A Coincidence, I’m Sure
The chronically captious ladies and other-gendered beings at Everyday Feminism, where everyone is terribly complicated and fascinating, want us to know that people with narcissistic personality disorder are also victims of heteropatriachal capitalist society. And that not being overly keen on the company of pathologically narcissistic people, possibly because of their dishonesties, neediness and obnoxious sense of entitlement, is “ableist,” bigoted and therefore wicked. Apparently, we mustn’t “minimise the experience” of people who are very often unbearable, manipulative, exploitative, emotionally unstable, and indifferent to the wellbeing of anyone but themselves.
Sometimes comment is superfluous.
Note the hair.
Yup
No comment!
Note the hair.
Snork.
I suppose it was inevitable. I mean, it’s Everyday Feminism, where narcissism is a credential, practically a prerequisite.
And don’t forget that, according to our betters at Everyday Feminism, we’re not showing enough compassion for sociopaths and pathological liars.
Funny how these things crop up, quite often.
#HugANarcissistWeek
I’m still processing the implication that because some pathological narcissists may be intermittently aware that they’re dishonest, manipulative, exploitative and abusive – and go on doing it anyway – this somehow makes them more delightful.
As Greg Gutfeld said, you can’t write a punch line for a punch line.
Next up, it’s criminalist to want to avoid consorting with criminals. We’re part way there with “ban the box”.
On the subject of hair…
A lot of lesbians can only dream of looking like Abby.
http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/09/dealing-with-body-hair-stigma/
Check out the butch fairy.
At least they know their market. 🙂
Do you mean people who are just selfish?
At least they know their market. 🙂
And it is staffed by people who write earnestly and at length about the intensely radical politics of their own hair.
Funny, one of the latest attacks against Trump was about narcissist personality disorder. Some headsxwillbpop if they connect those dots.
So, in other words, I need to subject myself to whims of pathologically obnoxious people in order to make sure they don’t get their feelings hurt thereby giving them further license to be pathologically obnoxious.
Got it.
They’re really scraping the barrel for new victim groups.
Those heteropatriarchal cis scum will try to stigmatize bunny boiling next.
Is nothing sacred?
Stop Batshit Crazy Shaming!
For those who missed our previous visits to the world of Everyday Feminism…
Some interracial dating tips.
Some feminist poetry. You know you want to.
How to order takeaway in a politically correct, fully intersectional manner.
And of course,
Is your bacon sandwich oppressing women?
Actually, I’d consider “NPD survivors” to be the lucky ones who got away from a narcissist. I almost feel like one, after reading that cartoon.
I was raised by a narcissist, and I’m still dealing with the psychological consequences thereof.
My mom was badly damaged by staying with him for 43 years. All our familial relationships were negatively affected by him, and he didn’t even manifest the worst aspects of the disorder.
NPDs were victims when they were little kids, but once into their 20s their disorder has crystallized into something impervious to change.
Such that they don’t suffer from their disorder anymore, but boy oh boy do they make sure everyone else does.
You know what’s fun? Going through these comics replacing “Narcissistic Personality” with “Setting Puppies On Fire.”
If the person with Setting Puppies On Fire Disorder doesn’t show empathy, they have their reasons.
Well, two things:
-I think it’s wrong to refer to NPD ‘sufferers’, because my experience is that it’s everybody that has to put up with them that suffer. The narcissist is having the time of his life, inside his little World of Me.
-And here in the United States, we elected a classic NPD type president. Twice. How’s THAT for debunking the ‘not treated fairly in society’ theory?
If the person with Setting Puppies On Fire Disorder doesn’t show empathy, they have their reasons.
Heh. Someone fetch cake for Franklin.
At least they know their market. 🙂
Ding ding ding ding! We have a winner! I can only assume that Everyday Feminism is full of narcissistic little idiots who want a piece of the victim pie for themselves.
People with NPD are “struggling?” Hey, I struggle too. Only I don’t lie, cheat, manipulate, cry, scream, or lash out to get what I want, as those with NPD are known to do.
Someone fetch cake for Franklin.
And people say that my joint is classy.
To be honest I think I did a much better job than Christine Deneweth on the woman with purple hair thing.
In no way related to anything.
