Ego: Good or Bad?

A common effect of narcissistic conditioning is believing that "ego" is bad. Not everyone gets affected in this way, but many do.
"Ego" is simply a kind of energetic version of our "skin" and our "self", connected with our boundaries. It can be healthy or unhealthy, but it's just a part of how we're made. Those with serious control issues will often send the message in various ways, over and over, that a target's ego is bad, that it's "inflated", that the target is arrogant/stuck-up/aggressive and has too much ego. However, this is the kind of thing that one might say to an actual control-freak who is wreaking havoc and creating serious problems, not a message one sends to a child, or to a loved one. Even if a child WAS displaying "inflated ego" issues (although it's usually just childhood confidence and boundary development misconstrued by adults), the remedy is more guidance, not disparagement.
When a person is targeted to strip them of their ego, they are being violated, and when a person is targeted for conditioning so that they believe their own ego is "bad", like a disease or a deformity, that's brainwashing and abuse.
Controllers of course want targets to be ego-less, because they can control and violate them much more easily. There's no barrier. Also, without ego, we tend to "let ourselves go", meaning we don't focus on keeping ourselves "shiny", so other people don't notice us as much, are less attracted, and so we receive less attention, and therefore less support, automatically.
The definition of the word "ego" has been skewed by popular culture in a way that implies automatic negativity, but it's not, it's just a part of being a human being. We're supposed to have an ego. It doesn't make us good or bad.
Narcissists channel their energy and focus into their ego and image, but not their character underneath. When one channels energy into one's real life, self, relationship with others, and learning, with humility, one's ego develops along with healthy boundaries. Anyone's ego can become inflated, but that's just something that happens to us as humans, we learn and we grow, and our ego becomes healthier.
Like M&M's, in a simplistic way: The candy shell as the ego is supposed to be there, without it the chocolate is vulnerable and melts easily; you can't just carry them around, they would get squished. But the core of the candy is the chocolate. Without that, it's just an empty shell. The M&M is a piece of chocolate, first, and around that chocolate is the candy shell. So without the shell it's still an M&M, but it's vulnerable.
If M&M's did not put chocolate inside those candy shells, and put all of their energy into only the shells, maybe made them flourescent or added sparkles, we would still see them as really neato M&M's, but we would have no idea there was no chocolate inside. Until we bought them, brought them home, and started eating them.
So what's "wrong" is when the ego is the thing that the person is putting all of their energy and focus into, not when the ego is present and exists. A healthy ego, like the shell of an M&M, doesn't DO anything negative to anyone else, it protects what's inside, makes it okay to travel around, and it likes to keep itself "up", clean, colorful, and shiny. With a clear "m" stamp ~ it's okay to be happy about that, and it's healthy; we're SUPPOSED TO maintain ourselves and let that be part of our confidence. When the ego and shell becomes our focal point to where we ignore and forget about what's inside, then it's unhealthy.
But the shell on the M&M, and the ego on a human, is perfectly healthy, it's supposed to be there, and it's important to keep it healthy.

Defensive Behavior On Purpose

"Being defensive" is a learned way of getting out of lots of things. It's also used to force one's point of view, or force getting one's way. When one behaves defensively, then one is implying that they are the one who is under fire and being treated unfairly. Reality doesn't matter if the behavior itself works, and it does work, quite often.

Children who develop this habit often learned it directly from watching someone else, a parent or other older person, even a sibling or neighbor. They also learned that people do get away with using it as a control tool in many circles, with many individuals.

Children learn that it can be used for all kinds of purposes, pretty much anything, if those around them allow it or fall for it. If they use it successfully during childhood, and are not reprimanded for it or guided away from it, they will often continue to use it in adulthood.

When there are several people in a group who use defensiveness for control purposes, they will often defend one another. They're really defending the behavior itself, not the person, and this can be seen when they throw the person they were just defending last week under the bus to defend themselves.

Humans tend to automatically align themselves with whoever is acting "defensively", REGARDLESS of facts and reality, and this automatic behavior increases dramatically when the person is like THEMSELVES in some way. The similarity can be anything at all, from being a fan of the same sports team, to being on the same "rung" of the ladder at their company, to being the same sex, same race, similar height, ancestry, FIELD of work or study, wealth or poverty status, even being from the same town, wearing similar clothing, anything at all that says "that person is like me".

Humans also tend to consider themselves "understanding" and "objective" when they align themselves with a person who is behaving defensively; they give themselves a 'reward' for it, and feel like a 'good person'. However the fact that they didn't actually view the events or situation objectively, from ALL sides equally, without bias, doesn't seem to enter their minds.

Behaving defensively is a learned behavior, usually from childhood, that a fair number of people use for control purposes.

Narcissism And Lying

Yes, most Narcissists lie habitually, about pretty much anything and anyone, for serious reasons and for very petty reasons. N's who do this may constantly make things up about themselves and about other people in order to manipulate whatever situation they're in, so it's in their favor. Tiny things or very big things, no thing and nobody is "immune".

