Author Breezy Trousers Posted May 13, 2011 Author Posted May 13, 2011 Sound like my MM is a super easy target, with the exception of being quiet and reserved It's not a joke to people who've been involved with these guys. It's clear from your comment that you never have had this experience. It doesn't sound like you're high on empathy, so it's unlikely you ever will. For years I assumed domestic violence victims were doormats. After my recent experience with MM, that all changed. I've never been in domestic violence situation, but I have a new compassion for those who have. I now believe much of domestic violence is related to involvement with those suffering from NPD/BPD. Last fall, two therapists helped me deal with the fear of MM at my workplace. One had been in practice for decades. He told me that the damage done to people in relationship with pathologicals can take years to undo. He told me I was one of the lucky ones. Many are not. He urged me to report my MM to protect other women. Incidentally, I never told this therapist my suspicions that MM had NPD. The therapist surmised as much from my description. Again, he had decades of study and experience with this disorder and its effects on partners, a fact I had no knowledge of at the time.
Author Breezy Trousers Posted May 13, 2011 Author Posted May 13, 2011 Have you ever seen this place? http://www.advocateweb.org/ Excellent resource. Thanks! I hear you. My experiences with therapist & MM have made me stronger, more aware, more compassionate and a much more independent woman. I used to believe what the majority said I should believe, even if it went against my own intuitions. Now I trust in myself, and I don't care if 100 people disagree with me. Experience has taught me that. I would have not received this gift had it not been for the therapist and MM, so I'm grateful in a way for their role in my life. However, as I said, I didn't have deep involvement. I pulled away early on. It may have been different if I encountered these guys years earlier, though.
Heart On Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 It's not a joke to people who've been involved with these guys. It's clear from your comment that you never have had this experience. It doesn't sound like you're high on empathy, so it's unlikely you ever will. Good point! Damn glad to meet a woman like you here Breezy! For years I assumed domestic violence victims were doormats. After my recent experience with MM, that all changed. I've never been in domestic violence situation, but I have a new compassion for those who have. I now believe much of domestic violence is related to involvement with those suffering from NPD/BPD. Amen to THAT.What lead me to falling for my LMT was the very fact that for 14 years before that,I had been verbally abused and belitted by my alcoholic xH who had his own N-Traits,and my LMT convinced me that I should LEAVE and that I had a right to be happy.His agenda was simply to control me and garner Narcissistic Supply (NS)from me it turned out.But at the time,I knew I had to find a way out of my abusive marriage after years of having my self esteem stolen from me and he built me up,just to destroy me. It's easy to lose one's moral compass and self protective nature whilst N-volved with these types.I keep putting this up hoping to help those who want to know why they continue to stay involved with MM or a Husband who treat them as though they are only an option and maybe help explain why they settle for that when they could be with someone who is actually available and sincerely loving towards them.Thankfully....I found Patrick Carnes' awareness and compassion to help guide me thru! Oh...and a few women along the way who got it.Like you. http://www.sexhelp.com/betrayal_bond.cfm I could answer YES to them all while I was married and N-volved.
Author Breezy Trousers Posted May 13, 2011 Author Posted May 13, 2011 It has a tendency to pathologize people full stop. It's maybe easy to say "he's NPD" or "she's BPD" and take that as meaning they're born that way and cannot be changed. Not fully human; sub-human you could say. You see where this is going? If you meet the criteria, what else is there to diagnose you as fitting the label? Yeah. Trust me. I know exactly where you are going with this. For years, my spiritual path has essentially been the study of projection. There's a lot of validity to that, too. However, my recent experience with MM has caused me to rethink that. I no longer choose to make the study of projection my religion. It's just a very helpful tool to me. Now I know that there are some "crocodiles" out there in life who are not interested in the study of projection but are merely interested in feeding. It is what it is. My failure to recognize that fact -- and simply learn to avoid the occasional crocodile -- is what got me in trouble. My insistence on taking 100% responsibility for everything - maybe that's codependency? -- is what got me in trouble. It needs to be balanced, as with anything else.