Step aside, peasants. She’s an agent of social change.
David, you reminded me that Charlotte Proudman exists…
Another feminism story: I’ve helped out once or twice on the Vote Leave stalls in town, and mainly enjoyed it. You’re bound to get an interesting debate or two, and occasionally some people who want to be awkward, but you have to expect that.
One of the latter group was a mother – out with her daughter on some errand – who shouted “It’s all men on the Leave stall, and I think that tells you a lot!”.. We tried to discuss things with this lady, but she didn’t want a polite exchange of views.
As it happens, there are normally a healthy mix of the sexes at our table in town. That day we had a very couple of very pleasant (and impeccably dressed) Danish euro-sceptics who were there to support us, a man and a woman. So..er.. we weren’t all men. It was obvious we weren’t.
Now I think this sort of thing is more and more common – people who simply don’t care whether what they’re saying is true – they are drunk with the rhetorical power of saying “you’re all men” or “you’re all white”*.
Honesty’s all out of fashion, it seems.
* we were also denounced as racists on a day when there was a chap with us (wearing the fetching T-shirt) who had been born in Zimbabwe.
So..er.. we weren’t all men. It was obvious we weren’t.
Even if it had been an all-male gathering on that particular day, or every day, what exactly would that “tell” anyone about the argument being aired?
Do you mean people who are just selfish?
No.
Narcissists are the emotional equivalents of malnourished children whose femurs bow outward, and when later in life they get adequate nutrition, their femurs stay bowed because it’s tool late to fix them.
Spoiled brats aren’t narcissists; a good stiff dose of reality might turn them around.
Millennials are mostly spoiled brats: stupid and over-indulged but not pathologically damaged the way NPDs are.
Sort-of-Mad-Max is correct: NPDs aren’t miserable at all. They are just fine–it’s the rest of the world that’s screwed up.
Even if it had been an all-male gathering on that particular day, or every day, what exactly would that “tell” anyone about the argument being aired?
As I recall, I asked her “Who cares if it is or isn’t?”. She shouted “I care” triumphantly and stalked off saying something or other.
Someone fetch cake for Franklin.
I see what you’re doing, David. You’re trying to ferret out the narcissists among the commentariat here. Someone who’d throw a fit because his/her comment wasn’t acknowledged, then upend the cake and dump the punch bowl on the carpet for good measure. That would be followed by locking himself/herself in the bathroom and weeping for three hours, while you take an inventory of the silverware.
I see what you’re doing, David.
I see you’ve given this more thought than I have.
Help yourself to Franklin’s cake.
Even if it had been an all-male gathering on that particular day, or every day, what exactly would that “tell” anyone about the argument being aired?
There is no rational argument; it’s a moral issue now. Years and years of drinking the kool-aid has convinced many women (and weak men) that everything white men have achieved has been at the expense of absolutely everyone else and it is all completely undeserved; and damn them for daring to take credit for anything good they have achieved (nothing, natch). Those who see men as morally inferior beings are highly suspicious of activity that gives an appearance of being organised and led by men.
I read an article recently about “asking mothers and grandmothers” about Brexit, “but not men! They are the problem!”. Hysterical for sure, but this is how men are viewed now by a significant portion of the population.
Even if it had been an all-male gathering on that particular day …
It shows that you believe women to be inferior, and that you dislike Islam.
It’s just astounding how wearying these people are. I wonder if their totalitarian impulses stem from their desire to intrude their toxic personalities into every facet of other people’s lives, or vice versa.
I read an article recently about “asking mothers and grandmothers” about Brexit, “but not men! They are the problem!”.
The logic of this escapes me.
If all men vote Leave, then Remain has exactly zero chance, because some women favour it — which gets Leave over 50% with a lot of room to spare. So there must be men who don’t vote Leave. So men, qua men, cannot be “the problem”.
Quite apart from the Remain campaign having all the old male white men in Parliament lining up behind Remain, that is.
And also quite apart from all those problematic grandfathers having been married to your, apparently not problematic, grandmother for all those years.
It just fails as an argument so awfully I cannot believe anyone could even bring themselves to utter it.
On the subject of hair…
A lot of lesbians can only dream of looking like Abby.
