This Too Shall Pass
Clique, Clique, Claque: Herd Behavior, Dysfunctional Groups
Dysfunctional groups and cliques like to
dictate who their members can associate with. They are often quite
effective, and don't even pay any mind to whether it's right or wrong. A
member of this group may be so used to this behavior that they also
don't think about whether it's right or wrong, they simply feel the
pressure of the group and behave accordingly. Any new person that a
member of this group
brings in will be assessed and found either acceptable or unacceptable.
The assessment is always first and foremost about whether this new
person fits in with the hierarchy that's already established within the
group. If this new person is found to be unwilling to follow the group
agenda, including political opinion and going along with gossip or
illegal activity, they will not be welcomed. If this new person
threatens the ego of one of the group members, they will not be
welcomed, and may be smeared or outright rejected. Even if this new
person is a love interest of one of the members of the group, this will
not be respected. The new person will ONLY be accepted and welcomed if
they follow along with the controls, agendas, and hierarchy already
within the group, and ONLY if no one in the group is jealous of or
intimidated by the person. Disordered groups do not respect the rights,
boundaries, opinions or needs of the individual. If a person does not
conform to their satisfaction, they will be rejected. If the member that
brought this new person into the group does not go along with the
rejection, he or she will be punished and ultimately rejected if he or
she does not stand up against the treatment. Disordered groups with this
behavior can be seen in any group of people who are in regular contact,
or who have common interests. A non-disordered group welcomes new
individuals with open arms, and is happy and interested to meet new
faces, and respects the relationships between its members. However, a
healthy group must have a large enough measure of security and ethics to
stay healthy.
Relationship Confusion And Heartbreak
Cognitive dissonance can be created in our own
minds when we meet someone who seems very straightforward and reliable
to us, but who's actions are actually unreliable.
The impression we have of them in our minds is "Person who will keep their agreements, person who stands up for what's right, person who will treat me with true reciprocal respect, person who I can depend on who will not betray or hurt me."
So when this person does not live up to the impression we have of them in our minds, it can cause confusion, anxiety, sadness, pain, and heartbreak. If their behavior is abusive, it can cause trauma.
We expect one thing, but we are experiencing another. Like biting into an apple that tastes like a hot dog. Even if we like hot dogs, we would immediately spit out an apple that tasted like one.
There are different causes for this issue. One of them could be our own deep desire to find someone to trust, so we may pin that profile onto someone we don't know very well at all. That person may remind us for some reason of a person we trusted in our past, so we subconsciously assume they have similar personality traits, or will treat us the same way the other person did. We may simply not be very good at reading people. We may be star-struck or love-struck and ignore the person's real behavior that we would have noticed otherwise.
If we have a disorder ourselves, or just a lack of maturity, we may have unrealistic expectations of the other person that they couldn't possibly live up to, and that we ourselves could not live up to. We may feel rejected and betrayed at their normal human behavior, and even misinterpret their words, emotional expression, and actions. We may see their sadness as an expression of anger or judgment toward us, for example. We may interpret their anger as abusive rage, we may interpret their happiness as smugness, etc.
If the other person has a disorder or is very immature, they may have purposely created an impression of themselves that does not represent their real personality or intentions. Con artists do this on a regular basis. Their goal could be anything, from getting their hands on something we own, to getting us to become subservient to them. In order to get us to trust them, they create a false "Good Person" image of themselves, which is often actually an AMPLIFIED "Good Person" image; a con artist can not afford to risk us seeing through their facade, so we may actually buy into their "Good Person" image MORE than an ACTUAL Good Person, because a genuinely good person does not try to create an image, and all their "flaws" show. Many people actually fall for con-artists and reject genuinely good people for this reason.
Con artists are not the only ones who create a "Good Person" image, however. Many people grew up in cultures in which they may have been punished, picked on or ostracized if they did not learn how to create a false image of themselves to "wear" in front of others. If a child has no adults who see them for who they really are, who listens to them without shaming them or invalidating them, who disciplines them without anger or agenda, who teaches them how to stand up for themselves or for what is right,who gives them safe sanctuary, or who teaches them why ethics and values are so important, then the child may easily resort to simply mimicking what a "good person" LOOKS LIKE without having an understanding of the underlying reasons, feelings, and dynamics. Mimicking the superficial behaviors of others who are respected in the family and community can gain them acceptance and respect. However, the behavior they are mimicking is only surface behavior, like vocal tone, language, clothing, facial expression, body posturing and compliment giving, or minimal "reliable person" actions such as showing up on time, showing up at key events, or making a show of occasionally helping others. Behind the scenes, their intentions, emotions, and motives are that of the child they were who did not receive enough guidance and security from the adults in their life. (Sometimes even a strong parent is unable to provide enough guidance and security to a child, due to other people or circumstances.)
So, when our impression of a person is one thing, but their actions do not match this impression, we can experience real emotional and cognitive dissonance. We can experience sadness, heartbreak, confusion, and pain. What we can do is step back and reevaluate our impression of the person, and discover objectively (which can be very difficult for most of us) where this false impression really came from. Are our own expectations too high? Are we looking for a "Super-Good" person who would not really exist in reality? Did we simply not give ourselves enough time to get to know the person, and paint our own picture of them from our imagination? Or did this person purposely and continually try to create a false image to make us believe and trust them?
The impression we have of them in our minds is "Person who will keep their agreements, person who stands up for what's right, person who will treat me with true reciprocal respect, person who I can depend on who will not betray or hurt me."
So when this person does not live up to the impression we have of them in our minds, it can cause confusion, anxiety, sadness, pain, and heartbreak. If their behavior is abusive, it can cause trauma.
We expect one thing, but we are experiencing another. Like biting into an apple that tastes like a hot dog. Even if we like hot dogs, we would immediately spit out an apple that tasted like one.
There are different causes for this issue. One of them could be our own deep desire to find someone to trust, so we may pin that profile onto someone we don't know very well at all. That person may remind us for some reason of a person we trusted in our past, so we subconsciously assume they have similar personality traits, or will treat us the same way the other person did. We may simply not be very good at reading people. We may be star-struck or love-struck and ignore the person's real behavior that we would have noticed otherwise.
If we have a disorder ourselves, or just a lack of maturity, we may have unrealistic expectations of the other person that they couldn't possibly live up to, and that we ourselves could not live up to. We may feel rejected and betrayed at their normal human behavior, and even misinterpret their words, emotional expression, and actions. We may see their sadness as an expression of anger or judgment toward us, for example. We may interpret their anger as abusive rage, we may interpret their happiness as smugness, etc.
If the other person has a disorder or is very immature, they may have purposely created an impression of themselves that does not represent their real personality or intentions. Con artists do this on a regular basis. Their goal could be anything, from getting their hands on something we own, to getting us to become subservient to them. In order to get us to trust them, they create a false "Good Person" image of themselves, which is often actually an AMPLIFIED "Good Person" image; a con artist can not afford to risk us seeing through their facade, so we may actually buy into their "Good Person" image MORE than an ACTUAL Good Person, because a genuinely good person does not try to create an image, and all their "flaws" show. Many people actually fall for con-artists and reject genuinely good people for this reason.
Con artists are not the only ones who create a "Good Person" image, however. Many people grew up in cultures in which they may have been punished, picked on or ostracized if they did not learn how to create a false image of themselves to "wear" in front of others. If a child has no adults who see them for who they really are, who listens to them without shaming them or invalidating them, who disciplines them without anger or agenda, who teaches them how to stand up for themselves or for what is right,who gives them safe sanctuary, or who teaches them why ethics and values are so important, then the child may easily resort to simply mimicking what a "good person" LOOKS LIKE without having an understanding of the underlying reasons, feelings, and dynamics. Mimicking the superficial behaviors of others who are respected in the family and community can gain them acceptance and respect. However, the behavior they are mimicking is only surface behavior, like vocal tone, language, clothing, facial expression, body posturing and compliment giving, or minimal "reliable person" actions such as showing up on time, showing up at key events, or making a show of occasionally helping others. Behind the scenes, their intentions, emotions, and motives are that of the child they were who did not receive enough guidance and security from the adults in their life. (Sometimes even a strong parent is unable to provide enough guidance and security to a child, due to other people or circumstances.)
So, when our impression of a person is one thing, but their actions do not match this impression, we can experience real emotional and cognitive dissonance. We can experience sadness, heartbreak, confusion, and pain. What we can do is step back and reevaluate our impression of the person, and discover objectively (which can be very difficult for most of us) where this false impression really came from. Are our own expectations too high? Are we looking for a "Super-Good" person who would not really exist in reality? Did we simply not give ourselves enough time to get to know the person, and paint our own picture of them from our imagination? Or did this person purposely and continually try to create a false image to make us believe and trust them?
Hellooo... It's Like A Runaway Train And Everyone Just Keeps Eating Their Sammiches
Political scientist Dr. Lawrence Britt recently wrote an article
about fascism ("Fascism Anyone?," Free Inquiry, Spring 2003,
page 20). Studying the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany),
Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia), and
Pinochet (Chile), Dr. Britt found they all had 14 elements in common.
He calls these the identifying characteristics of fascism.
The excerpt is in accordance with the magazine's policy.
The 14 characteristics are:
The 14 characteristics are:
- Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.
- Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights
Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.
- Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause
The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.
- Supremacy of the Military
Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.
- Rampant Sexism
The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.
- Controlled Mass Media
Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.
- Obsession with National Security
Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.
- Religion and Government are Intertwined
Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.
- Corporate Power is Protected
The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
- Labor Power is Suppressed
Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed .
- Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts
Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.
- Obsession with Crime and Punishment
Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.
- Rampant Cronyism and Corruption
Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.
- Fraudulent Elections
Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.
LIBERALS STAND UP FOR RIGHTS
"Liberal":
a. Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
b. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
c. Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism.
A REAL "Liberal" would WANT to hear what a Conservative has to say, and anyone else. REAL Liberals don't reject a person's POV or opinion BEFORE they speak, because of the body they were born in, the religion they belong to, the party they joined, or the color of their skin or hair. Not because of the money in their bank account, or the job they have or don't have, or what they have said before. A REAL Liberal PRESERVES Freedom.
REAL Liberals can listen to any Point Of View without buying into it. REAL Liberals don't follow blindly. They also don't reject blindly. A REAL Liberal wound never vote solely because they were emotionally attached to a PERSON, or to an IDEAL, or because it made them feel good to belong to a PARTY or a CLUB.
That means that a real Liberal would STAND UP for another person's right to their religious beliefs and practices, and be AGAINST any government sanctions that took other people's rights away, or freedoms. Real Liberals are for LESS government, minimal control over people's rights, freedoms, and lives, and equal and fair treatment of all citizens, including those they don't agree with or LIKE.
A REAL Liberal woman would NOT compete with or attack another woman based in jealousy or envy. She would not compete for a man's attention with another woman to the point of pain and drama, she would not try to HURT another woman to get what she wants. She would always have the goal of PEACE and CIVILITY as her priority, as well as FREEDOM and FAIRNESS for herself and for OTHER WOMEN, even those she was jealous or resentful of. She does NOT seek power over men, and she does NOT allow men to have power over herself or other women.