BB07 Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 Would you say you exhibited many of the traits of a disorderly personality yourself, BB07? No.....I'm confident when I say I don't have a personality disorder, however I do have some traits/residual crap from my background. I'm a adult child or an alcoholic http://alcoholism.about.com/cs/adult/a/aa073097.htm and I'm a sexual abuse survivor which leaves it's own marks. As someone else mentioned, when involved in intimate relationships I tend to be too much of a people pleaser and my ability to be too empathetic is not healthy. I think my background makes it easier for me to transfer my need to be fixed upon others and in some twisted way in the back of my head I somehow think if I can help fix them, I've helped myself. Of course thinking like that isn't logical nor healthy but I'm just starting on my journey of learning why I've done some of the things I've done. I no longer want to have a stamp on my head that says.....hey if you are twisted, I'm vulnerable to letting you twist me up some more. As strange as it is.....if I just have a casual relationship with someone, such as casual friends, coworkers, etc. I'm great at keeping boundaries and I'm certainly no pushover, but if I get close to someone, I don't have that voice of reason that others seem to have. Yuck!
Spark1111 Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 I am the child of a suicidal bi-polar and untreated mother and a benignly neglectful alcoholic father who had long periods of sobriety. I have been in and out of therapy to overcome many vulnerabilities and feel I have emerged stronger and wiser about myself and others. I still return for the occasional mental health "tune-up.":) In regards to seduction, whether innocent or predatory, this is what I do know: The times in my life I felt most vulnerable were the times someone tried to seduce me. A college professor, a former boss, many men during my separation from H after DDay.....pregnant for cryinoutloud! And I truly believe, though no one can spot all personality-disordered people, that if you work very hard to reduce your vulnerability, insecurity, and maintain positive relationships with family and friends that you do trust, the ability to be successfully conned dimishes greatly. I now know that healthy relationships build slowly and over time as trust is established bit by bit in not only words, but ACTIONS. And today, if someone comes on too quick, too complimentary, with no real relational basis for it.....my red flag gut triggers "get away, fast." Also, in therapy, the only proper response for someone new in your life who begins to moan about their unhappiness with their SO, spouse or marriage is: "I know the name of a good therapist. Here is their card." End the conversation, REFUSE to speak of it with them, and watch what happpens......usually they move on to the next victim.
betterdeal Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 Yeah. Trust me. I know exactly where you are going with this. For years, my spiritual path has essentially been the study of projection. There's a lot of validity to that, too. However, my recent experience with MM has caused me to rethink that. I no longer choose to make the study of projection my religion. It's just a very helpful tool to me. Now I know that there are some "crocodiles" out there in life who are not interested in the study of projection but are merely interested in feeding. It is what it is. My failure to recognize that fact -- and simply learn to avoid the occasional crocodile -- is what got me in trouble. My insistence on taking 100% responsibility for everything - maybe that's codependency? -- is what got me in trouble. It needs to be balanced, as with anything else. I don't know how projection comes into this. I am not suggesting you have projecting your problems onto the men in your life. I believe it is likely both parties have disorderly personalities in any disorderly relationship.
BB07 Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 Just a thought that I wanted to share.........a lot of us have been victims in our lives and there shouldn't be any shame in that realization but the key is turning our victimization into being a survivor and living a healthy whole life free from the chains of what was done to us without our permission or our full knowledge. There are people out there in the world who do really bad things and the truth is if any of us has been a victim in our childhoods then we are set up to become the victim again but through addressing it and our own accountability and culpability, we are survivors. Knowledge is key and I appreciate who started this thread and the contributors with the insight and the links. There might be someone out there who lurks who might be helped with some of this information as we never know who might be positively impacted by something read here. A toast to you all!
