Great, I am attracted to narcissistic, smart aholes

[Yer_Blues]

Well I found your original statement a "little pissy."

Oh no, not the rolling eyes!

 

Which original statement are you referencing? If I'm being insulting, I at least want to know where.

[runner]

I'm not so sure. My ex was my backlash to the other aholes I dated. He seemed like their opposite -- sweet, reliable, devoted -- but he ultimately let me down even worse than they did. This leaves me feeling lost about what to look for in a guy.

 

sounds like you want a more mature version of what you described in your OP, and someone with a more balanced attitude between selfish and caring- without compromising on the intelligence or ambition.

 

they are out there. as a tip (without any gaurantee of course), try the 28+ crowd.

[EasyHeart]

As far as #1 goes. . . while I do think it's an okay way for men in their twenties to be, I'm 26 and only date men in their mid-twenties to early thirties, and I've never had trouble finding smart, educated, witty, attractive men who want relationships. A lot of men realize that a solid relationship -- not one with a lot of drama -- can help them stabilize their life and career, rather than detract from the energy to put into it. (This can be true for women, too. I focus a lot on my career, but I always enjoy relationships that allow me to nurture myself, others, and my career at the same time.)

 

Most of the smarter, more successful, college-educated men I've known have had an interest in a LTR from the time they graduated. They just don't have an interest in any kind of drama.

 

The most likely exceptions are men who become very wealthy, very fast, and tie their self-worth in with that wealth. They sometimes get overinflated egos. But most of the men with a moderate level of success who are hard-working crave relationships.

 

Personally, a man with too much success too fast worries me. I'm not intimidated, but until I get to know him, I always wonder (a) What will he do if it doesn't last? Did he have time to really form himself? and (b) How tied is he to egoistic and materialistic things? I've definitely met a few men with fast success who broke this mold, but I watched a live-in boyfriend get insta-success and what it did to him, even a very nice guy. Just not my cuppa.

Sure. There are lots of men in that age range who are looking for LTRs. My point was simply that some aren't, and there is nothing wrong (morally or psychologically) with being hard-working and ambitious and prioritizing your career over dating/marrying. Whether you want to date them, of course, is up to you. (And implicit in my post was that someone like Sky shouldn't).

 

And it's not necessarily about money. If you want to meet some over-worked, stressed-out people, talk to some young public defenders!

 

It's not a gender-thing, either; plenty of women in this age group are career-oriented, too. The simple reality is that if you're working 80 hours a week, traveling a lot, constantly under tough deadlines, etc., you just don't have a lot of time or energy to deal with relationships. I simply wanted to point out that it's a legitimate life-choice and doesn't mean you're selfish or narcissistic.

[pandagirl]

It's not a gender-thing, either; plenty of women in this age group are career-oriented, too. The simple reality is that if you're working 80 hours a week, traveling a lot, constantly under tough deadlines, etc., you just don't have a lot of time or energy to deal with relationships. I simply wanted to point out that it's a legitimate life-choice and doesn't mean you're selfish or narcissistic.

 

I agree. It comes down to the energy you have to give and what you are willing to give.

 

BUT, in the OP's case, these guys are in college.

[EasyHeart]

BUT, in the OP's case, these guys are in college.

Really??? Well in that case, it's no mystery at all.

 

Guys in college are all *ssholes!

[northern_sky]

I agree. It comes down to the energy you have to give and what you are willing to give.

 

BUT, in the OP's case, these guys are in college.

 

Nah, I've moved on to guys in their mid to late twenties. The last guy I dated was 26.

[pandagirl]

Nah, I've moved on to guys in their mid to late twenties. The last guy I dated was 26.

 

Honestly, I think age plays into it sometimes, but if someone is a good guy, they are a good guy no matter what their age. Same goes for jerks.

[Girlygirl1977]

I am watching this thread because I'm a member of this club unfortunately too. . .

 

There are trade-offs to each personality trait - intelligence can have the trade-off of arrogance or aloofness, ambition can have the trade-off of selfishness etc.

 

I'm hoping to sort it out. . .it's tough out there.

[carhill]

It's disturbing to me, because I know any involvement with these guys will only lead to heartbreak, yet I feel zero attraction to guys who fall outside of this mold.

 

Kudos to you for sharing your enlightenment. What remains is finding and walking a path you choose to be healthier for you.

 

FWIW, I was trampled by such women in my 20's and early 30's so, IME, you're pretty 'normal'. Some women grew their attraction range to include a wider range of male psychologies; some did not.