A REAL Liberal man would NOT compete with or attack another man based in jealousy or envy, he does not try to DOMINATE, to gain POWER over others, or win territory over others. He DOES NOT always think he's right, he does not always think he's smarter than everyone else, he WANTS to hear and understand what OTHER PEOPLE'S points of view are, including men he disagrees with, AND WOMEN. A REAL Liberal man does NOT go along with male superiority, he sure as hell does NOT think of men as being a "certain way" and women being another, and he is not RACIST. A REAL Liberal man WANTS WOMEN to be treated LITERALLY equally, INCLUDING the women he doesn't LIKE, or women his wife is JEALOUS OF, and WOULD NOT go along with smearing, insulting, badmouthing, ostracizing, or bullying. A REAL Liberal man recognizes and stands up FOR anyone who gets treated with disrespect, and does not engage in it, he would find it DISTASTEFUL in his OWN MOUTH.
Believing that one's own point of view is the ONLY correct point of view on a topic is NOT "Liberal", rejection of other people because they have a different point of view is DEFINITELY NOT "Liberal". HATE is NEVER "LIBERAL".
Trashing people who belong to a different Political Party is DEFINITELY NOT "Liberal", Class Warfare NOT LIBERAL.
Trying to take away the right to bear arms, DEFINITELY NOT LIBERAL.
Bigotry against people who are physically different than one's self DEFINITELY NOT LIBERAL.
Trying to destroy Christianity or another belief is SO FAR FROM LIBERAL it's not even funny.
Trying to USE Christianity or any other belief to dictate who is "superior" or deserving or Godly is NOT LIBERAL EITHER.
Men who believe they're superior to women: NOT LIBERAL.
Women who believe they're superior to men: NOT LIBERAL.
Teaching AGENDAS and POLITICAL BELIEFS to CHILDREN IN SCHOOL is WAAAAYYYYY NOT LIBERAL!!!
There is a whole crew of people who are NOT LIBERAL, who label themselves as "Liberals".
The definition of "Liberal" is about preserving RIGHTS and FREEDOM for EVERYONE, ALL. That means ALL. Not just the people who are like me, or like you, or who AGREE, or who I think is "COOL" or who YOU think is "COOL".
Taking away people's rights and freedoms IS NOT LIBERAL, it's "AUTHORITARIAN" and "STATIST" and "FASCIST". (Political for CONTROL FREAK.)
FASCISM Runaway Train
a. Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
b. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
c. Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism.
A REAL "Liberal" would WANT to hear what a Conservative has to say, and anyone else. REAL Liberals don't reject a person's POV or opinion BEFORE they speak, because of the body they were born in, the religion they belong to, the party they joined, or the color of their skin or hair. Not because of the money in their bank account, or the job they have or don't have, or what they have said before. A REAL Liberal PRESERVES Freedom.
REAL Liberals can listen to any Point Of View without buying into it. REAL Liberals don't follow blindly. They also don't reject blindly. A REAL Liberal wound never vote solely because they were emotionally attached to a PERSON, or to an IDEAL, or because it made them feel good to belong to a PARTY or a CLUB.
That means that a real Liberal would STAND UP for another person's right to their religious beliefs and practices, and be AGAINST any government sanctions that took other people's rights away, or freedoms. Real Liberals are for LESS government, minimal control over people's rights, freedoms, and lives, and equal and fair treatment of all citizens, including those they don't agree with or LIKE.
A REAL Liberal woman would NOT compete with or attack another woman based in jealousy or envy. She would not compete for a man's attention with another woman to the point of pain and drama, she would not try to HURT another woman to get what she wants. She would always have the goal of PEACE and CIVILITY as her priority, as well as FREEDOM and FAIRNESS for herself and for OTHER WOMEN, even those she was jealous or resentful of. She does NOT seek power over men, and she does NOT allow men to have power over herself or other women.
A REAL Liberal man would NOT compete with or attack another man based in jealousy or envy, he does not try to DOMINATE, to gain POWER over others, or win territory over others. He DOES NOT always think he's right, he does not always think he's smarter than everyone else, he WANTS to hear and understand what OTHER PEOPLE'S points of view are, including men he disagrees with, AND WOMEN. A REAL Liberal man does NOT go along with male superiority, he sure as hell does NOT think of men as being a "certain way" and women being another, and he is not RACIST. A REAL Liberal man WANTS WOMEN to be treated LITERALLY equally, INCLUDING the women he doesn't LIKE, or women his wife is JEALOUS OF, and WOULD NOT go along with smearing, insulting, badmouthing, ostracizing, or bullying. A REAL Liberal man recognizes and stands up FOR anyone who gets treated with disrespect, and does not engage in it, he would find it DISTASTEFUL in his OWN MOUTH.
Believing that one's own point of view is the ONLY correct point of view on a topic is NOT "Liberal", rejection of other people because they have a different point of view is DEFINITELY NOT "Liberal". HATE is NEVER "LIBERAL".
Trashing people who belong to a different Political Party is DEFINITELY NOT "Liberal", Class Warfare NOT LIBERAL.
Trying to take away the right to bear arms, DEFINITELY NOT LIBERAL.
Bigotry against people who are physically different than one's self DEFINITELY NOT LIBERAL.
Trying to destroy Christianity or another belief is SO FAR FROM LIBERAL it's not even funny.
Trying to USE Christianity or any other belief to dictate who is "superior" or deserving or Godly is NOT LIBERAL EITHER.
Men who believe they're superior to women: NOT LIBERAL.
Women who believe they're superior to men: NOT LIBERAL.
Teaching AGENDAS and POLITICAL BELIEFS to CHILDREN IN SCHOOL is WAAAAYYYYY NOT LIBERAL!!!
There is a whole crew of people who are NOT LIBERAL, who label themselves as "Liberals".
The definition of "Liberal" is about preserving RIGHTS and FREEDOM for EVERYONE, ALL. That means ALL. Not just the people who are like me, or like you, or who AGREE, or who I think is "COOL" or who YOU think is "COOL".
Taking away people's rights and freedoms IS NOT LIBERAL, it's "AUTHORITARIAN" and "STATIST" and "FASCIST". (Political for CONTROL FREAK.)
FASCISM Runaway Train
Narcissism
The most obvious trait of a Narcissist is that they believe they are above self-examination.
All their problems are because of another person, usually the person who helps them the most, not who abused them.
They live in a fictional world where they have cast other people as characters who suit their ego and agenda. They do not SEE other people for who they really are, and they deny and delete anything about other people that messes up the fictional character they wrote for them.
The Narcissist is very unhappy unless he or she is the Rock Star or Movie Star in their family or group, and other people have to be "just audience members". They have to be THE star in the family or group, they can't share the stage, or the mic stand, or the voter polls, or the pulpit, or even the "Nice Person Award".
They don't help promote their other family or group members because they don't want them to get noticed or supported or recognized by the world outside. They might drop a little pat on the back or the head now and then, but that's just to keep the facade going of their own "good guy" character. They will however promote and boast about family members IF they believe they will get credit for that person's accomplishments, or if they will get something directly out of it (like money or fame by proxy). (Altruistic support is a foreign concept, and they often believe that "altruism" does not exist, OR that they are the only ones capable of it.)
They CAN'T STAND helping others, listening to others, being there for others. Their usual reaction to someone's sadness, pain, or anger is "Oh stop with the Poor Me" or "Get away from me" "Stop bothering me" "You're a loser" "All you have to do is..." "You need to get a thicker skin" "You are weak" "You deserved it".
Their exception to this is when they will receive "hero credit" for giving counsel or help, or if the person has something they want and that's the only way they'll get it, or if they are infatuated with the person and want their approval.
On the flip side of that, when a Narcissist feel sadness, pain, or anger, they feel entitled to all the sympathy in the world, regardless of how they have treated the person listening to them. No help is enough, once someone gives help to a Narcissist, they become a target of supply, and they will always "fall short" of the Narcissist's needs, no matter how much they give them. Just because a person gave help or sympathy to a Narcissist does not mean they will get any back, and in fact they will probably be treated worse than before.
They truly believe the world is a big hierarchy, and they are one of the "Top Echelon" of the humans.
They delete people as if they don't even exist.
They have no remorse or guilt for anything they do to others, and feel completely justified and entitled for anything and everything they do. Anything, and everything.
They honestly believe there are people who are "below" them, right in their own families.
If they're not judging a target for being "too lazy", they're judging that same target for being "too driven". They'll say they're "too soft", and then call the "too bitchy" in the next breath. The target is "too smart for his own good", and then "not too bright" in the next sentence. Narcissists do not use actual facts or reality when "assessing" other people.
Being considerate and caring for others is a HUGE BURDEN for them, and they become agitated, frustrated, annoyed, even enraged if someone they consider "below" them needs anything, expresses any emotion, or needs assistance or medical help.
No protest against anything they have done will go unpunished, whether that thing was huge or very small.
They do a thing called "baiting", where they will ask their target a fake question in order to get them to engage in an argument. "Are you okay" really means "I'm going to tell you that you're being a whiny baby as soon as you answer me." "What did I do wrong?" really means "I didn't do anything wrong to you! I am innocent and you are a bad, whiny bitch!" They have already made up their minds, the questions aren't real. They aren't seeking information.
They don't like whoever helps them, because that means they needed help. And if that person is supposed to be "below" them in their fantasy world, it destroys their fictional character script of that person being utterly useless, stupid, self-centered, and incapable. (Those "BELOW" them certainly wouldn't have anything the Narcissist would need).
They try constantly to convince their targets that they are, in fact, incapable, stupid, and useless. Some will actually say these things, and some will simply keep treating their target as if it was true. And they try very hard to convince anyone they can that their target is incapable, stupid, and useless as well, and a "bad person" to boot.
Targets often have to spend so much time, energy and resources dealing with the behavior, backlash, and consequences on their lives and emotional health that they can end up losing large parts of their regular lives that people normally take for granted.
All their problems are because of another person, usually the person who helps them the most, not who abused them.
They live in a fictional world where they have cast other people as characters who suit their ego and agenda. They do not SEE other people for who they really are, and they deny and delete anything about other people that messes up the fictional character they wrote for them.
The Narcissist is very unhappy unless he or she is the Rock Star or Movie Star in their family or group, and other people have to be "just audience members". They have to be THE star in the family or group, they can't share the stage, or the mic stand, or the voter polls, or the pulpit, or even the "Nice Person Award".
They don't help promote their other family or group members because they don't want them to get noticed or supported or recognized by the world outside. They might drop a little pat on the back or the head now and then, but that's just to keep the facade going of their own "good guy" character. They will however promote and boast about family members IF they believe they will get credit for that person's accomplishments, or if they will get something directly out of it (like money or fame by proxy). (Altruistic support is a foreign concept, and they often believe that "altruism" does not exist, OR that they are the only ones capable of it.)
They CAN'T STAND helping others, listening to others, being there for others. Their usual reaction to someone's sadness, pain, or anger is "Oh stop with the Poor Me" or "Get away from me" "Stop bothering me" "You're a loser" "All you have to do is..." "You need to get a thicker skin" "You are weak" "You deserved it".
Their exception to this is when they will receive "hero credit" for giving counsel or help, or if the person has something they want and that's the only way they'll get it, or if they are infatuated with the person and want their approval.