betterdeal Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 No.....I'm confident when I say I don't have a personality disorder, however I do have some traits/residual crap from my background. So you meet the criteria to some degree but you don't have the condition. How does that work? I think you see personality disorders as being almost the same as a pathogen, rather than a descriptive label some of the priests / professionals in the the church / discipline of psychiatry apply to their clients, and you don't feel like you're a crazy, you have your reasons, so you can't have the disease. As someone else mentioned, when involved in intimate relationships I tend to be too much of a people pleaser and my ability to be too empathetic is not healthy. I think my background makes it easier for me to transfer my need to be fixed upon others and in some twisted way in the back of my head I somehow think if I can help fix them, I've helped myself. Of course thinking like that isn't logical nor healthy but I'm just starting on my journey of learning why I've done some of the things I've done. I no longer want to have a stamp on my head that says.....hey if you are twisted, I'm vulnerable to letting you twist me up some more. As strange as it is.....if I just have a casual relationship with someone, such as casual friends, coworkers, etc. I'm great at keeping boundaries and I'm certainly no pushover, but if I get close to someone, I don't have that voice of reason that others seem to have. Yuck! I know what you mean. My inner child / subconscious / real self was so under-developed and disconnected from my ego / conscious / false self that I would get lost in any emotionally intimate relationship I had, and accept any harm done to me by a woman. And I also know the whole rescuer thing too. Trouble with that is, the rescuer requires there to be a victim and an abuser to rescue them from. And the roles can start swinging to and fro, with everyone involved being a victim, abuser and rescuer in some way at some point. Meh. It's tricky stuff unpicking all the knots in the system. For me, it started with being single, truly single, not jumping from one relationship to the next. Learning to enjoy my own company has been a major boon.
BB07 Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 So you meet the criteria to some degree but you don't have the condition. How does that work? I think you misunderstood me or I failed to make myself clear. Criteria for having a real personality disorder is certainly different than having "issues" from a bad childhood and some poor choices in adulthood. I think you see personality disorders as being almost the same as a pathogen, rather than a descriptive label some of the priests / professionals in the the church / discipline of psychiatry apply to their clients, and you don't feel like you're a crazy, you have your reasons, so you can't have the disease. In the above I'm not sure I'm clear on what your meaning is and how it relates to me. I even looked up the definition of pathogen in an effort to better understand so could you elaborate please? I know what you mean. My inner child / subconscious / real self was so under-developed and disconnected from my ego / conscious / false self that I would get lost in any emotionally intimate relationship I had, and accept any harm done to me by a woman. And I also know the whole rescuer thing too. Trouble with that is, the rescuer requires there to be a victim and an abuser to rescue them from. And the roles can start swinging to and fro, with everyone involved being a victim, abuser and rescuer in some way at some point. Meh. It's tricky stuff unpicking all the knots in the system. For me, it started with being single, truly single, not jumping from one relationship to the next. Learning to enjoy my own company has been a major boon. Now as for the above......I totally get all of that.
Taramere Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 Any thoughts? Any of this sound familiar? Yes. He seems to be purporting to teach the reader how to seduce others by exploiting their weaknesses...which is exactly what he's doing to the reader. By using words such as "target" and promoting the notion of this seduction target being weak and dysfunctional, he rescues the reader from their own insecurities by encouraging them to project them elsewhere (ie onto the target). those who are unhappy or who have suffered a recent misfortune. Such people will also appeal to your desire to play savior. He's making no bones about it there. He knows his reader is prone to drama...and is encouraging him to indulge his taste for it. Victims with great imaginations and melancholic airs are wonderful targets, too. Someone who lives in a fantasy world? Superb! Very superb. Especially as the reader probably also enjoys inhabiting a fantasy world. Avoid targeting people with passionate, volcanic appearances. They are often hiding insecure and self-involved natures. It can be hard to get rid of these targets later. IOW if you're going to play a narcissist's game, don't target anybody equally or more narcissistic, or the drama might become a bit too rich for your tastes. People who are reserved/quiet are great targets because they love to be drawn out of themselves. Shy people are probably just glad somebody else is doing the running so that they don't have to. Folks with lots of time on their hands are great targets, too. Busy people don't have the time to focus on you. That bored people are more likely to enter into emotional or physical affairs isn't exactly rocket science, but I think here he's seducing the reader by appealing to their narcissistic tendencies. "You need somebody who will have lots of time to devote to you." It's good if targets think you have something they don't. Their belief that you will provide "something" for them makes them easy to exploit. Make sure they believe they can feed on you to fulfill their perceived lack. In the same way that advertisers encourage consumers to believe they need products and services that they can easily do without. It's also good if your targets are those who feel they are lacking excitement and adventure in their lives, because seduction will always promise that. For that reason, repressed people make particularly good targets. Probably the healthiest piece of advice so far...to provide fun. The addition of "repressed people make particularly good targets" is interesting. It sounds unlikely, and my hunch is that this is more about Greene playing on the common male fantasy of prim lady turned whore between the sheets. People who repress their desire for pleasure are great targets, too. See above. I think that basically, he's seducing the reader. Give me your money, and I'll show you how to get rich.