They will imply nasty things about others, even their "loved ones', that aren't true, just to gain sympathy and attention from others. They'll exaggerate or make up illnesses and injuries, completely re-write conversations they had with others and then tell someone the "edited" version, they'll simply fabricate parts of their past, their present, and their future, and about OTHERS as well. Most N's will lie TO or ABOUT anyone, and anything, in order to make things the way the want them, and to put themselves in a "good light".
It does appear that many are actually delusional: they believe the lies they make up; their brains create a different version of reality, and they believe it, and then speak and behave accordingly.

Sometimes they get caught when they've gone "too far" with outlandish rumors, or get tangled in too many opposing fibs, or trash the "wrong" person, but often they stay undetected because:

While they're lying, they're acting as innocent, as well-informed, as injured, ill, and compromised, or as victimized as possible. A very large number of people fall for the act, hook line and sinker.

In most cases they did develop this habit as an unhealthy coping skill during childhood, so it's often deeply seated.
It's important to note: When one FEELS innocent and above reproach, it's much easier to convey the image of genuine innocence, and it's much easier to understand why they would feel defensive.
~
Regarding the people who fall for the act: It's one thing to fall for the facade another person is trying convey about themselves;
it's another thing entirely to go along willfully with slander and gossip, whether it's serious or seemingly trivial, about someone else.

Victim Hood

• Frequent bullying treatment such as being insulted, humiliated, invalidated, put down, ignored, verbally attacked, backstabbed, abandoned when in need, lied to, lied ABOUT, sabotaged, bullied, invaded, assaulted, played, and generally betrayed is going to have effects on a person. No normal human being is going to walk around "unscathed" and unaffected after being the target of this kind of treatment, whether it was during childhood or adulthood, whether it was family, friend, partner, or other. Only a robot, or a sociopath, would simply keep on like nothing happened, "pick themselves up and brush themselves off", "get on with their life", or "get over it". If it didn't affect you and your life adversely, that's when you want to worry. That would actually be a sign of mental illness.
  So, take heart if you feel overwhelmed, have depression or anxiety issues, or like your recovery is taking too long; it means you have a real, working, human brain.

Personal Creep-out:

There's something very creepy about people who act like you're invisible, like they don't see you standing there physically, like they don't hear you talking, or who act like you aren't a "real" person who "belongs" in whatever group or "crowd" you're in.
Sure, some of them might be shy... but not all of them.
Gives me the willies.

Primates and Sexist/Sexual Aggression

Primates and sexist/sexual aggression
Scientific American The Science Of Sexism

There has never been an observed case of male sexual coercion in this species (Bonobos) despite the fact that males are still somewhat larger than females.

Chimpanzee females are largely isolated from one another, but bonobo females come to one another’s aid.
"An important aspect of primate sexual coercion that shouldn’t be ignored is where it doesn’t exist and why. Bonobos are as closely related to us as chimpanzees are since we shared a common ancestor with both between four and six million years ago and the two species later diverged from each other only about a million years ago. There has never been an observed case of male sexual coercion in this species despite the fact that males are still somewhat larger than females.

A unique aspect of bonobo society is that they are a female-dominated species thanks to the network of support that exists between bonobo females. Chimpanzee females are largely isolated from one another, but bonobo females come to one another’s aid. While there may be genetic differences that account for the lack of sexual coercion in bonobos, one important factor is the different environment that promotes these cooperative networks and limits the usefulness of male coercion (see my interview with Frans de Waal for more on this topic). Male bonobos mate more frequently by gaining support from these female networks rather than using sexual coercion as can be found in chimpanzees. Males grow up with this “culture” and observe the older males in their troop emphasize grooming over aggression and then adapt their own behavior in order to maximize their reproductive success.
But bonobos aren’t the only ones. To illustrate how powerful the influence of culture can be for primate societies consider the most extreme example of a sexually coercive species: savanna baboons. Male baboons have been known to viciously maul a female that has rejected their advances and the level of male aggression is strongly correlated with their mating success. However, in a unique natural experiment Stanford primatologist Robert Sapolsky observed what developed when the largest and most aggressive males died out in a group known as Forest Troop (because they were feeding at the contaminated dump site of a Western safari lodge). In the intervening years Forest Group developed a culture in which kindness was rewarded more than aggression and adolescent males who migrated into the troop adopted this culture themselves. As Sapolsky related in his essay “A Natural History of Peace” for the journal Foreign Affairs

FULL POST 

Yoko Ono Plastic Ono Band - Bad Dancer

Bullies Defend Bullies

Those with control issues will more often than not defend others who display control behaviors, because they're coming from the same place.
If Jane wants to be justified in her bullying behaviors, she is going to defend John when he is accused of bullying, because she wants the bullying itself to be accepted.
Jane will not stand up for the person John is bullying, even if that person is her own partner, friend, or child. She will defend John's actions instead, because she's actually defending her OWN, and also her own motives and intentions.

If Jane stands up for the person whom John is bullying, or concedes that John was doing something wrong, then she's admitting that John's actions were "wrong", which means that when SHE does those same actions, SHE would be wrong as well.

Birds of a feather flock together; it's quite true.