On the flip side of that, when a Narcissist feel sadness, pain, or anger, they feel entitled to all the sympathy in the world, regardless of how they have treated the person listening to them. No help is enough, once someone gives help to a Narcissist, they become a target of supply, and they will always "fall short" of the Narcissist's needs, no matter how much they give them. Just because a person gave help or sympathy to a Narcissist does not mean they will get any back, and in fact they will probably be treated worse than before.
They truly believe the world is a big hierarchy, and they are one of the "Top Echelon" of the humans.
They delete people as if they don't even exist.
They have no remorse or guilt for anything they do to others, and feel completely justified and entitled for anything and everything they do. Anything, and everything.
They honestly believe there are people who are "below" them, right in their own families.
If they're not judging a target for being "too lazy", they're judging that same target for being "too driven". They'll say they're "too soft", and then call the "too bitchy" in the next breath. The target is "too smart for his own good", and then "not too bright" in the next sentence. Narcissists do not use actual facts or reality when "assessing" other people.
Being considerate and caring for others is a HUGE BURDEN for them, and they become agitated, frustrated, annoyed, even enraged if someone they consider "below" them needs anything, expresses any emotion, or needs assistance or medical help.
No protest against anything they have done will go unpunished, whether that thing was huge or very small.
They do a thing called "baiting", where they will ask their target a fake question in order to get them to engage in an argument. "Are you okay" really means "I'm going to tell you that you're being a whiny baby as soon as you answer me." "What did I do wrong?" really means "I didn't do anything wrong to you! I am innocent and you are a bad, whiny bitch!" They have already made up their minds, the questions aren't real. They aren't seeking information.
They don't like whoever helps them, because that means they needed help. And if that person is supposed to be "below" them in their fantasy world, it destroys their fictional character script of that person being utterly useless, stupid, self-centered, and incapable. (Those "BELOW" them certainly wouldn't have anything the Narcissist would need).
They try constantly to convince their targets that they are, in fact, incapable, stupid, and useless. Some will actually say these things, and some will simply keep treating their target as if it was true. And they try very hard to convince anyone they can that their target is incapable, stupid, and useless as well, and a "bad person" to boot.
Targets often have to spend so much time, energy and resources dealing with the behavior, backlash, and consequences on their lives and emotional health that they can end up losing large parts of their regular lives that people normally take for granted.
Anxiety, Control, And Sanctuary
When we have Controllers in our lives, especially narcissists of varying degrees, we can forget what it's like to simply BE.
When we have another person who is watching our every move, seeking to catch any "mistake", creating drama in order to get what they want whether it's big or small, who refuse to be responsible for their own behavior, actions, and emotional health, who refuse to respect ou...r person, our resources, our possessions or our right to live in peace and freedom, who regularly invade our boundaries, make demands on us, and try to control us with shame and fear, we can forget what it's like NOT to have this in our lives.
We can end up living in constant anxiety that may at times lessen, but not actually go away. We are always on alert, always waiting for the other shoe to drop even if there was no first shoe.
Controllers can be individuals in our personal lives, and they can also be individuals at school or work. Sometimes the atmosphere of a given group is influenced by Controllers so much that it changes the general atmosphere, like that of a company, family, school, or community.
Controllers often seek to create a constant atmosphere of tension that their targets feel all the time. This is so they are literally always on edge, even slightly, and always have the controller somewhere in their mind regarding any decision they make. Every decision they make. The controller wants to be inserted in all thought processes of the target, wants to be the person the target is thinking about at all times, on a conscious or subconscious level. All roads lead to the controller, and consideration is a one way street. Sometimes the controller's motives might simply be fear of abandonment, but the lack of peace for the target still invades their life all the same.
This constant undercurrent of anxiety can change the target's entire mental and emotional life. It can bring high level mental processing and learning to a halt. School grades can go from high honors to below passing, learning can go from interesting and exciting to difficult drudgery. Work performance can change noticeably. It can cause memory problems, forgetfulness, especially when a person has to not only remember everything they would normally remember in order to function properly, but ALSO remember everything about what the controller wants them to do, and all the consequences the controller might extol if they make a misstep that the controller notices, or call attention to themselves.
(Controllers are triggered by happy moods, positive inspiration and forward progress, not just by mistakes and negative events. An accomplishment, or an attempt at a challenge, an idea for a project, or a job being well done triggers a Controller's behavior just as quickly as any perceived flaw. )
This undercurrent of anxiety can cause a kind of mental paralysis, like a "writer's block". The target learns that anything they do at all, anything they initiate at all, will call attention to themselves and will be met with some kind of Control behavior. So many targets just STOP doing the things they would do normally. One by one, they drop their normal activities until they may find themselves a "shell of the person they used to be". For example when they can't get a haircut or even style it in the morning without hearing condescending opinions or criticisms or how they "should have" done it, or even someone trying to "re-do" it or "fix" it every day, they may simply just STOP styling their hair altogether so it doesn't draw attention and trigger the Controller. If they used to like to paint, they may just STOP painting altogether in order to avoid someone messing up their work area, or wrecking the work itself, or having their things taken or stolen or moved. They may STOP painting so they don't have to listen to constant opinions and criticism about their work, or the fact that they do it at all, or "should be spending that time" doing other things (like catering to the Controller).
It can cause a person to avoid doing anything at all that would trigger a Controller to criticize, "fix" them, take over what they are trying to do, sabotage, insert themselves, dramatize, or create more anxiety. Anything at all, like washing their car, fixing the roof, planting flowers, getting new clothes or shoes, dressing in nice clothes, practicing music, practicing sports, auditioning for a play, exercising, cooking, taking classes, getting a job, going to church, going shopping, talking to other people. Anything at all that a target does can trigger a Controller just because it calls their attention, not because the thing is "wrong" or "bad", but amazingly, Controllers (especially narcissists) can try to turn anything into something "wrong" for some reason they will be sure to find, or make up.
Controllers are triggered by anything they notice their target doing. And anything the target initiates that does not involve catering to the Controller's immediate comfort or agenda is considered "not a good thing to do". Just like a very small child who is terribly upset when Mommy needs to do something else besides pay attention to them, the Controller sees anything their target does away from their reach of control as "bad". Even if the target was going out to save a child from a burning building, the Controller would somehow try to make the target feel shame for it. (A Narcissist would do that AND try to convince everyone else that the target deserved this shame.)
Finding sanctuary, a safe place in time and space where one can simply BE, and remember what that was like. Even if they only had brief times in their childhood when they felt safe just BEING, remembering what that feels like is where one can find their sanctuary. We need to have a real place in time and space where we can just BE, and remember who we are and what we feel like when we are completely free from worry and anxiety. A place where there are neutral people who have no agenda toward us, and who have no interest in judging or criticizing us. A place that is safe and where we can hear ourselves think, without being tracked down or pulled away. A place where we can feel God's presence, in peace.
A place to remember what the love of our own soul feels like.
When we have another person who is watching our every move, seeking to catch any "mistake", creating drama in order to get what they want whether it's big or small, who refuse to be responsible for their own behavior, actions, and emotional health, who refuse to respect ou...r person, our resources, our possessions or our right to live in peace and freedom, who regularly invade our boundaries, make demands on us, and try to control us with shame and fear, we can forget what it's like NOT to have this in our lives.
We can end up living in constant anxiety that may at times lessen, but not actually go away. We are always on alert, always waiting for the other shoe to drop even if there was no first shoe.
Controllers can be individuals in our personal lives, and they can also be individuals at school or work. Sometimes the atmosphere of a given group is influenced by Controllers so much that it changes the general atmosphere, like that of a company, family, school, or community.
Controllers often seek to create a constant atmosphere of tension that their targets feel all the time. This is so they are literally always on edge, even slightly, and always have the controller somewhere in their mind regarding any decision they make. Every decision they make. The controller wants to be inserted in all thought processes of the target, wants to be the person the target is thinking about at all times, on a conscious or subconscious level. All roads lead to the controller, and consideration is a one way street. Sometimes the controller's motives might simply be fear of abandonment, but the lack of peace for the target still invades their life all the same.
This constant undercurrent of anxiety can change the target's entire mental and emotional life. It can bring high level mental processing and learning to a halt. School grades can go from high honors to below passing, learning can go from interesting and exciting to difficult drudgery. Work performance can change noticeably. It can cause memory problems, forgetfulness, especially when a person has to not only remember everything they would normally remember in order to function properly, but ALSO remember everything about what the controller wants them to do, and all the consequences the controller might extol if they make a misstep that the controller notices, or call attention to themselves.
(Controllers are triggered by happy moods, positive inspiration and forward progress, not just by mistakes and negative events. An accomplishment, or an attempt at a challenge, an idea for a project, or a job being well done triggers a Controller's behavior just as quickly as any perceived flaw. )
This undercurrent of anxiety can cause a kind of mental paralysis, like a "writer's block". The target learns that anything they do at all, anything they initiate at all, will call attention to themselves and will be met with some kind of Control behavior. So many targets just STOP doing the things they would do normally. One by one, they drop their normal activities until they may find themselves a "shell of the person they used to be". For example when they can't get a haircut or even style it in the morning without hearing condescending opinions or criticisms or how they "should have" done it, or even someone trying to "re-do" it or "fix" it every day, they may simply just STOP styling their hair altogether so it doesn't draw attention and trigger the Controller. If they used to like to paint, they may just STOP painting altogether in order to avoid someone messing up their work area, or wrecking the work itself, or having their things taken or stolen or moved. They may STOP painting so they don't have to listen to constant opinions and criticism about their work, or the fact that they do it at all, or "should be spending that time" doing other things (like catering to the Controller).
It can cause a person to avoid doing anything at all that would trigger a Controller to criticize, "fix" them, take over what they are trying to do, sabotage, insert themselves, dramatize, or create more anxiety. Anything at all, like washing their car, fixing the roof, planting flowers, getting new clothes or shoes, dressing in nice clothes, practicing music, practicing sports, auditioning for a play, exercising, cooking, taking classes, getting a job, going to church, going shopping, talking to other people. Anything at all that a target does can trigger a Controller just because it calls their attention, not because the thing is "wrong" or "bad", but amazingly, Controllers (especially narcissists) can try to turn anything into something "wrong" for some reason they will be sure to find, or make up.
Controllers are triggered by anything they notice their target doing. And anything the target initiates that does not involve catering to the Controller's immediate comfort or agenda is considered "not a good thing to do". Just like a very small child who is terribly upset when Mommy needs to do something else besides pay attention to them, the Controller sees anything their target does away from their reach of control as "bad". Even if the target was going out to save a child from a burning building, the Controller would somehow try to make the target feel shame for it. (A Narcissist would do that AND try to convince everyone else that the target deserved this shame.)
Finding sanctuary, a safe place in time and space where one can simply BE, and remember what that was like. Even if they only had brief times in their childhood when they felt safe just BEING, remembering what that feels like is where one can find their sanctuary. We need to have a real place in time and space where we can just BE, and remember who we are and what we feel like when we are completely free from worry and anxiety. A place where there are neutral people who have no agenda toward us, and who have no interest in judging or criticizing us. A place that is safe and where we can hear ourselves think, without being tracked down or pulled away. A place where we can feel God's presence, in peace.
A place to remember what the love of our own soul feels like.