betterdeal Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 I think you misunderstood me or I failed to make myself clear. Criteria for having a real personality disorder is certainly different than having "issues" from a bad childhood and some poor choices in adulthood. Tell me how it is different, please. In the above I'm not sure I'm clear on what your meaning is and how it relates to me. I even looked up the definition of pathogen in an effort to better understand so could you elaborate please? I get the impression you think a PD is distinct from being the consequence of things learnt / experienced by the person considered to be disorderly. From different perspectives, a narcissist can be seen to be a crazy, or an abuser, a victim, a troubled person, or a wounded child. I have two major gripes with the PD model: First, it is a social construct. A woman having casual sex in Sweden is an empowered, liberated and fully accepted member of society. In Saudi Arabia, she's the devil's spawn. But she hasn't changed; the world in which she exists has changed. It's everyone else's problem. Second, it serves very little useful purpose and gives the impression of being an illness not a condition. A pathogenic illness, such as cold, is distinctly different from a fear of butterflies or sneezing when we see a cat (even if the cat is in a house, you are in a car and there's no cat hair near you). The way to change learnt behaviour is different from how to respond to a pathogen. Does that make more sense?
Quiet Storm Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 National Institutes of Health estimates about 15% of the US population is personality disordered. IMO, that's a lot of people. This means that my city of nearly 700,000 has over 100,000 personality disordered people walking around. We are bound to deal with them in our daily lives, and we should learn to recongnize red flags to protect ourselves. NPD is not the only disorder you need to be on the lookout for. My sister is Borderline Personality and has left a trail of pain in her wake. These people are only out to meet their own needs, and don't mind using people to make that happen. I think that for many people, especially those that grew up in nice, normal, supportive families, it is hard to believe that the outside world is not as nice, caring and honest as their homes were. These people often take the words of others at face value. The believe that most people are genuinely honest and considerate. It's not their fault that they were sheltered from the harsh realities of the world we live in, but as they grow they can do things to make themselves less of a target. The main thing is to consider the person's entire life, and not just their individual dealings with you. For example, many OW focus on the attention their OM gives them, the sweet words, his pitiful home life, the "connection". They ignore the big picture- that he is married to someone else. He may be genuinely unhappy in his marriage or he may be happily married and craving ego strokes from other women...but either way, the dude has issues. He is not living and honest and authentic life. I've known many women that end up in bad situations and say later that they had an inkling, a feeling, that something was just not right. "I knew when I was walking down the aisle that this was wrong". "I knew what he said wasn't making sense but I wanted to believe him". These women had gut feelings and ignored them. They had a few things that didn't make sense but they didn't dig, they didn't push for the truth. They wanted to believe and they told themselves things would work out. They quieted the voice that was telling them to be wary. They silenced their warning bells. Our intuition is a very valuable thing, and it should not be ignored. It is our natural alarm...and we should pay attention. In all reality, every adult is responsible for their own well being. We have the tools to be pro-active, but we often choose not to use them. My cousin is from the Southeast and we often laugh about the differences between southerners and northerners. I am put off by their over-politeness. Strangers waving to us as we are driving down the road? Fellow shoppers asking how my day is going and going on to tell me personal details about their lives? WTH? It feels so phony to me. In my mind, people that don't even know me could not possibly care about me. From her point of view, she says us northerners are too suspicious and it makes us seem rude. I think you need to find a balance between these two extremes to have healthy boundaries. If a person contradicts themselves, call them on it. Don't push that "somethings not right" feeling away. If a person seems too nice or too interested, consider other possible agendas that they might have. Don't be afraid to ask them questions, and pay attention to their responses. Consider their whole life, not just their time with you. Chances are, if the person in question is personality disordered, they will move on to an easier target or someone that better fits their needs.