Those who bully stand up for other bullies; those who judge stand up for other judgers; haters will defend and "explain" haters: abusers will defend and "sympathize" with other abusers; those who have control issues will rationalize and defend the actions of others who have control issues.
Standing up for a target or victim means admitting that the actions committed against the person were wrong.
If one wants to continue to bully, condescend, judge, hate, abuse, or control, then one is of course going to rationalize and defend why OTHER people do these things, and join in invalidating and demeaning the target.

Naturally Human

Altruism, empathy, compassion, fairness, and even small self-sacrifice for others do not appear to be simply natural human traits, but rather enlightened understanding  and learning of what it really takes to maintain the mental, physical, and emotional health of people in a relationship, family, group and community. The more 'enlightened' individuals seen in a particular group, the better the quality of life is apparent for all members, and the less understanding and 'enlightenment', the less success the members of the group will find in various areas of life. Human beings tend to sink to the lowest common denominator, not float to the highest. We are heavier than air, water, and understanding, not lighter. We're dense, and that's our greatest weakness.

OCD and PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder)

How Are PTSD and OCD Connected?

In addition to PTSD, people who have experienced a traumatic life event may also be more likely to develop symptoms of OCD. In fact, it has been shown that the severity of a person's OCD symptoms is connected to the number of traumatic events they have experienced in their lifetime.


http://ptsd.about.com/od/relatedconditions/a/OCD_PTSD.htm

Why Certain People Get Targeted More Than Others

Why are there more abuse and bully victims of one sex than the other, one class or the other, one body type or another, or one ancestry, skin or hair color than another in a given area?

If a target's physical body and appearance matches local prejudices, then the odds are much greater that they will be targeted in the first place, and that the targeting will keep going as long as the person remains in the local area. Because people who target others ONLY STOP if they think they'll receive CONSEQUENCES for it from OTHERS.
(Because people who target others are immature, for the most part; they only do things or don't do things based on reward and consequence.)

This can be witnessed clearly in regions where certain prejudices such as white against black are now considered immoral, but other prejudices such as anti-white or anti-female go unchecked, and therefore there is no fear of consequences for behaving with such prejudice and immaturity.
For example, a local Firefighter's organization may be making sure that there is no racial bias in the entry process, but sex and height bias is still present, because no one is giving out social consequences for it. So now all races are represented in the Firefighter's organization, and everyone feels like they're being "morally correct", but the fact that all of the races of humans there are taller males is completely ignored, and everyone pretends they don't notice. If and when someone points it out, it will be either denied or rationalized, (something like "these are simply the people who passed the entry test, there's no bias going on") but there will be no fact-checking or real, objective review of the entry process or  surrounding factors. There will be no objective investigation into local biases, or into the possibility of a "hostile environment" that keeps certain people from even trying to take the entry tests.
There will be no objectivity, period. Because no one FEARS CONSEQUENCES for their prejudices.

Fantasy Life: "Good People" and "Bad People"

The rejection of another person's reality is a symptom of being used to living in fantasy about one's own life.
If a person needs to believe certain things about their life, themselves, and others in order to feel like a valuable person, then those beliefs and the stories that they are built upon can not be challenged.
A common fantasy that many people share is that they are one of the people who are above reproach, and are higher in 'natural status' than others around them. This allows them to believe that they are naturally more logical, more grounded, more responsible, and more emotionally stable than certain others whom they have designated as lower status than themselves. This allows them to believe that they are entitled to privilege, care, love, understanding, sympathy, resources OVER others. It also encourages them to believe they are entitled to have authority over those who are not included in their elite "good person" group.

This common fantasy is usually shared with one or more people in the person's life, and in fact they have likely actually adapted the fantasy from others who already live in it.
One of the behaviors that is nearly always visible when this fantasy is present is the labeling of others in negative ways. Projected "bad character" is placed on others in a blanket way, and projected "good character" is placed on themselves, and those within the shared fantasy.
Labels that categorize others in a blanket way as "bad people" such as "unstable", "loser", "emotional", "hostile", "lazy", "slut", "whackjob", "right-fighter", "naive", "self-centered", "stuck-up", etc are simply methods of ignoring and covering up events and details of reality, and casting the person in a bad light. If a person is upset about something that happened to them, then categorizing them as a "nutjob" is a way to have an excuse to ignore and invalidate them. This comes in very handy when a person is upset about something that someone else did TO them; the offender's actions get minimized, twisted completely, or even deleted, they never have to account for what they did, and as an added benefit, they even get to look like the "victim" of the other person, instead of the reality of it being the other way around.
Labels that categorize themselves and others who share their fantasy as "good people" such as "compassionate", "helpful", "hard worker", "responsible", "smart", "sweet", "generous", "down to earth", are also ways of clothing a person in a blanket judgment to keep the fantasy alive, and to keep their transgressions and not so nice motives hidden. If a person is labeled as "good people", then any sins they commit that are SEEN will be automatically painted as innocent mistakes, or unintentional, or because of stress.