[USMCHokie]

FWIW, I was trampled by such women in my 20's and early 30's so, IME, you're pretty 'normal'. Some women grew their attraction range to include a wider range of male psychologies; some did not.

 

Do you think it was out of choice, or did they feel "forced," like OP, into expanding their attraction range out of necessity?

[carhill]

I'm talking on the phone to an LS'er right now who feels 'attraction' is immutable and unchangeable, obviating 'force'. I'll get more insight from her. Myself, I think 'change' is possible and a healthy part of life experience and growth, irrespective of outside 'forces'. YMMV

[northern_sky]

A couple of observations:

 

You are always quick to apply diagnostic labels to people, and to make judgments about their intelligence. You don't seem particularly perceptive about these kinds of things; it appears more like you seek external explanations (excuses) for the places that your own behavior and choices take you. From my perspective, doing this is 100% counterproductive for you and helps to keep you safely within your own narrowly defined parameters of behavior. And, relieves you for personal accountability.

 

Respectfully, I ask you: why do you need to go to a place of putting other people down in your efforts to analyze your own situation and patterns? Those likely have nothing to do with "narcissism" or intelligence. The guys involved are probably not even narcissists at all, and the women they like may very well have higher IQ's than yours. You can't know from your distance.

 

All you really have to work with is yourself.

 

I agree with this:

 

There's nothing wrong with recognizing that I have a bad people picker and tend to be drawn to guys who aren't relationship material. If I denied this, I'd keep chasing the wrong men. It's a combination of self reflection and also reflection on my choices in people. There is nothing wrong with that, and you're not going to make me believe that there is.

 

Who are you to say I'm not perceptive about this? You don't know these guys. I do. In general the men I've dated have actually been struck by how accurate my guesses about them were, and they also referred to themselves in these terms -- "selfish," "arrogant." In fact, the last guy said at one point he was struck by how perceptive I am, not just in observing their personality traits, but in guessing details of his past. And most of the observations I shared with him were fairly neutral guesses about how he operates.

 

You call me a put down artist. Yes, I can be harsh at times, which is something I'm trying to work on, but I find it hypocritical to receive as a criticism from you. A few months ago I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, and actually agreed with some of your advice, but a disturbing, angry personality is emerging that takes it harder for me to take your words at face value.

 

Your path to self discovery seems to have been a dubious one given the lack of self awareness displayed. I have never once seen you show any sensitivity to how I might be hurt by your words or compromise, which is a first. I honestly question your motives for commenting on my threads when you've professed that you think I am beyond help. I don't believe your altruistic explanation of doing it to save other women from my pitfalls.

 

I could say more, but will respectfully bow out for the sake of civility. I wish you well and hope you have a happy new year.

Edited January 1, 2011 by northern_sky

[Star Gazer]

Respectfully, I ask you: why do you need to go to a place of putting other people down in your efforts to analyze your own situation and patterns?

 

I changed the poster name so that it comes from someone you trust and won't assume animosity from. How would you answer their question?

 

You really just dodged it, which isn't helpful to you:

 

You call me a put down artist, which I find hypocritical. A few months ago I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, and actually agreed with some of your advice, but a disturbing, angry personality is emerging that takes it hard for me to take your words at face value.

 

Do you see how in responding to the question, you put the question asker down?

 

The question asker didn't start the thread. The question asker is simply posing a question about a behavior that you are, in fact, guilty of. When confronted with things you think others are guilty of, you resort to the above glass-house argument, rather than addressing the question. You see the person asking the question, not the question itself. So, putting aside the identity of the question asker and whether the question asker is equally guilty of what they're asking about, are you able to answer the question?

 

I think the question posed is a very good one, and deserves to be answered, if only by yourself to yourself.

[Surrealist]

and they also referred to themselves in these terms -- "selfish," "arrogant." In fact, the last guy said at one point he was struck by how perceptive I am, not just in observing their personality traits, but in guessing details of his past. And most of the observations I shared with him were fairly neutral guesses about how he operates.

 

 

A true narcissist probably wouldn't refer to themselves as being selfish or arrogant as the ones I've heard about and encountered never see fault with themselves, or at least admit to it openly.

[northern_sky]

I changed the poster name so that it comes from someone you trust and won't assume animosity from. How would you answer their question?

 

You really just dodged it, which isn't helpful to you:

 

 

 

Do you see how in responding to the question, you put the question asker down?

 

The question asker didn't start the thread. The question asker is simply posing a question about a behavior that you are, in fact, guilty of. When confronted with things you think others are guilty of, you resort to the above glass-house argument, rather than addressing the question. You see the person asking the question, not the question itself. So, putting aside the identity of the question asker and whether the question asker is equally guilty of what they're asking about, are you able to answer the question?