nordic Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 After seeing it referenced here, I'm reading Robert Greene's The Art of Seduction. It's a fascinating book, particularly for those of us who thought we were always immune to seduction -- Greene says we are the most susceptible of all. It's always good to learn how seducers think - or intuit -- to avoid being seduced. Here's what I've learned so far: 1) Targeting the right person is necessary. Obviously, the best to target are those who are unhappy or who have suffered a recent misfortune. Such people will also appeal to your desire to play savior. Practically speaking, happy people are much harder to seduce. 2) Victims with great imaginations and melancholic airs are wonderful targets, too. Someone who lives in a fantasy world? Superb! Good luck trying to seduce someone lacking imagination / grounded in reality. 3) Avoid targeting people with passionate, volcanic appearances. They are often hiding insecure and self-involved natures. It can be hard to get rid of these targets later. 4) People who are reserved/quiet are great targets because they love to be drawn out of themselves. 5) Folks with lots of time on their hands are great targets, too. Busy people don't have the time to focus on you. (And, again, happy people don't have the inclination to. See #1.) 6) It's good if targets think you have something they don't. Their belief that you will provide "something" for them makes them easy to exploit. Make sure they believe they can feed on you to fulfill their perceived lack. 7) It's also good if your targets are those who feel they are lacking excitement and adventure in their lives, because seduction will always promise that. For that reason, repressed people make particularly good targets. 8) People who repress their desire for pleasure are great targets, too. Any thoughts? Any of this sound familiar? none of this works really well. women will have sex, when they have time and are relaxed. so, find a holiday resort, find women who has been there a few days and are getting bored lying in hte sun, and who are drinking. thats your perfect target.
Heart On Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 http://soundingcircle.com/newslog2.php/__show_article/_a000195-000673.htm Writer Peter Trachtenburg surveyed many men who admitted to having affairs and came up with patterns of emptiness in men who could not be faithful. The Casanova Complex of having affairs is more than a way of acting sexually--it is sexual addiction where a major portion of time the man's time is spent thinking about and pursuing sexual activities. Trachtenburg, who says he has this disorder says, "Any behavior that is used to anesthized pain is likely to become addictive." The need to womanize is a disorder of the feelings characterized by a man's compulsive and addictive--pursuit and abandonment of women or by symbolic flight through infidelity and multiple relationships." The man who has sexual addiction cannot allow feeling the deep pain within and his primary drug of choice becomes women. In this sexual addiction, the man sees women as good and bad--Madonna's and whores. In the chase of the new partner, he longs for the good mother. As the relationship cools, she becomes the castrating mother. After the chase and catch, he must discard her when the threat to himself becomes too great as he cannot deal with intimacy. Ongoing affairs are a pattern of conquering and manipulating women. According to Trachtenburg, there is an underlying personality disorder of narcissism in these men. In the early years there may have been a devouring, nonnuturing, rejecting mother and an ineffectual, emotionally distant father. The child's ego splits into two parts: (1) A false self which meets the parent's approval because the child is complaint and becomes a little adult meeting the demands of the dysfunctional system. (2) The true self of the child gives up and is withdrawn inward. As the boy grows up he seeks girls and women with haste and an intense courtship. Men with sexual addictions can be very charming, highly romantic and are masters of instant intimacy. This instant intimacy makes the woman feel special, singled out and valued giving them a rush... The hurry gives the man a relationship rush. The man needs to cement the liaison quickly as he knows that the "bloom" will fade soon. There is emotional fusion due to sharing the erotic excitement and the pseudo-opening of the self. The man sets up a dependence on the woman for nurturance, acceptance and excitement. His relationship with the primary woman (usually his wife) in his life becomes symbiotic. He fears fusion or being sucked into the woman. Affairs are seen as the means of escaping commitment and the sense of being smothered and consumed by the wife. There may be fear of his becoming femininized so he must act out sexually to prove his masculinity. The man flees intimacy