People who live in and with this common fantasy can be heard using descriptive terms about other people frequently, INSTEAD of reviewing actual events in order to understand what really happened. They don't WANT to hear what happened, they don't WANT to talk about details, and they don't WANT to know all sides or points of view. They are ONLY concerned with keeping their fantasy alive of who is in the "good person/entitled person" group and who is not, which means reality is not welcome, because it would destroy the fantasy.
The importance of keeping the fantasy going and keeping one's self in the "good person" group can actually mean the difference between having access to resources, care, and normal living, and being ostracized from the person's family and community, because these fantasies are usually originated and carried by others who actually hold real control, power, and resources. When the fantasy is SHARED, then others are also invested in it, so when someone does NOT perpetuate the fantasy and begins to actually LOOK at real events, they are an immediate THREAT. They will often be quickly rallied against and ejected from the group with prejudice. If a person stands up FOR a person who has been treated unfairly or badly by those in the "good person" group, they will usually be quickly rallied against and rejected, and RE-CATEGORIZED and RE-LABELED in the "bad person" group.
When a person does anything at all, real or IMAGINARY, that leads to them being ejected from the "good person/entitled person" group, they will then be re-categorized as NOT "one of the good/entitled people", and therefore will be blocked from resources, denied care, sympathy, and support, will be denied recognition and credit for anything they do, and will be blocked, sabotaged, countered, and invalidated at every turn. Nothing they say from that day forward will be heard or taken seriously by anyone in the "good person/entitled person" group.
The fantasy is actually a shared consensus that is kept alive BY these changes in "membership". If there is no one to reject, then there's no more fantasy, and the pain of reality starts to creep in. Those who live in this fantasy may not KNOW that there is another way to live that doesn't cause so much drama and harm to people, but it's also possible that they do know, and don't care, because the fantasy seems to work better for them than real life.

What Can I Possibly Do To Help An Abuse Victim?

Those who know someone who has been through trauma and abuse sometimes feel like they can't do anything to help, so they do nothing, they avoid and act coldly toward the person. What they can do that actually would be helpful is to understand that one of the things that can happen to a person is isolation. It can be because they are too overwhelmed, too fatigued, or too stressed to reach out to others, or they often don't realize time has gone by because of their fatigue; they may have ended up with fear of going outside or fear of other people (either fear of attack, fear of slander, or fear of having to deal with cold human cruelty and domination behaviors, anxiety about suppressing their own anger when yet another person acts disrespectfully or abusively),
or they may have actually been conditioned (brainwashed) to isolate themselves from others by a Controller/abuser.
Conditioning a target to disconnect from other people that they would normally be connected to is a very common abuser behavior that targets (no matter how intelligent or physically strong) are rarely aware of, and the effects can last for years, especially if no one around them understands the effects and trauma of manipulative abuse, whether it was from childhood or during adulthood, or both.
So if you think of yourself as a "compassionate person" and you're not suffering from the effects of trauma yourself, try reading up on what happens to strong, good, intelligent human beings when they go through trauma. You can do a lot of good in the world if you simply have a decent grasp on what happens, what people go through, what the effects are, and how to behave toward a person who has dealt with trauma (and how NOT to.)
That person could easily be you someday, and hopefully it won't, but if that day did come, you would find out how rare and how precious it is to find a person who actually grasps it at all, who treats you with respect, and who you can simply communicate with in a genuine way.

Natural Authority, Entitlement

Those who grow up being taught that certain people have some kind of natural right to have CONTROL over other adults will often try to become such a person (a "boss" person). They were likely taught that it's actually a real thing, that certain people have a natural right and entitlement to be the "boss" over other people. Since they think it's true, they of course would rather be in the position of "boss" than "subordinate", because "subordinates" have to live their lives UNDER a "boss", and don't have personal freedom or access to resources.
IF one believes that there really are natural "bosses" who get to have control over other human beings, then it stands to reason that they are going to want to have that position if they CAN, and in their minds, it would be a matter of quality of life and survival.
Unless they come to realize through experience and maturity that all adults are equal in natural "status", that no one has a "natural right" to have control and power over others, and that no one was born as an "automatic subordinate" to anyone else, they will of course continue to try to be a "Boss" person. Because there are only two choices in their mind: "Boss" or "Subordinate". They don't know any differently.

It is worth noting that those who believe either consciously or subconsciously that "Boss Entitlement" is real will project this onto others as well. So they will assume that another person is either a "Boss" or a "Subordinate", and they will interpret the person's actions as either "trying to be a Boss", or "submitting to authority". In other words they see all people in either a Control/Authority role, OR a Subordinate/Follower role. And they will interpret other people's actions, behaviors, and expressions INSIDE of those parameters. (So if they think a person "should be" a "subordinate", but the person is not ACTING like a "subordinate" is "supposed to act", then they will interpret all of their actions as rebellion or insolence. If they think a person "should be" a "boss", but the person is not ACTING controlling and domineering towards others, then they will interpret their actions and behavior as weak and submissive. They simply are not ABLE to see others, or themselves, as human beings OUTSIDE of these authority/subordinate, leader/follower parameters. )