Who Do You Listen To? Mentors, Types, and Bias
One of the complaints many parents have is that their adolescent child will listen intently to everything their favorite teacher, coach, friend's parent, or celebrity says. But when the parent speaks, the child lets it in one ear and out the other, regardless of what the parent is actually saying. The child will rebel against the parent for saying or doing the exact same thing as what they praise their "wise" idol for.
A child in this stage of development who's father is John Lennon, the Dalai Lama, or Steven Hawking, and who's mother is Mother Theresa, Maya Angelou, or Mary of Bethlehem would STILL go through this stage of seeking someone outside of the family to "follow" and learn from, and temporarily reject and diminish their family members.
Unfortunately, some do not outgrow this stage of development. They become stuck in the land of teenage rebellion, still searching for identity with "wiser people" outside of their family of origin, and reject "wisdom" or knowledge coming from anyone close to them, even people they chose to become close to. (Unless they idolized that person already and did not reject them at some point in their youth.)
They tend to idolize certain "types" of people, generally the same types of people throughout their lives. They also tend to reject certain "types" of people, and categorize them into groups they consider inferior in some way. As a consequence, they will often blindly follow, believe, and support anyone who resembles their favored type, and blindly dismiss, reject, or oppose anything that is said by their unfavored type.
Those who are stuck in this stage can run into serious relationship problems, either platonic or romantic. When they see a New Person outside of their familiar group who they find engaging, wise, or interesting, they may desire to get to know them. If this New Person responds to friendly invitations or romantic overtures, the New Person will quickly become a Familiar Person after a short while. Since people who are seen as Wise are those who are "out in the larger world", and not close to the person, anyone who feels like family no longer qualifies as being "Wise" or "knowledgeable", and they will suddenly be expected to stop acting as if they are. They will no longer be admired, or even heard. They will often even be turned against, so the things they said and did that were "admired" before are now seen as annoying, burdensome, or self-centered. The New Person will be accused of "changing", especially if they object to being treated with unexpected rejection or disrespect. This devaluing happens more quickly when the New Person is seen subconsciously as a "type".
Those who are stuck in this rebellion/identity stage usually identify their favored "type" of person, those whom they will listen to, believe, and follow, during childhood. They may subconsciously decide what "type" of person they will reject in that same period, or they may develop that in time based on social pressure from peers, or from the way adults around them behave.
Quick and obvious examples that are easy to figure out:
Little Samantha's basketball coach is a tall brunette woman who carries herself with high confidence and a brusque demeanor. The coach likes Samantha, so she treats her well. Samantha's natural rebellion/identity seeking stage leads her to seek a mentor, and this coach happens to be there. The coach is no Philosophy Guru, she's not even that nice, actually, but since she included Samantha in her "favorite players" and initiated a more personal relationship with her, Samantha is glad to follow her around, emulate her, and listen to her words and advice. Samantha has placed her coach as a "Wise Person To Follow".
Another adult in Samantha's life is her Uncle Larry. He does not play sports, he smokes cigars, his hair is thin and grey, and he's not tall. Uncle Larry is a very nice person, very intelligent, actually quite wise, and has had many wonderful and interesting life experiences (including being a high school basketball MVP). Samantha only knows him as Uncle Larry who is always nice but doesn't play basketball, and isn't very tall, and doesn't seem that strong or fit. Uncle Larry does not brag about his life or himself, and Samantha's family treats him with a certain amount of disrespect, "That Larry with the cigar". In reality, Larry has been there to help Samantha's father on several occasions, and is always there for others to lean on.
Compared to her coach, Uncle Larry is actually wiser, more experienced, and more helpful and generous, but because of a few simple factors, Samantha has chosen her coach as a "Mentor", and sees Uncle Larry as just her old silly uncle with the cigar who's just always there, whether she treats him well or not. In addition, Samantha sees her coach being TREATED by lots of other kids with a great deal of respect, so she believes the coach deserves that amount of respect, and she wants to be associated with her. What she sees with her uncle is people (mostly her family) treating him with a subtle lack of respect; certainly no fanfare, no high-fives in the hallway, no stories about his adventures, no articles about him in the daily newspaper. Samantha sees her coach as superior, and her uncle as not so much. Since she is a child in a natural stage of rebellion and identity seeking, she does not have all the facts about either her coach or her uncle, and even if she did, she may not be able to process them intellectually. She is trying to build her own identity in the World, and she is going by what she experiences and what she sees around her.
If there is no one to teach her or show her that there is much more to other people than what she can see on a very superficial level, if no one teaches her not to just believe anyone who resembles her coach, and not to dismiss those who resemble her uncle, she may have some rude and unnecessary wake-up calls later in life, and even suffer real consequences. She may also miss valuable experiences, relationships and connections.
If Samantha becomes stuck in this rebellion/identity stage, she will probably KEEP her image of her coach as a "Type" of "Who To Automatically Respect and Trust", and her image of her uncle as a "Type" of "Who To Automatically Dismiss". She may have others as well, but these will remain prominent, unless she matures past this stage.
Also, if Samantha's coach became personally unkind toward Samantha after she had chosen her as a Mentor type, (after she had decided to trust her), Samantha might decide that people who look and act like her coach are Not Trustworthy. This can be another "type" that Samantha files in her subconscious for future reference.
Physical traits, appearance, speech patterns, gender, height, weight, clothing, dialect, even hair color and style can factor into a person's "Type" of who to listen to and who to dismiss.
This can be seen quite often with children who subconsciously choose a mentor who is a coach, a teacher, a musician, a political or religious leader, or a sports star, whether they are in a personal relationship with the person or not. The gender of the mentor is often the first and foremost physical trait that a child can imprint with, even if the child is not the same gender.The opposite sex is often categorically dismissed as less capable and knowledgeable, or less interesting. Another commonly imprinted trait is height, and yet another is race. These are prominent physical traits that are quite unrelated to intelligence or capability, but because children are not yet sophisticated enough to dismiss these traits as irrelevant, they file them as legitimate and real ways to discern things about others like intellect, experience, and potential. It can be compared to using cartoon characters as templates for judging others.
Those who do mature past this stage see others as fully unique individuals, but those who do not may always believe their own assumptions about others, even when their assumptions are proven unreliable over and over again.
(For example, a surprisingly large number of women, even women who are vocal proponents of equal rights, will listen respectfully and intently to a man speaking about most things, while ignoring, dismissing, or arguing when a woman speaks. Watch who most people listen to when someone asks for directions at a gas station; if there is a woman giving the directions, 9 times out of 10 a random man will either talk right over her, or wait until she's finished and then give his directions, even if they are exactly the same directions as she has just given. Further~ 9 times out of 10, the asker, even if female, will listen to the man, and disregard the woman. This is not about reality, there is no way for the asker to know who has the "correct" directions. It is an example of subconscious following of one TYPE of person, and dismissing another TYPE of person.)
A simple way to begin the process of growth past this stage is to be aware of our own biases.
Does it annoy me when my close friend talks about "personal growth", but when I hear someone on TV or the radio talk about the same subject, I listen and pay attention?
What am I assuming about people I know, or people I've never met?
Who do I listen to when more than one person is talking?
Who do I talk over, argue with, or interrupt?
Who am I excited to talk with, even slightly, and who am I bored with talking to?
Who do I want to like me, and who do I not really care whether they like me or not?
Who do I assume would know the answer to my questions, and who do I assume is less intelligent, or won't know the answer?
When I am annoyed at someone I don't even know, what is the real reason for my annoyance?
Did they even really do anything severe enough to deserve it, and would I feel the same way if someone I liked said or did the same thing?
A child in this stage of development who's father is John Lennon, the Dalai Lama, or Steven Hawking, and who's mother is Mother Theresa, Maya Angelou, or Mary of Bethlehem would STILL go through this stage of seeking someone outside of the family to "follow" and learn from, and temporarily reject and diminish their family members.
Unfortunately, some do not outgrow this stage of development. They become stuck in the land of teenage rebellion, still searching for identity with "wiser people" outside of their family of origin, and reject "wisdom" or knowledge coming from anyone close to them, even people they chose to become close to. (Unless they idolized that person already and did not reject them at some point in their youth.)
They tend to idolize certain "types" of people, generally the same types of people throughout their lives. They also tend to reject certain "types" of people, and categorize them into groups they consider inferior in some way. As a consequence, they will often blindly follow, believe, and support anyone who resembles their favored type, and blindly dismiss, reject, or oppose anything that is said by their unfavored type.
Those who are stuck in this stage can run into serious relationship problems, either platonic or romantic. When they see a New Person outside of their familiar group who they find engaging, wise, or interesting, they may desire to get to know them. If this New Person responds to friendly invitations or romantic overtures, the New Person will quickly become a Familiar Person after a short while. Since people who are seen as Wise are those who are "out in the larger world", and not close to the person, anyone who feels like family no longer qualifies as being "Wise" or "knowledgeable", and they will suddenly be expected to stop acting as if they are. They will no longer be admired, or even heard. They will often even be turned against, so the things they said and did that were "admired" before are now seen as annoying, burdensome, or self-centered. The New Person will be accused of "changing", especially if they object to being treated with unexpected rejection or disrespect. This devaluing happens more quickly when the New Person is seen subconsciously as a "type".
Those who are stuck in this rebellion/identity stage usually identify their favored "type" of person, those whom they will listen to, believe, and follow, during childhood. They may subconsciously decide what "type" of person they will reject in that same period, or they may develop that in time based on social pressure from peers, or from the way adults around them behave.
Quick and obvious examples that are easy to figure out:
Little Samantha's basketball coach is a tall brunette woman who carries herself with high confidence and a brusque demeanor. The coach likes Samantha, so she treats her well. Samantha's natural rebellion/identity seeking stage leads her to seek a mentor, and this coach happens to be there. The coach is no Philosophy Guru, she's not even that nice, actually, but since she included Samantha in her "favorite players" and initiated a more personal relationship with her, Samantha is glad to follow her around, emulate her, and listen to her words and advice. Samantha has placed her coach as a "Wise Person To Follow".
Another adult in Samantha's life is her Uncle Larry. He does not play sports, he smokes cigars, his hair is thin and grey, and he's not tall. Uncle Larry is a very nice person, very intelligent, actually quite wise, and has had many wonderful and interesting life experiences (including being a high school basketball MVP). Samantha only knows him as Uncle Larry who is always nice but doesn't play basketball, and isn't very tall, and doesn't seem that strong or fit. Uncle Larry does not brag about his life or himself, and Samantha's family treats him with a certain amount of disrespect, "That Larry with the cigar". In reality, Larry has been there to help Samantha's father on several occasions, and is always there for others to lean on.
Compared to her coach, Uncle Larry is actually wiser, more experienced, and more helpful and generous, but because of a few simple factors, Samantha has chosen her coach as a "Mentor", and sees Uncle Larry as just her old silly uncle with the cigar who's just always there, whether she treats him well or not. In addition, Samantha sees her coach being TREATED by lots of other kids with a great deal of respect, so she believes the coach deserves that amount of respect, and she wants to be associated with her. What she sees with her uncle is people (mostly her family) treating him with a subtle lack of respect; certainly no fanfare, no high-fives in the hallway, no stories about his adventures, no articles about him in the daily newspaper. Samantha sees her coach as superior, and her uncle as not so much. Since she is a child in a natural stage of rebellion and identity seeking, she does not have all the facts about either her coach or her uncle, and even if she did, she may not be able to process them intellectually. She is trying to build her own identity in the World, and she is going by what she experiences and what she sees around her.