 

I think the question posed is a very good one, and deserves to be answered, if only by yourself to yourself.

 

As I said in my response above, I believe the best approach for me is a combo of self reflection on my own problems and examination of my people picker. In fact my bad people picker is one of my problems. I don't see anything wrong with acknowledging that I tend to chase guys who aren't good relationship material.

 

Mmm's post was insulting. She said I am not perceptive about people, when she actually has no idea whether my analysis is accurate because she has never met these people. I suspect she is offended by some of the things I've pointed out about her personality, when I've come to my own defense in response to her often insulting posts.

Edited January 1, 2011 by northern_sky

[northern_sky]

A true narcissist probably wouldn't refer to themselves as being selfish or arrogant as the ones I've heard about and encountered never see fault with themselves, or at least admit to it openly.

 

A pathological one may not be likely to, but I've met plenty of selfish people who acknowledge that they are selfish. I'm not talking about people who have outright personality disorders, but fall in the spectrum of normal. A lot of people have taken issue with my use of the word narcissistic, so I should clarify that I basically meant more selfish and vain than average...not pathological.

 

Even TBF's ex husband, who has been diagnosed with NPD, realized he had a problem and sought out therapy.

Edited January 1, 2011 by northern_sky

[Yer_Blues]

I changed the poster name so that it comes from someone you trust and won't assume animosity from. How would you answer their question?

 

You really just dodged it, which isn't helpful to you:

 

 

 

Do you see how in responding to the question, you put the question asker down?

 

The question asker didn't start the thread. The question asker is simply posing a question about a behavior that you are, in fact, guilty of. When confronted with things you think others are guilty of, you resort to the above glass-house argument, rather than addressing the question. You see the person asking the question, not the question itself. So, putting aside the identity of the question asker and whether the question asker is equally guilty of what they're asking about, are you able to answer the question?

 

I think the question posed is a very good one, and deserves to be answered, if only by yourself to yourself.

 

"Narcissists hold unreasonable expectations of particularly favorable treatment and automatic compliance because they consider themselves special. Failure to comply is considered an attack on their superiority, and the perpetrator is considered an "awkward" or "difficult" person. Defiance of their will is a narcissistic injury that can trigger narcissistic rage.

 

A narcissist who is feeling deflated may reinflate by diminishing, debasing, or degrading somebody else.

 

They also use projection to dump shame onto others."

 

And where might I have seen some of these patterns before?

[Star Gazer]

As I said in my response above, I believe the best approach for me is a combo of self reflection on my own problems and examination of my people picker. In fact my bad people picker is one of my problems. I don't see anything wrong with acknowledging that I tend to chase guys who aren't good relationship material.

 

I don't disagree.

 

But I guess it's just the way you label all these guys with pretty nasty labels, while basically saying the only fault you have is a bad people picker. I'm by NO MEANS saying that you put yourself down or namecall the way you do with the guys you date, but I think it would greatly benefit you to acknowledge other faults you have in terms of relationship behavior/attitude. I've seen you do this on occasion, but you often still bring it back somehow to blame the guy.

 

And I really held back from responding to your thread where you crucified J's new girlfriend, but what good did that do you to insult her and put her down the way you did? J obviously saw/sees something in her, just as he did with you.

 

Mmm's post was insulting. She said I am not perceptive about people, when she actually has no idea whether my analysis is accurate because she has never met these people. I suspect she is offended by some of the things I've pointed out about her personality, when I've come to my own defense in response to her often insulting posts.

 

Well, while I often agree with her in substance, here I do disagree.

 

You are very perceptive about people. But where I think you trip up is when you label someone or put them down or come to an entire conclusion about someone based on just one aspect of their personality. Panda mentioned that she thinks your use of the narcissist label is misplaced and overused, and that selfish is probably a better term, because narcissism involves a lot more than what's been described, and let's be honest, it's a pretty harsh label to give someone. I agree with her. Besides, there's obviously some great parts to these guys you like, right? Otherwise you wouldn't like them.

 

For example, using BOTH of us an an example. We can both be overly sarcastic, defensive, and biting in our delivery. Both of us. I own it, and I think you can too. Now, do those sarcastic, defensive and biting moments mean that we're psycho bitches? Horrible people? That we don't have the capacity to love? Or truly care? Or does it mean we're human and could stand to improve how we react when we're frustrated? Again, just an example.