Biased Point Of View

"Biased Point Of View" is what humans do when they/we talk about a subject  as if the whole world is the same sex, or race, age, etc. as themselves.
It can be found in quite a lot of forms, forums and venues, from creative prose to poetry, to songwriting, to unfortunately journalism, education, and instructional material that's supposed to be non-biased. It can even be found in many religious writings (including the Bible, the Quran, and many other religious or anti-religious materials), also in medical and psychiatric papers, and also in various science studies and reports.
When biased point of view is seen in creative writing and other creative projects, then it can be taken into consideration as part of the expression of the producer of the creative work. It should be pointed out during study, for example "Leaves of Grass" by W. Whitman; while much of it could be taken as gender-neutral, there are points that show that Whitman is writing in "male-only" and "male-favored" point of view, not from a "human" inclusive point of view. A very large amount of poetry and other creative writings are written in specifically biased point of view, which excludes or sometimes demeans and attempts to invalidate the point of view of others.
A song by the rock band Led Zeppelin, for example, states in the lyrics, "The soul of a woman was created below", which does not require further explaining. There are thousands, if not millions, of examples throughout human creative writing and other projects that expose the producers' exclusive and biased point of view. Refusing to recognize this fact seems very strange and agenda-based; there is no legitimate reason to deny that it exists.

There are more male-biased examples throughout human history mostly because more males than females have been permitted to create and publish their original work over the centuries. One will find the same holds true in relation to race and ancestry; those who are permitted or encouraged to create original work and have it published and preserved are the ones whose point of view will be seen, of course.
There is also an element of a higher objectivity in point of view in females because girls are often actually instructed to empathize with boys, while boys are often not instructed to empathize with girls. Also, being the mother of both daughters and sons, mothers in general tend to have more interest and empathy in both male and female offspring's real point of view than fathers in general, and are therefore more likely to have the ability to see the world from more than their own personal point of view.

When biased point of view is seen in Journalism, educational material, textbooks, instructional material, and religious writings, then the issue of agenda-based influence and conditioning is introduced.
Journalists who report from male point of view, female point of view, racial point of view, class point of view, and POLITICAL point of view are not doing "real" journalism, they are projecting their own personal bias onto whatever they're covering.

Educational material is agenda-based when there is a political, religious, anti-religious, sexist, or racist slant to the content, which means someone is trying to control the way students feel, think, and see the world and themselves.

A carpentry teacher can teach all of the students how to make a napkin holder, OR that teacher can IMPLY that only certain students would be good at it, or would understand how to use the tools and work with wood. One is actually objective teaching, and the other is subjective, biased, and agenda-based.

The story of the Little Red Hen was used by a first grade teacher to influence political agenda on the students. The story is straightforward, about putting in work and help toward something, and then getting to benefit from it (Little Red Hen is going to bake bread, but no one will help her do any of the tasks needed such as harvesting wheat or kneading the dough, so she does it all herself and then keeps it for herself and her family, without giving to those who refused to help when she asked them, which is a healthy and "normal" action.)
The aforementioned first grade teacher told the story to the students, but then skewed the meaning and asked the students questions such as "Why do you think the Little Red Hen was so selfish?" This is agenda-based "teaching", the story was not written that way, the teacher purposely twisted the meaning to match his/her political beliefs, and then "taught" the students in such manner.

Many religious writings are written in only one gender's or one race's point of view, due to the sex or race of the writer and producer of the piece. Those who are not familiar with objective "human" point of view, or perceiving the world outside of their own sex, race, or class, often express themselves and report stories in speech and writing in a biased point of view. So everything is from a male, TO a male, or from a female, TO a female, or from a certain racial ancestry TO another member of the same ancestry. It is often simply taught as  religious instruction WITHOUT recognizing that the content is completely biased because of the producer's personal point of view. Some writings we can see in the Bible, for example, are obviously personal instructions or advice to a son from a father, (specific, real people), but very few people seem to recognize this, or understand that it does NOT imply that the male point of view is "more righteous" than the female, or "wiser", or "higher" in wisdom on some esoteric level. They are simply the writings from a male, in male point of view, addressing his son, because he had a real son.

The less able a person is to perceive the world objectively, in the point of view outside one's own, the more likely he or she is to express themselves or convey instruction IN the person's OWN biased personal point of view, TO others who are similar to them physically.

Seeing this in action right now is very simple and easy: Turn on any Major League Sports show and listen to the reporters or announcers, and turn on most media "news" networks in the US. Listen to most modern stand-up comedians, there are few who can do comedy outside of their personal biases and prejudices. Flip through comic books, listen to song lyrics. Watch practically any sit-com, some are more obvious than others (The Big Bang Theory is an obvious one). Read blogs online. Thousands of movies.
In fact, bias in the media, politics, creative projects and journalism may be at an all-time HIGH, in spite of the "information age" we supposedly live in.

To be sure, a person is not automatically biased because of their sex or race; there are and have always been both males and females, and people from any ancestry who are capable of relatively objective point of view. It helps when one sees one's self as a "Human being" first, who happens to have a certain background and be of one sex or the other.