and he is frightened of vulnerability. He is afraid of being truly himself with another human being. He is incapable of being himself and has a damaged capacity for connecting on a deep level in a long term relationship. Intimacy feels like being devoured by the woman. He feels invaded, possessed. Normal requests by the woman are seen as demands. The man must withdraw quickly to protect his fragile ego so that he does not get burned, leaving behind a string of broken hearts. The following are a series of statements which describe traumatic bonding in which a person bonds with an unfaithful or abusive partner on the basis of betrayal. This unhealthy pattern is what Patrick Carnes calls a "Betrayal Bond". http://www.sexhelp.com/betrayal_bond.cfm All unhealthy narcissism(or self esteem/worth) is formed in childhood. Some go on to be abusive and interpersonally exploitive with entitlement issues, while others continue on to be victimized over and over throughout thier lives thanks to thier subconscious ability to betrayal bonding or deny the abuse or betrayals. http://www.enotalone.com/article/4291.html When in jeopardy, our body mobilizes its defenses. All our physical systems achieve high states of readiness. Adrenaline flows. The electrochemical reactions between synapses in the brain accelerate. It's just like an automobile driven at the maximum possible speed. The sustained, flat-out performance pushes the car's mechanical system past its limits. Pretty soon, things start to break down. Our bodies and minds will react the same way. When pushed past their limits, they begin to fall apart. Unlike a car, however, our bodies and minds can regenerate and recover. Some traumas that occur as a result of betrayal create damage that is residual. That is, we do not see it or understand it until later. Some traumas, especially over time, can alter how our systems operate.
nordic Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 http://soundingcircle.com/newslog2.php/__show_article/_a000195-000673.htm Writer Peter Trachtenburg surveyed many men who admitted to having affairs and came up with patterns of emptiness in men who could not be faithful. The Casanova Complex of having affairs is more than a way of acting sexually--it is sexual addiction where a major portion of time the man's time is spent thinking about and pursuing sexual activities. Trachtenburg, who says he has this disorder says, "Any behavior that is used to anesthized pain is likely to become addictive." The need to womanize is a disorder of the feelings characterized by a man's compulsive and addictive--pursuit and abandonment of women or by symbolic flight through infidelity and multiple relationships." The man who has sexual addiction cannot allow feeling the deep pain within and his primary drug of choice becomes women. In this sexual addiction, the man sees women as good and bad--Madonna's and whores. In the chase of the new partner, he longs for the good mother. As the relationship cools, she becomes the castrating mother. After the chase and catch, he must discard her when the threat to himself becomes too great as he cannot deal with intimacy. Ongoing affairs are a pattern of conquering and manipulating women. According to Trachtenburg, there is an underlying personality disorder of narcissism in these men. In the early years there may have been a devouring, nonnuturing, rejecting mother and an ineffectual, emotionally distant father. The child's ego splits into two parts: (1) A false self which meets the parent's approval because the child is complaint and becomes a little adult meeting the demands of the dysfunctional system. (2) The true self of the child gives up and is withdrawn inward. As the boy grows up he seeks girls and women with haste and an intense courtship. Men with sexual addictions can be very charming, highly romantic and are masters of instant intimacy. This instant intimacy makes the woman feel special, singled out and valued giving them a rush... The hurry gives the man a relationship rush. The man needs to cement the liaison quickly as he knows that the "bloom" will fade soon. There is emotional fusion due to sharing the erotic excitement and the pseudo-opening of the self. The man sets up a dependence on the woman for nurturance, acceptance and excitement. His relationship with the primary woman (usually his wife) in his life becomes symbiotic. He fears fusion or being sucked into the woman. Affairs are seen as the means of escaping commitment and the sense of being smothered and consumed by the wife. There may be fear of his becoming femininized so he must act out sexually to prove his masculinity. The man flees intimacy and he is frightened of vulnerability. He is afraid of being truly himself with another human being. He is incapable of being himself and has a damaged capacity for connecting on a deep level in a long term relationship. Intimacy feels like being