Edited January 1, 2011 by Star Gazer

[Star Gazer]

"Narcissists hold unreasonable expectations of particularly favorable treatment and automatic compliance because they consider themselves special. Failure to comply is considered an attack on their superiority, and the perpetrator is considered an "awkward" or "difficult" person. Defiance of their will is a narcissistic injury that can trigger narcissistic rage.

 

A narcissist who is feeling deflated may reinflate by diminishing, debasing, or degrading somebody else.

 

They also use projection to dump shame onto others."

 

And where might I have seen some of these patterns before?

 

Is that really true? Admittedly, I'm not totally up to date on what a narcissist really is.

[northern_sky]

I don't disagree.

 

But I guess it's just the way you label all these guys with pretty nasty labels, while basically saying the only fault you have is a bad people picker. I'm by NO MEANS saying that you put yourself down or namecall the way you do with the guys you date, but I think it would greatly benefit you to acknowledge other faults you have in terms of relationship behavior/attitude. I've seen you do this on occasion, but you often still bring it back somehow to blame the guy.

 

And I really held back from responding to your thread where you crucified J's new girlfriend, but what good did that do you to insult her and put her down the way you did? J obviously saw/sees something in her, just as he did with you.

 

 

 

Well, while I often agree with her in substance, here I do disagree.

 

You are very perceptive about people. But where I think you trip up is when you label someone or put them down or come to an entire conclusion about someone based on just one aspect of their personality. Panda mentioned that she thinks your use of the narcissist label is misplaced and overused, and that selfish is probably a better term, because narcissism involves a lot more than what's been described, and let's be honest, it's a pretty harsh label to give someone. I agree with her. Besides, there's obviously some great parts to these guys you like, right? Otherwise you wouldn't like them.

 

For example, using BOTH of us an an example. We can both be overly sarcastic, defensive, and biting in our delivery. Both of us. I own it, and I think you can too. Now, do those sarcastic, defensive and biting moments mean that we're psycho bitches? Horrible people? That we don't have the capacity to love? Or truly care? Or does it mean we're human and could stand to improve how we react when we're frustrated? Again, just an example.

 

I basically agree with you. I realize I can be overly harsh/dismissive at times, and this is something I'm trying to work on...especially with the advent of a new year.

 

Yeah, there is a lot I like about him. I still think he's pretty adorable, despite everything.

[Yer_Blues]

I basically agree with you. I realize I can be overly harsh/dismissive at times, and this is something I'm trying to work on...especially with the advent of a new year.

If you don't mind me asking, how are you working on this? What is your method?

[northern_sky]

I basically agree with you. I realize I can be overly harsh/dismissive at times, and this is something I'm trying to work on...especially with the advent of a new year.

 

Yeah, there is a lot I like about him. I still think he's pretty adorable, despite everything.

 

Didn't have a chance to add this, but again, I was using the word "narcissistic" rather loosely. When people hear it, they probably associate it with a pathological disorder. I meant in the realm of what's normal. Arrogant might be a better descriptor.

[Mme. Chaucer]

There's nothing wrong with recognizing that I have a bad people picker and tend to be drawn to guys who aren't relationship material. If I denied this, I'd keep chasing the wrong men. It's a combination of self reflection and also reflection on my choices in people. There is nothing wrong with that, and you're not going to make me believe that there is.

 

I don't think I have implied in even a remote way that there is anything wrong with reflecting upon your choices in people. I am just amazed that your microscope is never turned upon yourself.

 

You say it's a combo of self-reflection but that part of it doesn't make it into your threads or posts, evidently.

 

Here is a fact: NOTHING is going to get better unless / until you are willing to acknowledge and change your own behavior regarding your relations with other people. And FORGET about all the shortcomings of all the other people while your at it.

 

I'm sure you'll complain that I'm being insulting, etc. Go for it. I'm telling you the truth, "northern underscore sky."

 

Who are you to say I'm not perceptive about this? You don't know these guys. I do. In general the men I've dated have actually been struck by how accurate my guesses about them were, and they also referred to themselves in these terms -- "selfish," "arrogant." In fact, the last guy said at one point he was struck by how perceptive I am, not just in observing their personality traits, but in guessing details of his past. And most of the observations I shared with him were fairly neutral guesses about how he operates.

 

Right! I DON'T know the guys. I don't know if they actually praised your astute perceptions, either. What I do know, just for one example, is that you labeled one guy "perfect" a mere few weeks before labeling him "disgusting." There are many such examples; I don't think I need to go back and mine for them. Anyone who reads your threads has read them.

 

Reading your posts is how I formed my opinion about you and how "accurate" your judgements about people are. You revealed information; I used it to form my opinion.