“>http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/09/dealing-with-body-hair-stigma/
Eeek! Even Clark Gable has transitioned
OK, finally I read the actual cartoon. Cripes, it’s so wrong. If any of the following things is true, it rules out NPD:
— “Talk therapy is a popular form of treatment for NPD. The symptoms can be manageable with help.” NPDs don’t think there’s anything wrong with them. If they darken the door of a therapist’s office it’s only because of a court order or other form of coercion. They emerge from any therapy session confident that they’re OK and the rest of the world is screwed up, regardless of what the therapist said.
— Ability to empathize. Anyone who can empathize, even a little, doesn’t have NPD.
— Not being abusive. NPDs are always abusive, even if they don’t mean to be. Other people’s needs, wants, and preferences aren’t on their radar.
— Awareness of NPD. NPDs are the last to know that they have NPD, if ever. Even if you present hard evidence, they won’t believe you.
What cartoon-girl describes isn’t NPD but rather one of the ways people respond to abuse. Real NPDs only struggle with how inadequate the rest of us are.
Not sure if this is relevant to the NPDelightful, but I figured the residents of this little venue might enjoy it. It appears to be a brief documentary on the current state of Art Education.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1tFbZ5kaY8
I’m still processing the implication that because some pathological narcissists may be intermittently aware that they’re dishonest, manipulative, exploitative and abusive – and go on doing it anyway – this somehow makes them more delightful.
You have to be true to yourself.
What cartoon-girl describes isn’t NPD…
True, what they all have is Histrionic Personality Disorder.
From our friend the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders:
‘Symtoms’..? I guess NPD renders you unable to spell too…
A corporate version of unbearable, manipulative, exploitative, emotionally unstable, and indifferent to the wellbeing of anyone but themselves. . . . has gotten itself in rather an interesting bit of comparative ethical behavior . . .
Goldman Fires Ex-Porn Star Over… Ethics?
First of all, Goldman has rules of employment regarding one’s private life – as in ethical rules? Because if that’s the case the firm may as well shut its doors in the morning.
And then there are the comments . . . .
They’re really scraping the barrel for new victim groups.
The gist seems to be that we mustn’t stigmatise narcissistic personalities or their behaviour, however bad it is, however irresponsible, dishonest and non-reciprocal, and we should prioritise their feelings above those of the people who suffer their company. Apparently, pathological narcissists “deserve the same respect” as people who don’t behave in such selfish, aggravating and anti-social ways.
The implication seems to be that because a narcissistic personality is likely to react very badly to anyone challenging their narcissistic behaviour, because they may be disproportionately upset by correction or rebuke, or just a hint of disapproval, therefore we should be especially accommodating and non-judgemental. Which doesn’t sound like a recipe for a happy relationship, or a functional one. Some people are broken, irretrievably, and best avoided.
Help yourself to Franklin’s cake.
(makes Morpheus come-at-me hand gesture)
What are the symptoms?
Need for a lot of admiration
May disregard others feelings
Have a hard time with criticism
Strong sense of entitlement
I’ll have ‘Describe a Feminist’ for $100.
The implication seems to be that because a narcissistic personality is likely to react very badly to anyone challenging their narcissistic behaviour…
The clinical term for which is “narcissistic rage.” It’s really a thing to see.
The thing all PDs have in common is the person’s inability to see how she is contributing to the dysfunction in her life.
A borderline might say that she “gets it” but she doesn’t change her behavior in such a way as to indicate that she does.
There actually ARE some exceptions to NPDs not having self-awareness: Sam Vanga wrote “Malignant Self-Love” about himself, who has NPD, but it took landing in jail for him to wonder whether something might be wrong with him.
It hasn’t cured his NPD, nor does he claim that he’s no longer NPD; he just learned to see himself for what he is and can talk about it.
My father knew that I thought he was NPD but he’d deny it to the ends of the earth. Being the dept chair of the psych department, he’d KNOW by God if he were NPD, because he’d be the One NPD On The Earth who would know.
And I don’t have a PhD in Psych, so who do I think I am?
For certain political cults it’s useful to recruit, manipulate and use people with particular disorders, it seems. Once mission is accomplished they can be just abandoned. To top it off, blame the abandonment on “those bad people over there” (i.e., anyone who’s not a progressive).