devoured by the woman. He feels invaded, possessed. Normal requests by the woman are seen as demands. The man must withdraw quickly to protect his fragile ego so that he does not get burned, leaving behind a string of broken hearts. The following are a series of statements which describe traumatic bonding in which a person bonds with an unfaithful or abusive partner on the basis of betrayal. This unhealthy pattern is what Patrick Carnes calls a "Betrayal Bond". http://www.sexhelp.com/betrayal_bond.cfm All unhealthy narcissism(or self esteem/worth) is formed in childhood. Some go on to be abusive and interpersonally exploitive with entitlement issues, while others continue on to be victimized over and over throughout thier lives thanks to thier subconscious ability to betrayal bonding or deny the abuse or betrayals. http://www.enotalone.com/article/4291.html When in jeopardy, our body mobilizes its defenses. All our physical systems achieve high states of readiness. Adrenaline flows. The electrochemical reactions between synapses in the brain accelerate. It's just like an automobile driven at the maximum possible speed. The sustained, flat-out performance pushes the car's mechanical system past its limits. Pretty soon, things start to break down. Our bodies and minds will react the same way. When pushed past their limits, they begin to fall apart. Unlike a car, however, our bodies and minds can regenerate and recover. Some traumas that occur as a result of betrayal create damage that is residual. That is, we do not see it or understand it until later. Some traumas, especially over time, can alter how our systems operate. what is this baby? :-)
Heart On Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 what is this baby? :-) none of this works really well. women will have sex, when they have time and are relaxed. so, find a holiday resort, find women who has been there a few days and are getting bored lying in hte sun, and who are drinking. thats your perfect target. Possibly all about you?Sorry to blow your cover. :-)
nordic Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 Possibly all about you?Sorry to blow your cover. :-) i never use a cover, ever:-) i just dont see what it is about. that men like to have sex with women? i thought we knew that already. is this a shocking news to you?
Author Breezy Trousers Posted May 14, 2011 Author Posted May 14, 2011 (edited) I don't know how projection comes into this. I am not suggesting you have projecting your problems onto the men in your life. I believe it is likely both parties have disorderly personalities in any disorderly relationship. Thanks for clarifying that. I disagree that both are likely to have disordered personalities. Most "codependents" have no problem accepting responsibility. In fact, their problem is that they take on too much responsibility. The problem with people with genuine disorders (per my definition) is that they refuse to take responsibility. Denial is a sign of mental illness. Despite the denial, the disorder is there, big time. This causes people interacting with PDs to cope with their disorder in, yes, dysfunctional ways. However, it's the situation that makes "codependents" act dysfunctional. They are not inherently disordered the way PDs and addicts are. Some -- like many here - grew up in alcoholic homes or with an BPD/NPD parent (I was lucky -- I won both lotteries, ha!). People like us learn maladaptive ways of interacting and unconsciously carry those patterns into adulthood. However, just as often, "normal" people will find themselves involved with PDs. PDs are extremely seductive. PDs can make you feel like you're "The One" very quickly ... If involved with PDs, high-functioning "normal" people will gradually start acting dysfunctional, too. It's well known fact that a non-pathological start behaving "pathological" when sufficiently exposed to a pathology over time. It doesn't work the other way around, unfortunately. That's why "NO CONTACT" is encouraged when leaving a relationship with PDs. That's why Nicole Brown Simpson's family kept protesting, "But Nicole came from a happy, normal home!" They couldn't understand how and why she stayed in an abusive situation. (We could talk more about Stockholm Syndrome, betrayal bonding, etc., here, but I won't. ) PDs resist seeking therapy. Denial and refusal to take responsibility is always a part of disorders, so no surprise there. This is often not the case for their loved ones, who are eager to get into therapy and take responsibility. So it's not hard to see how an entire industry got build around pathologizing codependency. "Codependents" are 100 times more likely to seek professional help than their disordered partners are. Why not turn "codependency" into an equal pathology? It's far more profitable for than focusing on the real source of the problem -- the PD. So that's my argument with the codependency religion. It