If there is no one to teach her or show her that there is much more to other people than what she can see on a very superficial level, if no one teaches her not to just believe anyone who resembles her coach, and not to dismiss those who resemble her uncle, she may have some rude and unnecessary wake-up calls later in life, and even suffer real consequences. She may also miss valuable experiences, relationships and connections.
If Samantha becomes stuck in this rebellion/identity stage, she will probably KEEP her image of her coach as a "Type" of "Who To Automatically Respect and Trust", and her image of her uncle as a "Type" of "Who To Automatically Dismiss". She may have others as well, but these will remain prominent, unless she matures past this stage.
Also, if Samantha's coach became personally unkind toward Samantha after she had chosen her as a Mentor type, (after she had decided to trust her), Samantha might decide that people who look and act like her coach are Not Trustworthy. This can be another "type" that Samantha files in her subconscious for future reference.
Physical traits, appearance, speech patterns, gender, height, weight, clothing, dialect, even hair color and style can factor into a person's "Type" of who to listen to and who to dismiss.
This can be seen quite often with children who subconsciously choose a mentor who is a coach, a teacher, a musician, a political or religious leader, or a sports star, whether they are in a personal relationship with the person or not. The gender of the mentor is often the first and foremost physical trait that a child can imprint with, even if the child is not the same gender.The opposite sex is often categorically dismissed as less capable and knowledgeable, or less interesting. Another commonly imprinted trait is height, and yet another is race. These are prominent physical traits that are quite unrelated to intelligence or capability, but because children are not yet sophisticated enough to dismiss these traits as irrelevant, they file them as legitimate and real ways to discern things about others like intellect, experience, and potential. It can be compared to using cartoon characters as templates for judging others.
Those who do mature past this stage see others as fully unique individuals, but those who do not may always believe their own assumptions about others, even when their assumptions are proven unreliable over and over again.
(For example, a surprisingly large number of women, even women who are vocal proponents of equal rights, will listen respectfully and intently to a man speaking about most things, while ignoring, dismissing, or arguing when a woman speaks. Watch who most people listen to when someone asks for directions at a gas station; if there is a woman giving the directions, 9 times out of 10 a random man will either talk right over her, or wait until she's finished and then give his directions, even if they are exactly the same directions as she has just given. Further~ 9 times out of 10, the asker, even if female, will listen to the man, and disregard the woman. This is not about reality, there is no way for the asker to know who has the "correct" directions. It is an example of subconscious following of one TYPE of person, and dismissing another TYPE of person.)
A simple way to begin the process of growth past this stage is to be aware of our own biases.
Does it annoy me when my close friend talks about "personal growth", but when I hear someone on TV or the radio talk about the same subject, I listen and pay attention?
What am I assuming about people I know, or people I've never met?
Who do I listen to when more than one person is talking?
Who do I talk over, argue with, or interrupt?
Who am I excited to talk with, even slightly, and who am I bored with talking to?
Who do I want to like me, and who do I not really care whether they like me or not?
Who do I assume would know the answer to my questions, and who do I assume is less intelligent, or won't know the answer?
When I am annoyed at someone I don't even know, what is the real reason for my annoyance?
Did they even really do anything severe enough to deserve it, and would I feel the same way if someone I liked said or did the same thing?
Flow
 |
True generosity and philanthropy. Sharing talents with the world, and hoping they'll be received gracefully. Trusting in the prosperity of the universe. |
Bad People and Good People, Black and White Thinking
When we have "black and white thinking", we
can know someone who is consistently kind, a good friend, even who is
generous and giving, but the moment we have conflict with them, we see
them as "Bad". Even if they were not the initiator of the conflict or
actually did anything terrible; even if we were the ones who turned a
small friction into a large conflict, our "black and white thinking"
will turn that "Good" person into a "Bad" person, with really very little provocation.
Swinging from seeing another person as "Good" or "Bad" is a symptom of more than one disorder, and can also be a result of abuse.
The moment the other person seems more powerful than us, or if we envy them or feel jealous, we can do this as well. To a "black and white thinker", other people are either doing what pleases us, and therefore they are "Good", or they are not doing what pleases us, and therefore they are "Bad". Memory of the person's character does not factor in, nor does memory of the entire history of the person's behavior or actions. This type of thinking will simply delete any memories that don't confirm the EMOTIONAL reaction and judgment of "Good" or "Bad".
For example, a person who has been a great friend, who has stuck by us in times of trouble or tragedy, who has shown support time and time again, will be seen suddenly as a "Bad" person the moment a conflict erupts, regardless of what the conflict is about, or how small. This person may have weathered many storms caused by the black and white thinker, but all of these are simply forgotten and dismissed the moment the black and white thinker feels upset with this person. The actual facts of the conflict are often not factored in either, for example the black and white thinker may have said something to hurt the other, and the other is simply reacting with normal objection and emotion. Or the black and white thinker may even feel angry because the other is dealing with something very painful or difficult, and therefore can not be fully available. Black and white thinkers often feel accused when another is asking for information, or asking direct questions that others would not find offensive, and this may trigger them to turn on the asker.
Whatever the circumstances, black and white thinkers do not factor in real history, only bits and pieces that back up their judgment of "Good" or "Bad". Everything else is pushed aside. They do not maintain an overall respect and good will for the other person either, so any conflict changes their entire assessment of the other person. One minute the other person is "Good", acceptable, even wonderful, and the next the other person is "Bad", and unacceptable. When a person is suddenly assessed as "Bad", all evidence to the contrary is ignored and dismissed. The black and white thinker believes their own emotional reactions as objective fact, and has no interest in reviewing or rechecking their real history or evidence. (In other words, there is no way to show them anything that would help them see a larger picture, they will just shut the conversation down. They are only interested in trying to prove that the person is indeed "Bad", or "Good".)
This black and white thinking can be clearly seen in cults and politics, when people will rationalize a cult leader as "All Good And Wonderful" regardless of what he or she is really doing, or a political leader as "Good And Benevolent" or even a "savior"; no matter what this political leader does, his followers will continue to "believe in him", and simply argue with anyone who does not agree, or who talks about anything he has done wrong. These followers will also assess his political opposition as "All Bad", and often try to degrade anything they say or do.
In friendships, family, relationships, and business, schools, and communities, this kind of black and white thinking can be very destructive, and can cause real damage in people's lives. (Becoming aware of our own tendency to think in black and white is the way to thwarting it. We can learn to think more objectively, and be not so willing to put others on pedestals, or throw them under a bus.)
Swinging from seeing another person as "Good" or "Bad" is a symptom of more than one disorder, and can also be a result of abuse.
The moment the other person seems more powerful than us, or if we envy them or feel jealous, we can do this as well. To a "black and white thinker", other people are either doing what pleases us, and therefore they are "Good", or they are not doing what pleases us, and therefore they are "Bad". Memory of the person's character does not factor in, nor does memory of the entire history of the person's behavior or actions. This type of thinking will simply delete any memories that don't confirm the EMOTIONAL reaction and judgment of "Good" or "Bad".
For example, a person who has been a great friend, who has stuck by us in times of trouble or tragedy, who has shown support time and time again, will be seen suddenly as a "Bad" person the moment a conflict erupts, regardless of what the conflict is about, or how small. This person may have weathered many storms caused by the black and white thinker, but all of these are simply forgotten and dismissed the moment the black and white thinker feels upset with this person. The actual facts of the conflict are often not factored in either, for example the black and white thinker may have said something to hurt the other, and the other is simply reacting with normal objection and emotion. Or the black and white thinker may even feel angry because the other is dealing with something very painful or difficult, and therefore can not be fully available. Black and white thinkers often feel accused when another is asking for information, or asking direct questions that others would not find offensive, and this may trigger them to turn on the asker.
Whatever the circumstances, black and white thinkers do not factor in real history, only bits and pieces that back up their judgment of "Good" or "Bad". Everything else is pushed aside. They do not maintain an overall respect and good will for the other person either, so any conflict changes their entire assessment of the other person. One minute the other person is "Good", acceptable, even wonderful, and the next the other person is "Bad", and unacceptable. When a person is suddenly assessed as "Bad", all evidence to the contrary is ignored and dismissed. The black and white thinker believes their own emotional reactions as objective fact, and has no interest in reviewing or rechecking their real history or evidence. (In other words, there is no way to show them anything that would help them see a larger picture, they will just shut the conversation down. They are only interested in trying to prove that the person is indeed "Bad", or "Good".)
This black and white thinking can be clearly seen in cults and politics, when people will rationalize a cult leader as "All Good And Wonderful" regardless of what he or she is really doing, or a political leader as "Good And Benevolent" or even a "savior"; no matter what this political leader does, his followers will continue to "believe in him", and simply argue with anyone who does not agree, or who talks about anything he has done wrong. These followers will also assess his political opposition as "All Bad", and often try to degrade anything they say or do.
In friendships, family, relationships, and business, schools, and communities, this kind of black and white thinking can be very destructive, and can cause real damage in people's lives. (Becoming aware of our own tendency to think in black and white is the way to thwarting it. We can learn to think more objectively, and be not so willing to put others on pedestals, or throw them under a bus.)
Clique Makers: Part 1
The difference between Cliques and Friendship Groups is control. One is based on control, and the other has no interest in control.
When people are in a group or a class because of a common interest, they are all there for the same reason, and should all be equally welcome, and equally welcome to participate fully. Narcissists however, often bring the drama.
Exclusion, not Inclusion, is the main function of a Clique.
A person does not have to be full-blown NPD to make cliques, just enough narcissism to find joy in creating a subgroup within the group where they get to be the Leader, and include or exclude people based on their Judgment... usually, really, based on how much the Clique-Leader(s) believes a person will follow their agenda of exclusion. The willingness to exclude and demean others is the main requirement.
"We" are above "Them" is the Clique mantra.
Clique-makers bring drama into a situation by creating a "hierarchy". They will try to turn any place where there are humans into a social soup of "In Crowd" and "Out Crowd". Of course if the actual leader of the group is a Clique-maker (like a professor, coach, or manager) the drama is through the roof. However that does not need to be the case, Cliques are made all the time within larger groups, often hidden from the real leader of the group.
A person who is fair-minded, kind-hearted, with strong boundaries and original thought will usually not be included in a Clique. When they are, they will only be included until they make noises of disagreement, stand up for someone who is being treated unfairly, or until they "outshine" the Clique-Leader(s) in some way. Then they will be rejected forthwith, even shunned.
When there is a Clique happening, whoever does not fit the parameters of the Clique will be excluded purposely, and treated as if they are not worthy of common courtesy and respect. Obvious examples of this behavior can be found all over modern culture, and can be found in stories throughout recorded history. Large and small scale Cliques have caused terrible problems for humans throughout the ages.
Cliques are different than friend-groups. A subgroup of natural friends who happens to be in the larger group does not exclude people, judge people as "less worthy" than they are, or make it known that certain people are Not Liked.
Natural friends voluntary come together on their own, there is no Leader (or co-Leader) who gets to decide who "WE" don't like, or orchestrate what everyone else does all the time, or who's opinions and ideas are automatically held above everyone else's.