Taking Things Personally

Taking everything personally is one of the issues that those with certain disorders including Narcissism have. They tend to project this onto others as well, including their children.
Children who grow up in families where Narcissism and/or Codependence is present are often confused about how to define "personal" or "non-personal".
~
So if Susan is angry about something that happened at school, when she comes home she tries to express that anger in a healthy way (talking about it in relatively polite language, not directed at those she is speaking to). However, someone in the home interprets her anger as being directed at THEM, and so instead of listening to Susan or respecting her emotions, they try to shut her down, and tell her she's "wrong" or "bad". They imply that she's overreacting, or that she must have done something to cause it. They also may talk about Susan being an "angry, hostile person", or even being "unstable", instead of treating her with basic respect.
This changes the entire situation from non-personal to personal; the behavior of the other person at Susan's school is now somehow SUSAN'S responsibility, and her anger about it is something she should feel guilty or ashamed about. So now, instead of the person's behavior being NOT about Susan (which it isn't, in reality), it's turned into being ALL about Susan, and she is being blamed and shamed for having and expressing emotion about it. So now, Susan feels self-conscious about her normal, healthy emotions, and feels responsible for someone else treating her poorly.
~
The reason for this invalidation and blame toward Susan has nothing to do with Susan herself, or for anything she's done. Susan did not come in the house slamming doors or breaking things, she did not attack anyone verbally or physically, she didn't kick the dog, she did not get drunk and drive her car, she didn't do anything at all that would actually be "hostile" or "aggressive behavior". She simply verbally expressed her natural, normal anger about something real that happened to her, and tried to tell the story about the event, of course in an "angry tone", because that's how humans express emotions.
Whatever we feel influences the tone and flow of our speech in some way, and that includes everyone except sociopaths. Some sound "more expressive" and others less so, but it's healthy and normal to have a "tone", and also a volume change, that expresses our feelings.
It is NOT the same as "raging", "exploding", or 'displaying aggression and hostility".
~
They can't discern other people's expressions of emotions because they see everything as being about them, and affecting them directly. Anything and anyone that is in their world is "personal".
They make terrible caregivers because they include every patient and client in their personal circle, and take everything others do and say as a personal engagement with THEM. So for example, if they were a nurse in a hospital, they would take it personally and become annoyed or angry if a patient in a psych. ward "gives them an attitude" (because they have a certain disorder, trauma, are sad, are upset about something, or are severely depressed), or if an injury patient in great pain kept calling them, or a patient was not responding as expected to treatment, or if they had to clean someone. As parents, when their child is upset, they take it personally and as a blow to their ego and their "serenity", so they will discipline/admonish the child for expressing their feelings (no matter what the emotion is, even fear or pain). If the child doesn't like certain food, they take it as a personal insult, or as the child rebelling against them. Anytime the child resists, disagrees, or displays emotion, they take it as a personal insult and "rebellion" against them. Anytime the child displays autonomy or initiative, or doesn't fully comply or submit to them will be taken as an insult, as aggression, and as "rebellion" against them. Anytime the child displays affection or admiration for others, they will again take it as an insult and rebellion against them, and they may resent both the child and the other person.
~
If a person expressing anger or any other emotion is someone they see as being "lower status" than themselves, they feel entitled to "admonish" or "punish" them for their healthy emotional expressions.
If a person expressing an emotion is someone they see as "higher status" than themselves, they may still take it personally, but will most likely "allow" the person to express themselves, and even take pride in being "understanding" of the person.
~
Micro-judging others, trying to control others with shame, trying to cast shame for anything and everything others do, say, and express are common in such families and groups. In order to stay out of the target range of the micro-judging and shaming, certain members "go along to get along", and will follow along with gossip, slander, ostracism and cruelty, eschewing fairness, compassion, respect, or justice, and will deny it to kingdom come, defending themselves and others who are doing it.
Blame will always be cast on the person who is the target of the gossip, shaming, ostracism, or abuse.
(If pressed for a reason why a person is being treated poorly and rejected, there will be given all kinds of character assassinating descriptions, like "he's self-centered" or "she's lazy" or "he's unappreciative" or "she's a slut" or "he takes advantage", but no real events will be given, because usually there aren't any; if events are given, they will often either be very petty but exaggerated to be serious (like "she didn't go to the dinner") or they will be from years ago (when he was 17 he showed up drunk) or it will be something that no one else gets judged negatively about (she got divorced!) or it will be blame for something that someone else actually did. The person who is targeted is usually actually a victim of someone else's abuse, and has been scapegoated in order to "make it go away". The person may be a victim of some other trauma or injury, and their symptoms and recovery were too annoying to deal with for others in the group. Sometimes the person is just a target of someone's resentment or envy, or refuses to comply with the control, ego, and egg-shell walking around others in the group.)

The more families and individuals within a community who are affected by Narcissism or Codependence there are, the more this "taking things personally", "status-mongering", "micro-judging", "self-righteousness", "clique behavior", "domination displays", "envy-based retaliation" and "blame/responsibility evasion" is evident in the local community on all levels, and the effect can be exponential. One person and family affects another, which affects another, and so on.

Secret to the Secret

The Secret to the Secret is within the feeling of safety, sanctuary, confidence, gratitude, and enjoyment ~:)

Fear is a block, anxiety is a block, worry is a block, frustration, resentment, envy, shame, and hostility are blocks to manifestation.
Guilt is not shame, and is not a block, but shame can result if one does not take accountability for something that one feels guilt about.
Being accountable for one's actions and behaviors clear many of the blocks, along with gratitude; gratitude fuels the process of manifestation. So does appreciation of life force around us, (including bugs, spiders, reptiles, and humans, as well as plants and cute and cuddly animals; life force is life force, it's energy), and appreciation for the amazing beauty and abundance that surrounds us.