Real NPDs only struggle with how inadequate the rest of us are.
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/03/obama-doctrine-goldberg-disappointment/473172/
Oh well.
the person’s inability to see how she is contributing
So it’s only women? Well, that answers the question regarding Obama’s sexuality!
Yes, it’s only women.
Either that or I wanted to use a singular pronoun.
Either that or I wanted to use a singular pronoun.
According to Webster’s Third New International Dictionary, one of the senses of the pronoun he is “that one whose sex is unknown or immaterial.” The women who taught me English also taught me that.
The women who taught me English also taught me that.
Thank you Geezer. That’s what I was taught too. “She” refers only to women when referring to human beings (or gay men I suppose, but that’s one of those exceptions that prove the rule, and can generally be determined from context).
When the sex of a human being is not known or not specified, “he” is the correct, third-person, singular pronoun. Use of anything else in those circumstances generally signals PC/SJW efforts to unilaterally re-structure common usage to further a particular political narrative. Such has been my experience anyway, hence my irritation when I see the construction.
I should probably clarify the “gay men” part of the above. I’ve heard gay men refer to one another as “she”, though I honestly don’t know how common that usage is, and it was generally intended as at least somewhat snarky.
Obo and Proudman.
Star cross’d.
Like Ripley and the xenomorph.
considers relationships to be more intimate than they actually are
This is the artsy flake in a nutshell: declaring love and intimacy one minute and bailing the next. I also used to see this behavior in hookers in Dubai in the mid ’00s.
“they” is perfectly acceptable for an unknown singular person, and has been used for hundreds of years* as such. Normally it is so natural that one doesn’t even notice it. It’s only rarely glaring examples that catch the eye.
A person can use he to refer another who may be female but shouldn’t be surprised if quite ordinary people think it makes them look like a dinosaur.
I just can’t see how that sentence above is improved by insisting the dinosaur is “him”.
(* It’s in the King James Version. So God said it, that settles it.)
Chester: Is that a common usage in the KJV? I would be grateful for an example or a reference.
Tim Newman: I’ve been trawling through your blog, found your experiences to be quite interesting.
Tim Newman: I’ve been trawling through your blog, found your experiences to be quite interesting.
I’m glad about that! For my part, I’ve found them fascinating…I only wish I’d hung in there longer to get an invitation to the community back in Brooklyn to see it all first hand. Also, I can only really tell half the story online…the stuff I’m leaving out makes people’s jaws drop open when I tell them in real life.
Tim Newman: Have you perchance commented elsewhere using the handles Timinkuwait or TiminKSA? I hope it is no breach of netiquette to ask this.
Also, I can only really tell half the story online…
Change names to protect the litigious. I think it very important that you share details with your internet friends. And also with us perfect strangers.
I think it very important that you share details with your internet friends. And also with us perfect strangers.
It does seem terribly mean to leave us all hanging.
Have you perchance commented elsewhere using the handles Timinkuwait or TiminKSA?
Nope, alas not me. I have usually gone with my full, real name and gotten myself in the shit as a result.
It does seem terribly mean to leave us all hanging.
I’m actually working on a format for telling the story…I’m gonna turn it into a short story, I think. The bottom line is I met somebody who I assumed was normal and one day she drops a great bombshell regading her sexual history on me which ought to be filed under “too much information”. Just as I’m getting my head around this, she drops another. This pattern repeats itself several times until I find myself – rather like the frog that has been boiled slowly – neck deep in a situation which I am completely ill-equipped to deal with. I’m left wondering just who the hell I’ve gotten involved with, and have to call in reinforcements from outside for assistance. I’ve actually posted much of the juicy stuff in the comments here, but put altogether the cascade effect of one revelation after another makes for a good story.
but put altogether the cascade effect of one revelation after another makes for a good story.
Just let me grab some more coffee…
A person can use he to refer another who may be female but shouldn’t be surprised if quite ordinary people think it makes them look like a dinosaur.
I’m old-fashioned enough to prefer English to Political Correctese. I take pride in being considered a “dinosaur” by “quite ordinary people.” (Who never learned the difference between grammatical gender and biological sex.