While Cliques enjoy rejecting anyone who doesn't conform, natural friend groups don't even notice how others are dressing, talking, or acting. They only take notice if a person has done something to hurt someone.
Rejection, ostracism, or shunning of a member of a healthy group is rare, and only occurs if someone did something terrible that caused someone personal injury and damage. Things such as physical attacks, slander, adultery, child endangerment, verbal attacks, fraud, and theft. And even then, rejection does not necessarily occur if the person shows remorse and makes amends; if the damage is recognized, faced, and repaired.
In contrast, a Clique does not necessarily reject people no matter how heinous a crime they commit. Since the Clique membership is not based on anything except "In Crowd", play-hierarchy and the egos of the Leader(s), members do not get rejected as long as they meet those three requirements. A member would not be rejected solely for defrauding or attacking a fellow member. If, however, the victim stands up for themselves against the perpetrator, it is HE or SHE who will be rejected. The victim, not the perpetrator.
The exception to this is when the victim is either a "Leader" or a "Leader's Pet", then there will be great Ego Injury (narcissistic injury) and the perpetrator may be rejected. But it is not for the CRIME ITSELF, it is because of the Ego Injury. (If the very next day, someone perpetrated the exact same crime on a "lesser" member of the Clique, the whole thing would be downplayed, ignored.)
Natural friend groups have no parameters except obvious courtesy and respectful behavior; different personalities and points of view add richness to the group. New members are welcome, and jealousy does not dictate who is let in. A very accomplished man with "movie star looks" would be just as welcome as anyone, and a very intelligent, well-spoken woman with "movie star looks" would just as welcome as any man. A "nerdy" woman or man, a shy woman or man, a young, old, skinny, heavy, short, tall, any-race, any background woman or man is equally welcome as anyone else.
Cliques however actually enjoy rejecting people based on whatever "parameters" they make up, which can change based on someone's insecurities. The goal is sameness, not diversity, and anyone who disagrees, has an original point of view, who does not follow the social signals and dress, talk, or act within the very limited "approval" is not welcome. Anyone who the Clique members feel "out-shined" by in any way, or anyone who the Clique Leader(s) feel they won't be able to control will not be let in, and will possibly be driven out of the original larger group altogether.
On a rather large spectrum, Cliques range from kindergarten children leaving classmates out who don't have brown hair all the way to national and global political agendas. Cults are more intense versions of Cliques, but the basic parameters remain.
Who joins Cliques? Nearly all of us have been involved in Clique behavior at some point in our lives, maybe several times. Sometimes we're aware of it, sometimes we're not. We are usually more aware of being on the EXCLUSION end of Clique behavior than being on the INCLUSION side of it. When we are being included, we may not realize that people are being treated with contempt and disrespect by our fellow group members, and so we don't realize our group is really a Clique. But when we are being treated as if we don't belong, as if we are less worthy, as if we don't have a right to speak our minds, as if we don't have a right to participate, as if we are incapable and less than equal, then we can discern that there is indeed a Clique going on. Especially when those who we thought were our friends make no move to stand up for us, or act as if they don't even notice the behavior, as if we deserve to be treated as a lesser person (because to them, we are).
But when we are INCLUDED in a Clique, we may not think much about the way our partner is being spoken down to, or excluded. We may feel powerful when our brother or sister is being treated with disrespect by our "friend" who seems to hold us in high esteem. We may feel like we've "arrived" when WE are being spoken to as an equal by another person, but the person we are standing next to is being left out or condescended to. We may get a thrill of recognition when someone praises our opinions or Facebook post, and let that blind us to the way that person opposes or shoots down everything someone else says or posts.
Clique-Makers play to our innate human need for acceptance, approval, and recognition. We fall for it because we are human. But when we realize that we have been recruited into a Clique, we become Co-Clique-Makers if we go along with their agenda of excluding, disrespecting, and demeaning others.
When people are in a group or a class because of a common interest, they are all there for the same reason, and should all be equally welcome, and equally welcome to participate fully. Narcissists however, often bring the drama.
Exclusion, not Inclusion, is the main function of a Clique.
A person does not have to be full-blown NPD to make cliques, just enough narcissism to find joy in creating a subgroup within the group where they get to be the Leader, and include or exclude people based on their Judgment... usually, really, based on how much the Clique-Leader(s) believes a person will follow their agenda of exclusion. The willingness to exclude and demean others is the main requirement.
"We" are above "Them" is the Clique mantra.
Clique-makers bring drama into a situation by creating a "hierarchy". They will try to turn any place where there are humans into a social soup of "In Crowd" and "Out Crowd". Of course if the actual leader of the group is a Clique-maker (like a professor, coach, or manager) the drama is through the roof. However that does not need to be the case, Cliques are made all the time within larger groups, often hidden from the real leader of the group.
A person who is fair-minded, kind-hearted, with strong boundaries and original thought will usually not be included in a Clique. When they are, they will only be included until they make noises of disagreement, stand up for someone who is being treated unfairly, or until they "outshine" the Clique-Leader(s) in some way. Then they will be rejected forthwith, even shunned.
When there is a Clique happening, whoever does not fit the parameters of the Clique will be excluded purposely, and treated as if they are not worthy of common courtesy and respect. Obvious examples of this behavior can be found all over modern culture, and can be found in stories throughout recorded history. Large and small scale Cliques have caused terrible problems for humans throughout the ages.
Cliques are different than friend-groups. A subgroup of natural friends who happens to be in the larger group does not exclude people, judge people as "less worthy" than they are, or make it known that certain people are Not Liked.
Natural friends voluntary come together on their own, there is no Leader (or co-Leader) who gets to decide who "WE" don't like, or orchestrate what everyone else does all the time, or who's opinions and ideas are automatically held above everyone else's.
While Cliques enjoy rejecting anyone who doesn't conform, natural friend groups don't even notice how others are dressing, talking, or acting. They only take notice if a person has done something to hurt someone.
Rejection, ostracism, or shunning of a member of a healthy group is rare, and only occurs if someone did something terrible that caused someone personal injury and damage. Things such as physical attacks, slander, adultery, child endangerment, verbal attacks, fraud, and theft. And even then, rejection does not necessarily occur if the person shows remorse and makes amends; if the damage is recognized, faced, and repaired.
In contrast, a Clique does not necessarily reject people no matter how heinous a crime they commit. Since the Clique membership is not based on anything except "In Crowd", play-hierarchy and the egos of the Leader(s), members do not get rejected as long as they meet those three requirements. A member would not be rejected solely for defrauding or attacking a fellow member. If, however, the victim stands up for themselves against the perpetrator, it is HE or SHE who will be rejected. The victim, not the perpetrator.
The exception to this is when the victim is either a "Leader" or a "Leader's Pet", then there will be great Ego Injury (narcissistic injury) and the perpetrator may be rejected. But it is not for the CRIME ITSELF, it is because of the Ego Injury. (If the very next day, someone perpetrated the exact same crime on a "lesser" member of the Clique, the whole thing would be downplayed, ignored.)
Natural friend groups have no parameters except obvious courtesy and respectful behavior; different personalities and points of view add richness to the group. New members are welcome, and jealousy does not dictate who is let in. A very accomplished man with "movie star looks" would be just as welcome as anyone, and a very intelligent, well-spoken woman with "movie star looks" would just as welcome as any man. A "nerdy" woman or man, a shy woman or man, a young, old, skinny, heavy, short, tall, any-race, any background woman or man is equally welcome as anyone else.
Cliques however actually enjoy rejecting people based on whatever "parameters" they make up, which can change based on someone's insecurities. The goal is sameness, not diversity, and anyone who disagrees, has an original point of view, who does not follow the social signals and dress, talk, or act within the very limited "approval" is not welcome. Anyone who the Clique members feel "out-shined" by in any way, or anyone who the Clique Leader(s) feel they won't be able to control will not be let in, and will possibly be driven out of the original larger group altogether.
On a rather large spectrum, Cliques range from kindergarten children leaving classmates out who don't have brown hair all the way to national and global political agendas. Cults are more intense versions of Cliques, but the basic parameters remain.
Who joins Cliques? Nearly all of us have been involved in Clique behavior at some point in our lives, maybe several times. Sometimes we're aware of it, sometimes we're not. We are usually more aware of being on the EXCLUSION end of Clique behavior than being on the INCLUSION side of it. When we are being included, we may not realize that people are being treated with contempt and disrespect by our fellow group members, and so we don't realize our group is really a Clique. But when we are being treated as if we don't belong, as if we are less worthy, as if we don't have a right to speak our minds, as if we don't have a right to participate, as if we are incapable and less than equal, then we can discern that there is indeed a Clique going on. Especially when those who we thought were our friends make no move to stand up for us, or act as if they don't even notice the behavior, as if we deserve to be treated as a lesser person (because to them, we are).
But when we are INCLUDED in a Clique, we may not think much about the way our partner is being spoken down to, or excluded. We may feel powerful when our brother or sister is being treated with disrespect by our "friend" who seems to hold us in high esteem. We may feel like we've "arrived" when WE are being spoken to as an equal by another person, but the person we are standing next to is being left out or condescended to. We may get a thrill of recognition when someone praises our opinions or Facebook post, and let that blind us to the way that person opposes or shoots down everything someone else says or posts.
Clique-Makers play to our innate human need for acceptance, approval, and recognition. We fall for it because we are human. But when we realize that we have been recruited into a Clique, we become Co-Clique-Makers if we go along with their agenda of excluding, disrespecting, and demeaning others.
Spiders And Snakes And Triggers, Oh My
When someone sees a spider or snake, or perhaps a hornet or a centipede, they may instantly react with obvious fear or panic. It shows, you can see it happen, and they often don't try to hide their reaction. It happens so quickly that they may not be able to hide their reaction, even if they tried. They'll let out at least a muffled squeal or scream, or jump back, or run away. The spider or snake is associated as a trigger for fear in the person's brain, the region called the amygdala. It's one of the brain's ways of keeping us safe from harm, a kind of automatic function.
All of us humans have triggers that are very subtle, that we ourselves are unaware of. Some of those triggers cause feelings of anxiety, excitement, anger, comfort, joy, resentment, envy, jealousy, trust, or distrust. Things we see and hear, things we smell, things we touch can be triggers. Like the feeling of comfort when we step into a warm and bright kitchen, or smell baked bread. Our mind instantly feels comfort and warmth just from the smell of baked bread, or coffee, or maybe stew, or pie. Many of us feel warmer or even safer when we see a hearth fire or a woodstove, even if there is very little heat.
Most of us have triggers that cause more intense emotions such as panic, like when we see a snake or a spider, or some other possible threat. And some of us have triggers that cause us to feel rage or defensiveness, even hatred.
Triggers are not the same as straightforward emotional reactions to things. They are faster, instant, "knee-jerk". It can be the look in a person's eyes, or the shape of their eyes, that can be someone's trigger for trust, OR for distrust. The sound of someone's voice, their dialect or accent, their intonations, all can be triggers for us to trust them or to distrust them. Even someone's broad smile that is beautiful and sincere can be a trigger for some people to feel a great degree of trust and even caring, but it can also be a trigger for some to feel an extreme reaction of distrust, even anger. Both reactions have no thought process behind them, there is no actual assessment if the person smiling is actually trustworthy or not. Triggers are not about thought process, they are reactions.