Controllers and abusers cause these feelings in others which prevents them from manifesting, achieving, and gaining.We cause ourselves these feelings as well, but usually because we've experienced fear and anxiety in the past.

A loop gets created in a person's mind and therefore life: One is worried about survival, whether it's physical or otherwise, therefore one puts more energy into worrying and anxiety, or fear, and one does not stay in the feeling of safety, confidence, and enjoyment. One's contemporaries are also in worry, anxiety and fear, and are therefore also not in the feeling of safety, confidence and enjoyment.

Being in this loop means a person may be doing things to calm or escape his or her worry, anxiety, and frustration, instead of doing things and being in the "place" where one would feel good, safe, and happy. When we are in the place of feeling safe, feeling clean (physically and conscience-wise), and feeling enjoyment for what we are doing, we are much more able to achieve one's little or big intentions, with or without manifestation.

 We can achieve this combination of rather pleasant, calm, and warm feelings, or rather remember, (almost all of us have felt this at several points throughout our lives) without the use of substances; in fact, since the "high" from a substance is always temporary, is from an external source, and does not actually cause the full impact of what we're looking for, it's more of a hindrance than a help. Also, substance use is usually accompanied by feelings that block and inhibit what we're looking for. So in achieving and remembering these feelings, we are much more likely to find them if we are "sober". We can find this "place" with any number of methods, but some of the easier ones are laughter (without malice or dark sarcasm), certain very soothing, mentally stimulating, and emotionally or spiritually uplifting music and songs, playing fun games with people whom we like and can trust, eating excellent food either by ourselves or with others, again whom we like and can really trust, things that help us get our minds out of worrying, and focused on the good thing that we are doing. We may want or need to mentally understand our anxiety issues, and what the root cause of our unsafe feelings is, and then teach ourselves how to feel safe.

When we are in the company of others who are also feeling safe, clean, and enjoying what they're doing, we are connected with their positive frequency and resonance, and the energy expands and increases. It does actually make a difference whose company we are keeping, whether it's personal or at work, and it makes a difference for others as well when they are keeping our company. There is no need to make drama about rejecting or shaming others, especially since that would inhibit the feelings we're looking for, it's simply good to remember what "RESONANCE" is, and how it applies to being in the company of others and in them being in our company (are we contributing to the atmosphere, or dampening it, and are they contributing or dampening? Remember it's not about shame or blame, both of those will dampen the energy, whether we apply them to ourselves or someone else.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnS0SYF4pYE

The Secret to the Secret is within the feeling of safety, sanctuary, confidence, gratitude, and enjoyment ~:)

Hard To Change

It's much easier to grow and change if we remove shame and blame from the places where they don't belong, and put them where they do belong. Learning the difference is half the battle.