 

You call me a put down artist.

 

No, I didn't. I asked you why you needed instantly go to labeling / insulting others (superficial psyche labels like "Aspergers," "Narcissist," et al; postulating that the guys only like girls who are less intelligent than you perceive yourself to be).

 

It's a question: Why do you do that?

 

 

but a disturbing, angry personality is emerging that takes it harder for me to take your words at face value.

 

Now that there's some insulting!

 

I have a "disturbing" personality? Hm!

 

Honestly, I believe the only thing I have said to you that is "insulting" was that you showed an ugly side of yourself in that post about how loathsome J's recent love interest is.

 

Can you give me any examples of me being insulting to you?

 

Your path to self discovery seems to have been a dubious one given the lack of self awareness displayed.

 

That was weak! My self-awareness, or lack of it, is not shown in my responses to your posts. My reaction to YOU is shown in my responses to your posts. I am well aware that I don't choose to handle you with kid gloves. I don't get the overall impression that you've been done wrong or that you need to be pitied; I do get the impression that you probably wreak a lot of havoc for other people as well as for yourself.

 

I have never once seen you show any sensitivity to how I might be hurt by your words or compromise, which is a first.

 

I don't understand this. You post an impressive amount on a public board. I think the purpose of this is to cast a wide net for different points of view. There are dozens of people who are not going to take your (or any posters') side of things. They can say so. It's a discussion board.

 

I've suggested many times that if you don't want to hear from anyone who does not stroke your ego that you just form a "northern underscore sky" fanpage or something, and only accept members who say things you like to hear.

 

 

 

I honestly question your motives for commenting on my threads when you've professed that you think I am beyond help. I don't believe your altruistic explanation of doing it to save other women from my pitfalls.

 

Um ... I have never said you were beyond help. Did I? I did say I would continue to post on your threads if I feel like it if you put me on "ignore" (why haven't you?) in case I might have something helpful to offer another woman who might read it.

 

Please consider the following posted by Yer_Blues. I don't know where it came from, or whether it is a valid description of a Narcissist ... but it sounds quite like how you seem to function:

 

 

"Narcissists hold unreasonable expectations of particularly favorable treatment and automatic compliance because they consider themselves special. Failure to comply is considered an attack on their superiority, and the perpetrator is considered an "awkward" or "difficult" person. Defiance of their will is a narcissistic injury that can trigger narcissistic rage.

 

A narcissist who is feeling deflated may reinflate by diminishing, debasing, or degrading somebody else.

 

They also use projection to dump shame onto others."

 

[that girl]

There's nothing wrong with recognizing that I have a bad people picker and tend to be drawn to guys who aren't relationship material. If I denied this, I'd keep chasing the wrong men. It's a combination of self reflection and also reflection on my choices in people. There is nothing wrong with that, and you're not going to make me believe that there is.

 

The problem is that you are kind of excusing picking the wrong men with "Well, it is because I like smart, witty guys and they're all jerks!"

 

The problem isn't liking smart guys. It seems like you are drawn to guys with an openly mean sense of humor, that you find a spiteful type of wit appealing. Guys like that are telegraphing the fact that they are jerks and it is the jerky stuff that you are drawn to.

 

In general the men I've dated have actually been struck by how accurate my guesses about them were, and they also referred to themselves in these terms -- "selfish," "arrogant." In fact, the last guy said at one point he was struck by how perceptive I am, not just in observing their personality traits, but in guessing details of his past. And most of the observations I shared with him were fairly neutral guesses about how he operates.

Perception doesn't mean much when you continue to date guys who you know are selfish and openly admit to it. You should be able to perceive that these guys will treat you badly.

 

I think there are two possible reasons why you are drawn to this type of guy, either you have low self-esteem or you're kind of selfish and arrogant yourself (which also generally comes from low self-esteem but can be other issues).

 

You can either stop dating guys as soon as you start seeing signs of selfishness or arrogance or you can embrace the fact that you don't like supportive guys and choose to date guys without depending on them for any kind of support.

[irc333]

That's what I keep suggesting to the whiney women that *itch about how all they meet are *******s, etc etc....but of course, a single gal will NEVER give someone "different" a "whirl"

 

After all, they say, "I'm attracted to what I'm attracted to, so don't tell me different!"

 

 

 

 

I think it's like what you had been telling me regarding my own issues...just go out and do something different...give something (or someone) new a whirl...even if it doesn't work, just expose yourself to personalities you wouldn't normally be "attracted" to...you might surprise yourself...