When we have triggers we are not aware of, we may project the feelings the trigger produces onto the object, animal, or person. "Snakes are scary" "Spiders are dangerous" are really expressions of our feelings about them, not facts about them. Snakes are only scary to individuals who are afraid of them, and only about 11% of snake species are venomous. Spiders are only dangerous if the spider is venomous to humans, we are within biting range, and they choose to bite us. The vast majority of spiders are non-lethal to humans, and most are much more concerned about hiding and getting killed than almost any human. The survival chance of a venomous spider in the US is approximately 99%. The most recent stats of deaths by spider in the US is 5.
It would be accurate to say "I am afraid of snakes", or "I am afraid of spiders", rather than "snakes and spiders are dangerous". Statistically, humans cause about 3000 times more fatalities (homicides) than both snakes and spiders annually. Dogs cause about 10 times more than both snakes and spiders.
A lot of people share common triggers, sometimes, often, developed in childhood. Most people will admit to the baking bread aroma that makes us feel warm and happy inside. But there are all kinds of subtle things that our brain associates with a memory of a feeling, and so when we see, hear, smell, or feel something, we feel that again.
For me, Sunday mornings in the Spring, when the sun is out but it's not very warm or bright, make me feel bleak, even depressed if I don't recognize the trigger. When I was 8 years old, we woke up on Father's Day to find my Daddy passed away, he had had a heart attack during the night. So even decades later, on Sunday mornings when the sunlight and the air match that morning, I feel unnerved, sad, out of sorts, even dark. If I catch what's going on, I can actively do something to change my mood.
I know a young girl who is afraid of dogs, but terrified of German Shepherds, or dogs that look like German Shepherds. She is not silly or wimpy. She had an encounter with someone's pet German Shepherd that was terrifying for her, and it left the imprint in her subconscious. Now, when her eye sees a "German Shepherd", her brain signals "Danger!" Just like anyone who's afraid of bees and hornets and spiders.
There is a man I know, an lifelong fisherman, who is very much afraid of rapids when he is in a boat. Any rapids, any boat. Even water that resembles rapids because it is flowing over rocks in a shallow area of a lake. In his youth when he was fishing with a friend, they became caught in a dangerous part of a river, they were very much afraid for their lives. Ever since, he instantly becomes anxious when there is any resemblance to "white water".
Two people I have spoken to personally, a man and a woman, are triggered by blond haired, blue or green-eyed women. They both are well-spoken, functioning adults. Both become anxious or defensive, even angry, when they are in the presence of a woman who fits this description, especially if she smiles broadly or laughs out loud. The woman also becomes anxious around brunette women of a certain body type, and seems to see them as hostile or having an agenda, even if she has just met her. The man has a list of blond actors and musicians he "can't stand", none of whom he has ever met. Both of them have reported actually being abusive to others who match the description, the man even to the point of physical attack "because of the look on her face".
Common factors include: Both of these people have older female relatives who match these physical traits and have "happy normal family lives".
Also, both of these people have divorced parents, but more importantly both of them reported feeling neglected or abandoned by one or both parents. One of them also had a stepparent who fit the physical description, who was reportedly cold and cruel to them. Their common trigger is based solely on physical appearance and facial expressions, NOT on the behavior, speech, or personality of a person. Their trigger apparently tells them "This person is uncaring" or perhaps "This person is mean" or "This person will hurt you", regardless of the person's actual intentions, history, or character. Whatever the specific message is, the feelings invoked by their common trigger seem to be a combination of resentment, anger, fear, jealousy, and possibly envy. (Obviously they are both aware of their common triggers and are working to defuse them, since they cause them each problems in their personal and professional lives. One of them has a blond daughter to boot. Also I am blond, so without their self-awareness they probably would not have shared their experiences with me.)
I worked with a client once who was triggered terribly by anyone on the street who looked directly at him, or if two people had their heads together talking. In school, he was bullied terribly by the other classmates on a regular basis, for years, and he developed an imprint of the memories that is so strong it is nearly impossible to talk him down from an anxiety attack, or anger. Like people who believe that every spider is venomous absolutely, he believes every close conversation nearby is about him. He believes his feelings are caused by reality, not by a trigger implanted in his past.
I enjoy my "positive" triggers. The feeling of joy when I hear or see a child, of happiness when I see or touch an animal, of serenity when I am next to, on, or in water. I see my child-hands when I smell or touch clean dirt, and I hear my father's voice when I see, read, or watch anything by Tolkien. The feeling of elation when I see my son or hear his voice, of warmth when I hear my mother's. These are good, as far as I can tell. As long as I don't believe all children are the same, or all animals are human-friendly, or all water is pure or safe. As long as I know the feelings are my own, and do not think they are coming FROM the person, animal, or thing I am hearing, seeing, feeling, or smelling.
My "negative" triggers I work on as much as my awareness allows. I have some friends and associates who don't shy away from the subject, and freely share and compare their own. When I discover a new one, I take note and focus on defusing it. Being a human with a working amygdala, I will always be discovering old triggers, and creating new ones. I'd like to get past my fear of centipedes, dirty dishes, and driving in Boston. Luckily, triggers aren't all problem-causers or I'd never leave my room. Some of them are kind of nice.
Click this link for a helpful page: Identifying Your Triggers
All of us humans have triggers that are very subtle, that we ourselves are unaware of. Some of those triggers cause feelings of anxiety, excitement, anger, comfort, joy, resentment, envy, jealousy, trust, or distrust. Things we see and hear, things we smell, things we touch can be triggers. Like the feeling of comfort when we step into a warm and bright kitchen, or smell baked bread. Our mind instantly feels comfort and warmth just from the smell of baked bread, or coffee, or maybe stew, or pie. Many of us feel warmer or even safer when we see a hearth fire or a woodstove, even if there is very little heat.
Most of us have triggers that cause more intense emotions such as panic, like when we see a snake or a spider, or some other possible threat. And some of us have triggers that cause us to feel rage or defensiveness, even hatred.
Triggers are not the same as straightforward emotional reactions to things. They are faster, instant, "knee-jerk". It can be the look in a person's eyes, or the shape of their eyes, that can be someone's trigger for trust, OR for distrust. The sound of someone's voice, their dialect or accent, their intonations, all can be triggers for us to trust them or to distrust them. Even someone's broad smile that is beautiful and sincere can be a trigger for some people to feel a great degree of trust and even caring, but it can also be a trigger for some to feel an extreme reaction of distrust, even anger. Both reactions have no thought process behind them, there is no actual assessment if the person smiling is actually trustworthy or not. Triggers are not about thought process, they are reactions.
When we have triggers we are not aware of, we may project the feelings the trigger produces onto the object, animal, or person. "Snakes are scary" "Spiders are dangerous" are really expressions of our feelings about them, not facts about them. Snakes are only scary to individuals who are afraid of them, and only about 11% of snake species are venomous. Spiders are only dangerous if the spider is venomous to humans, we are within biting range, and they choose to bite us. The vast majority of spiders are non-lethal to humans, and most are much more concerned about hiding and getting killed than almost any human. The survival chance of a venomous spider in the US is approximately 99%. The most recent stats of deaths by spider in the US is 5.
It would be accurate to say "I am afraid of snakes", or "I am afraid of spiders", rather than "snakes and spiders are dangerous". Statistically, humans cause about 3000 times more fatalities (homicides) than both snakes and spiders annually. Dogs cause about 10 times more than both snakes and spiders.
A lot of people share common triggers, sometimes, often, developed in childhood. Most people will admit to the baking bread aroma that makes us feel warm and happy inside. But there are all kinds of subtle things that our brain associates with a memory of a feeling, and so when we see, hear, smell, or feel something, we feel that again.
For me, Sunday mornings in the Spring, when the sun is out but it's not very warm or bright, make me feel bleak, even depressed if I don't recognize the trigger. When I was 8 years old, we woke up on Father's Day to find my Daddy passed away, he had had a heart attack during the night. So even decades later, on Sunday mornings when the sunlight and the air match that morning, I feel unnerved, sad, out of sorts, even dark. If I catch what's going on, I can actively do something to change my mood.
I know a young girl who is afraid of dogs, but terrified of German Shepherds, or dogs that look like German Shepherds. She is not silly or wimpy. She had an encounter with someone's pet German Shepherd that was terrifying for her, and it left the imprint in her subconscious. Now, when her eye sees a "German Shepherd", her brain signals "Danger!" Just like anyone who's afraid of bees and hornets and spiders.
There is a man I know, an lifelong fisherman, who is very much afraid of rapids when he is in a boat. Any rapids, any boat. Even water that resembles rapids because it is flowing over rocks in a shallow area of a lake. In his youth when he was fishing with a friend, they became caught in a dangerous part of a river, they were very much afraid for their lives. Ever since, he instantly becomes anxious when there is any resemblance to "white water".
Two people I have spoken to personally, a man and a woman, are triggered by blond haired, blue or green-eyed women. They both are well-spoken, functioning adults. Both become anxious or defensive, even angry, when they are in the presence of a woman who fits this description, especially if she smiles broadly or laughs out loud. The woman also becomes anxious around brunette women of a certain body type, and seems to see them as hostile or having an agenda, even if she has just met her. The man has a list of blond actors and musicians he "can't stand", none of whom he has ever met. Both of them have reported actually being abusive to others who match the description, the man even to the point of physical attack "because of the look on her face".
Common factors include: Both of these people have older female relatives who match these physical traits and have "happy normal family lives".
Also, both of these people have divorced parents, but more importantly both of them reported feeling neglected or abandoned by one or both parents. One of them also had a stepparent who fit the physical description, who was reportedly cold and cruel to them. Their common trigger is based solely on physical appearance and facial expressions, NOT on the behavior, speech, or personality of a person. Their trigger apparently tells them "This person is uncaring" or perhaps "This person is mean" or "This person will hurt you", regardless of the person's actual intentions, history, or character. Whatever the specific message is, the feelings invoked by their common trigger seem to be a combination of resentment, anger, fear, jealousy, and possibly envy. (Obviously they are both aware of their common triggers and are working to defuse them, since they cause them each problems in their personal and professional lives. One of them has a blond daughter to boot. Also I am blond, so without their self-awareness they probably would not have shared their experiences with me.)
I worked with a client once who was triggered terribly by anyone on the street who looked directly at him, or if two people had their heads together talking. In school, he was bullied terribly by the other classmates on a regular basis, for years, and he developed an imprint of the memories that is so strong it is nearly impossible to talk him down from an anxiety attack, or anger. Like people who believe that every spider is venomous absolutely, he believes every close conversation nearby is about him. He believes his feelings are caused by reality, not by a trigger implanted in his past.
I enjoy my "positive" triggers. The feeling of joy when I hear or see a child, of happiness when I see or touch an animal, of serenity when I am next to, on, or in water. I see my child-hands when I smell or touch clean dirt, and I hear my father's voice when I see, read, or watch anything by Tolkien. The feeling of elation when I see my son or hear his voice, of warmth when I hear my mother's. These are good, as far as I can tell. As long as I don't believe all children are the same, or all animals are human-friendly, or all water is pure or safe. As long as I know the feelings are my own, and do not think they are coming FROM the person, animal, or thing I am hearing, seeing, feeling, or smelling.