Envy Is Based On Identity

Envy, resentment, and domination are all about identity, and desiring control over another person and things the person has or seems to have.
~
The person who wants their identity to be "Look How Tough I Am" is not going to feel resentment, challenge, or envy toward a person who doesn't look "tough" to them. He or she WILL most likely envy and resent someone who appears confident or "tough", and who they think OTHER people might see as "tough". They will also often look for signs that someone else "thinks they're tough", and try to "knock them off their high horse" (whether the person actually "thinks they're tough" or NOT is irrelevant; it's not about the other person, it's about themselves.)
~
It is the same with anything else one identifies one's self AS; for example the person who wants to be seen as "very good looking" is going to notice and focus on another person whom they think is good-looking, not because the other person is a "bad person", but because their "good looks" threatens the envious person's identity/ego.
~
If a person does NOT identify themselves AS something such as "Tougher than...", "Stronger than...", "Better Looking than...", "Smarter than...", "More Experienced than...", "More Knowledgeable than...", "More Responsible than...", "More Accomplished than....", then they will not feel CHALLENGED, resentful, spiteful, or envious toward others for apparent personal attributes, and in fact may not even NOTICE such attributes about another person.
~
The person who wants to be seen as "Tough" is the one who won't get counseling for past trauma or current problems because the identity of "Tough" has been used as a shield against further bullying and trauma, and they're afraid to put it down. And since they feel that they NEED this identity to protect themselves from attackers or from humiliation, and also to receive positive treatment from others, they will often feel threatened and challenged by a person who seems equally or more "Tough" naturally. This identity is a coping and survival tool in their minds, so there is a fear of being compared to another person and found to be LESS "tough". They may act out, puffing themselves up, retaliating, "acting tough", making a show of behavioral displays such as noises, facial expressions, body language, slamming things (doors, footsteps, equipment), vocal tones, words, and loudness, gestures, whatever they've seen and heard others use, or whatever seems to "work" on others (or has in the past).
If a display doesn't seem to work on someone, they may even become resentful or angry about THAT.
~~If they weren't using "Tough" as an identity, they would not be focused on whether others are "tough" or not, or who's "tougher" than whom. It wouldn't be in their normal thought process, just like a person who was raised in the Amazon doesn't think about SNOW when the sky turns grey.
~
A person who wants to be seen as "Good Looking" is also usually trying to "put on" an identity for similar reasons as the "Tough One". To protect themselves from humiliation and attack, and to receive positive treatment from others. So if someone else is around who might be seen by others as equally or MORE "Good Looking", then they feel immediately threatened, because they fear the positive attention they're getting might go to the OTHER person instead. Of course this would only happen if the others around them were narcissistic and non-trustworthy anyway, however that IS the very environment that usually compels a person to develop such identity issues as survival mechanisms.
~
A person who wants to be identified as "Feminine" or "Masculine" will feel resentful and threatened by anyone who appears to be more feminine or masculine than them; a person who wants to be seen as the "Best Dog Trainer" will feel threatened by someone who dogs seem to respond to; a person who wants to be seen as "Very Responsible" will be threatened by a person who appears very responsible; a person who wants to be seen as "Naturally Very Gifted" in something will feel threatened by someone who appears to be naturally gifted in similar things, etc., etc. Again, this is usually CAUSED by an atmosphere where the person was not valued as a person, and not given accurate or positive feedback about their own true natural abilities or accomplishments.
~
Adults who pit children and others against each other for their own insecurity, agenda and ego purposes often create such atmospheres very quickly. For example when a young girl realizes that the men in her family or at school are paying much more positive attention to females whom they find physically attractive can easily develop appearance-identity issues, as will the young boy in a similar environment.
When people, especially adults, frequently give positive attention to certain children and adults because of SUPERFICIAL, petty, and favoritism reasons, and dismiss and IGNORE children and adults who don't seem to "measure up" to these petty requirements (such as looks, gender, popularity, body size, ancestry, etc.), it is NOTICED and felt by nearly all of the youth in the area, and identity coping mechanisms are often quickly developed. So for a concrete example: the teachers all treat Jeffrey the basketball star like they very much like and respect him, even though his behavior toward other kids is arrogant and mean, his grades suffer, and he "parties"; but they treat Joseph the boy who gets decent grades and is an excellent artist, who treats others very well, and who takes care of his autistic cousin like he's invisible. They treat Sharon the girl who's been on the Honor Roll since first grade, who rescues animals, and who volunteers at the Nursing Home like she's less worthy than both Jeffery AND Joseph.
All three of them are witness to the disparity in the way the adults are treating them, and all three of them are affected negatively, because the feedback from the adults is NOT accurate; it's NOT about WHO THE KIDS ARE and what they DO, it's about the egos and comfort of the adults. Hence, the atmosphere is ripe for all three of them to develop identity issues.
~
Adding more volatility to that same atmosphere such as adults displaying histrionic behaviors such as shaming, rage, jealousy, envy, adults gossiping, adults acting abusively, adults using substances, adults displaying domination behavior, adults doing criminal behaviors, adults displaying overt sexism and/or racism, adults displaying baseless "rebellion" to "be cool", and the cauldron fills and churns, creating a swamp that threatens to drown a young person's real, original "Self", so they desperately seek some kind of "SHELL" to wear to protect themselves and emotionally (or literally) survive.

Judging Me, Judging You

Many humans attach meaning to anything about others, and the less mature a person is, the more they believe that they're CORRECT. So each person thinks that your hair means a certain thing about you. your clothing means a certain thing about you, your car, your height, your sex, your face, your makeup or lack thereof, your facial expression, etc. Even more importantly, they judge YOU on how your speech and manner makes THEM FEEL, and tend to attribute ALL of the way you "make them feel" on YOU, not themselves. (In other words, if they find you attractive and you acknowledge them or are nice to them, they'll say you're a "great guy!" If they find you attractive and you don't give them enough positive attention because you didn't hear them or you were working, they might say you're "stuck up", or perhaps that you're a "very hard worker", depending on the individual. If you're smaller than they are, they will assess everything you do and say in a different way than if you're bigger than they are. If they find you attractive and you're a woman, they tend to crank up the volume on their "judgment" dial to "High", so they attribute much more meaning, negative or positive, to anything you say and do. If they see you as very unattractive (to them), they tend to do the same.)
If and when a person learns a little bit about you personally, then they tend to believe their own assessments about you based on your interests, job, financial status, your apparent ancestry, your Facebook posts, the people you are Facebook friends with, your partner, and your political affiliation or lack thereof.
Then, they will attribute even more meaning to the way your actions "make them feel", so if you bring them cookies or send a card, they tend to see you as a wonderful person, no matter what you're really like. If you don't go out of your way to "make them feel special" or give them extra attention, depending on the maturity level of the individual, they may tend to judge you as "self-centered" and "uncaring", regardless of anything real about you, your life, or your real actions, experiences, and personality.
The less mature the person is, the more they will treat you according to the way they have assessed you in their imagination.
(Very few will bother to spend any time or effort actually finding out real information about you, your life, your past, or your real personality, and even those who do can't make an accurate picture; it's not possible for them to gather all of the data about you that exists, or process it accurately, nor you them. There will always be huge missing chunks of data no matter who is doing the information gathering, and there is no objectively reliable source to gather it FROM in the first place, so the exercise of gathering information about a human being cannot result in hard scientific data.)