or accuse them of LYING, depending on the severity of the N's illness.

No Girls Allowed, No Boys Either

"I'm afraid to say that the tendency to bond with one's own sex to the exclusion of the other is a childhood stage. It includes seeing one sex as worthy, strong and capable, and the other as weak, overly emotional, and less capable. It tends to show itself in day-to-day behaviors, where one sex is ignored, criticized, and micro-managed, insulted, and "punished" with dismissiveness, slander, betrayal, and various kinds of sabotage. The other is held in high esteem, high sympathy, and given access to resources and to leadership positions.

This developmental stage can be seen working itself out in elementary school-age children, more or less depending on the surrounding culture:
Cultures with science, math, language, the arts, and social instruction (simultaneously) as main focus tend to be successful in guiding children to grow past this developmental stage, but cultures without focus and cultures that are fixated on material gain and warmongering actually discourage children from maturing past this stage, keeping them in an unhealthy suspended state of childhood that they carry into adulthood.
If an individual grows beyond this stage due to outside influences, or of their own volition, they are usually singled out and excluded.

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.