My "negative" triggers I work on as much as my awareness allows. I have some friends and associates who don't shy away from the subject, and freely share and compare their own. When I discover a new one, I take note and focus on defusing it. Being a human with a working amygdala, I will always be discovering old triggers, and creating new ones. I'd like to get past my fear of centipedes, dirty dishes, and driving in Boston. Luckily, triggers aren't all problem-causers or I'd never leave my room. Some of them are kind of nice.
Click this link for a helpful page: Identifying Your Triggers
Isolating, Manipulation, Social Anxiety
Isolating friends, partners and family members from one another is a common trait of narcissism, but non-narc. people with social anxiety also may do this. They may have anxiety about group activities, even if everyone who would be invited is known to them. If they have past trauma, they may fear being excluded when those friends connect with each other. They may fear being ganged up on, or left out of conversation or jokes. They may fear being seen as less cool, less intelligent, less talented, less funny, less desirable when there is more than one friend present. Those with social anxiety may try to control plans, and bow out of things they can't control, or if more than one friend is going. They may make plans with one person, even for public events, and fail to mention those plans to anyone else due to their own social caution. They may not even realize they are isolating people, and they may also be doing it out of consideration when they are worried how one friend will act toward another friend, and are unsure how to deal with such a situation (they may not realize that they aren't responsible for the behavior of others.)
Manipulators and Narcissists on the other hand may have all these same fears and do the same things, but they also have the fear of being found out, and of being "outshined". This fear, which is usually well-founded, drives their need to isolate friends from one another. They often think of themselves as the hub of all of their relationships, and others like spokes, all radiating out from them. Friends (and family) are purposely kept apart from one another in order to maintain all kinds of fictional facades, both about the manipulator, and about certain "friends" who are painted in a bad light. They can not have Jack meeting up with Mary and finding out that she's actually a normal, intelligent, kind person who shows no signs of being crazy or mean. And if they become friends, they may exchange information.
Manipulators and Narcissists do not attend events to share experiences with friends, except when that "friend" is a co-narcissist with the same agenda. They are there more to be seen than anything else. Only those who enhance their appearance or go along with their agenda will not be ditched. They aren't at the concert to experience the music, they are there to BE SEEN. As...the number one fan (no one else gets this music the way I do), or part of the "In Crowd", or as a fellow "star", or as one of the "Hot People", maybe even the "Hottest" or "Cutest" or "Coolest". They are there not to SHARE the experience, but to feel a rush from feeling like they are BETTER in some way, either better than those who are at the event, OR better than those who were purposely left out.
Manipulators and Narcissists have agendas. If their plan for attending an event is to see if they can meet a new romantic interest, of course they are going to hide the event from anyone they're currently dating, or any friends of the person they're dating. This agenda is a common reason why the smear campaigns begin; if someone sees them, the manipulator has to have a "reason" why they have ditched their partner, and it has to be their partner's "fault" in order for them to look innocent. They will always turn around anything they get caught doing wrong (betrayal) on either the person who caught them, or their partner. Any of their co-conspirator friends (also manipulators) will back them up. It's just second-nature to them, they've all been getting out of "trouble" most likely for years this way, and are unlikely to wake up.
Manipulators and Narcissists often play to others' personalities; they create a persona that will elicit sympathy, respect, or desire from each individual person. So when there is a gathering of people who the manipulator has played different characters to, they are going to be seen by at least one person as being fake. (When this does occur, that person is often targeted for reputation destruction.) When the Narcissist is being seen by a lot of people for a reason, they will often be aloof, flitting here and there very briefly, making a big deal about how busy they are, even barking orders or displaying dramatic frustration at how much has to be done (but refusing help). They will leave early unless they can isolate themselves away from the crowd. They can not risk being seen for too long as NOT playing the various personas they have set up with each person. Adapting a stuck-up attitude, an overwhelmed attitude (too much to do) or even an angry attitude can facilitate their hiding if all else fails. These attitudes make them unapproachable, and will keep anyone who would see through them at a distance. (They can often be seen suddenly dropping their attitude to talk calmly and happily with certain people, even at length, making small talk. "Which attitude is real," you may wonder, '"the frustrated and angry one, or the calm and happy one?")
In summation, the social anxiety isolator may bow out of going to a local festival because more than one friend wants to go, but they won't try to hide their plans of going or not going, and they won't be angry about other friends showing up. But the manipulator will invite one friend, or one group of friends, and purposely exclude another person by hiding their plans from them, hiding the event from them, even acting as if they aren't going. They may even ask the person they're excluding "what are you doing on Sunday night" just to make sure that the person is not planning on attending the event.
- "What can I do if I find myself isolating people from one another? Am I a Narcissist?"
- If I am afraid I am isolating friends or family, I probably don't have the Narcissist Disorder, but I still may be causing unnecessary distress and problems for other people, and for myself. Human beings do have a bent for manipulation in childhood, but as we mature we learn why it's wrong and how to navigate life in an honest and more straightforward manner. If I find myself isolating or triangulating people, it would be helpful if I take a look at my relationships, and things that could be causing me stress. Often we don't realize how much stress we are dealing with until something "breaks". I can ask myself these questions:
- Am I trying to deal with my own anxiety issues by trying to exert control over other people?
- Have I been dealing with someone who is controlling, bullying, abusive, manipulating, toward me or toward others?
- Do I actually and honestly TRUST all the people I am in close contact with?
- Am I doing something that I feel guilty or ashamed about, and might be unconsciously trying to hide it?
- Am I afraid people will see the "real me" and not like me anymore?
- Am I jealous or envious of someone in my group?
- Am I harboring trauma from my past that I have not healed from?
I don't want to be kept a minute longer from engaging fully in life, love, adventure, and happiness, so I am fully engaged in healing my own scratches, bruises, and wounds, and helping others heal when they need to, as much as I am able.
(Imagine a world where every person kept themselves emotionally healthy AND was aware and willing to help everyone else stay healthy, and feel supported, included, and respected? There would no longer be any need for counseling, or prison, for that matter! Idealist? No, other animals pull it off, it can be done. It has been done. It is the not the will to do it that is required so much as the lack of REFUSAL to do it.)
Blessings.
A note to readers: everyone in a free country has the right to write, you have the same right to write as the editor of the New York Times. That's what "free" means. If you don't like what someone else wrote, or don't agree with it...or you don't like the person for some ego reason so you want to disrespect everything they write... or you have prejudice against certain kinds of humans so you dispute everything they write about...DO REMEMBER that you are solely responsible for your own actions, and that NO piece of writing can "MAKE" a person say or do ANYTHING. Only the mentally disordered actually believe that a piece of writing MAKES people do or say things. So if you disagree, and you want to express that, feel free, that is also your right! But if you want to harass someone for what they wrote, THINK AGAIN. Writing is protected under free speech. LIBEL is when that writing spreads false information about a REAL PERSON, not generalities about human behavior. Harassment is against the law, for real, even in this current ridiculous atmosphere of entitlement and nastiness.
Why More Male Narcissists Than Female?
Why are there more Narc. Males than Narc.
Females in the general population? (And there are, make no mistake.)
It's all about the Culture we live in. None of us chose to be born into
it, but here we are, and Narcs take advantage of any opportunity
that others allow them to take. Females do help facilitate male
narcissism when they compete with each other for male attention,
throwing each other under the bus, and refusing to bolster their
daughter's self-actualization, refusing to stand up for girls and women,
refusing to RECOGNIZE other women as equal to men, and refusing to
TREAT women with the same respect and admiration they give men. And this
huge disparity lays a red carpet for male Narcs to FLOURISH. I know
several female musicians, for example, who get very little credit and
recognition for their amazing talent, except from their friends and
people who think they're "hot". While I know zillions of mediocre male
musicians who get all the recognition in the world from BOTH females and
males. This culture gets a thrill out of admiring men, but they act
lukewarm and bored toward women who have twice the talent. It's not
about reality. And immature males eat it all up with a spoon, as if the
reason they are getting more attention and credit is because they
INTRINSICALLY DESERVE IT. Obviously not all males have this problem, and
there are plenty of females who do have this problem as well
(narcissism), but the reason for the imbalance is the culture we live
in, and that very few do anything about. It's not about gaining equal
rights nearly as much as it is about checking OURSELVES. Our OWN biases
and the way we treat others, and the recognition and attention and
praise we give, or refuse to give, others.
Read this thread, these men are dead serious about their beliefs and delusions, and no one is setting them straight, no one ever did when they were growing up :
Men Are Superior To Women
Read this thread, these men are dead serious about their beliefs and delusions, and no one is setting them straight, no one ever did when they were growing up :
Men Are Superior To Women
Don't Break Their Spirits
(From H. McFarland)
In a recent sermon (view "God the Father" from 5/16, starting at 28:30), Pastor Ira Hall expounds upon Eph. 6:4 NASB: And you, fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord. He reminds us that "bring them up" means to rear them, to cherish, to train. Rearing, training, and cherishing as bringing up teaches others that they are valuable. In Greek, discipline means "education, training, and correction." Instruction means "mild rebuke or warning." Col. 3:21 states, Fathers do not exasperate your children, so they will not lose heart. To exasperate is to provoke. The Greek word for "lose heart" means broken spirits. Essentially Paul is saying, "Don't break your child's spirit. Don't crush them." Fathers provoke by not providing cherishing training, mild rebuke, education or correction. "This is not the same as making your child mad," Hall says. "But they should never not feel cherished."
In a recent sermon (view "God the Father" from 5/16, starting at 28:30), Pastor Ira Hall expounds upon Eph. 6:4 NASB: And you, fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord. He reminds us that "bring them up" means to rear them, to cherish, to train. Rearing, training, and cherishing as bringing up teaches others that they are valuable. In Greek, discipline means "education, training, and correction." Instruction means "mild rebuke or warning." Col. 3:21 states, Fathers do not exasperate your children, so they will not lose heart. To exasperate is to provoke. The Greek word for "lose heart" means broken spirits. Essentially Paul is saying, "Don't break your child's spirit. Don't crush them." Fathers provoke by not providing cherishing training, mild rebuke, education or correction. "This is not the same as making your child mad," Hall says. "But they should never not feel cherished."
God And Women
"The accusation of feminism against any woman who would rather obey God than men gets quite tedious."
~M.Reid
~M.Reid
~I Concur 100% QUITE tedious.
Quivering Daughters Blog
I just found the "Quivering Daughters" Web Log, and it is instantly among my favorites. Well written, well organized, and most importantly from sincere and objective hearts.
A quote and disclaimer:
*Please remember that articles at Quivering Daughters are written primarily to adult women struggling with a fundamentalist or patriocentric upbringing. Bear in mind that some content might be triggering for parents or siblings to read. As a writer in keeping with my audience, it is not to "paint with a broad brush" or "condemn" those who believe differently but to address the concerns of those to whom I write. Thank you for understanding.*
Visit by clicking here:
A quote and disclaimer:
*Please remember that articles at Quivering Daughters are written primarily to adult women struggling with a fundamentalist or patriocentric upbringing. Bear in mind that some content might be triggering for parents or siblings to read. As a writer in keeping with my audience, it is not to "paint with a broad brush" or "condemn" those who believe differently but to address the concerns of those to whom I write. Thank you for understanding.*
Visit by clicking here:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)