certainly has its value but, like most religions (IMO), gets larger and larger and ends up obscuring its original truth. Finally, for me, there seems to be a lot of unexamined misogyny underlying the "you're a codependent" finger pointing. After all, which gender is the most likely to be empathetic, loyal, nurturing? .... As feminist Shulimuth Firestone pointed out years ago, some of the worst misogynists are women. Just sayin'. I get the impression you think a PD is distinct from being the consequence of things learnt / experienced by the person considered to be disorderly. From different perspectives, a narcissist can be seen to be a crazy, or an abuser, a victim, a troubled person, or a wounded child. I have two major gripes with the PD model: First, it is a social construct. A woman having casual sex in Sweden is an empowered, liberated and fully accepted member of society. In Saudi Arabia, she's the devil's spawn. But she hasn't changed; the world in which she exists has changed. It's everyone else's problem. Second, it serves very little useful purpose and gives the impression of being an illness not a condition. A pathogenic illness, such as cold, is distinctly different from a fear of butterflies or sneezing when we see a cat (even if the cat is in a house, you are in a car and there's no cat hair near you). The way to change learnt behaviour is different from how to respond to a pathogen. Does that make more sense? I really do appreciate your viewpoint but must respectfully disagree. PDs are not social constructs anymore than addictions are a social construct. All PDs have consistent identifying characteristics, whether you are from Sweden, Saudia Arabia or the U.S. It's not at all influenced by cultural bias anymore than alcoholism, drug addiction, etc. is influenced by cultural bias. (This is probably why many 12-steppers have no trouble going from a 12-step clubhouse in NYC to one in Paris to one in Mexico City to another in Bulgaria. The addiction pattern is unbelievably consistent throughout the world, regardless of gender and culture.) Disease, pathology, spiritual disorder, mental illness ... Honestly, I think human symbols are inadequate to describe any of this, and it's easy to get caught up in arguing the semantics. I believe BPD/NPD is where alcoholism was pre-1935. One hundred years ago, alcoholics were labeled hopeless degenerates. Their compulsive drinking disrupted their lives and the lives of others, but there was no cure. In 1935, AA was founded. It has a list of core characteristics of alcoholics that is, I believe, undisputed -- at least in worldwide AA meetings. Thanks to AA, 5 percent of alcoholics have a shot at recovery. However, those are still dismal rates. Denial is part of the disorder, however, so 5 percent is better than nothing. I think PD's are pre-1935 in terms of public awareness and treatment. Until 1995 (!), there wasn't much public awareness about BPD. I think that's why "Walking On Eggshells" was written --- after years of trying to cope with her BPD partner, a woman learned from a psychiatrist that he had the characteristics of BPD so naturally she would have issues. She was shocked. She didn't know what BPD was and could barely find any information on it, so to inform the public, she wrote the book. It's been a bestseller for years. Living with BPD people is extremely difficult -- just read the forums of families of BPDs. It's even tougher being a person with BPD. The good news is that there are the beginnings of treatments for BPD that are looking promising - dialectical therapy, is one. The catch 22? BPDs, like alcoholics, have to want the treatment. Narcissism? I'm hopeful there will be a cure for that, but I'm not encouraged. I imagine there is tremendous pain in those with NPD but the defenses against acknowledging that pain are immense -- and destructive. In fact, part of my attraction to MM -- a huge part -- was sensing his deep pain underneath the bravado. I've since read books on NPD and have learned this is fairly common characteristic for those who get involved with NPDs. Fortunately, again through reading, I recognized that my secret hope to "save" MM was to make up for the fact that I couldn't "save" my mother. I quickly saw my mistake -- before I actively acted out that mistake by having an affair with MM. I had to accept that my job was to focus solely on my own healing. (Again, just one of the few gifts MM inadvertently gave me...) Not all affairs result from interactions with PDs. However, many do. That's why I posted. For a number of reasons I won't go into here, I won't expose my MM. I just want to learn my lessons & restore peace to my life with as little triangulation as possible -- between him, me & OW, between him, me & work, etc. I don't hate MM anymore than I could hate a crocodile. (If you play with crocodiles, you'll get bitten. It's not personal. It's just their nature.) However, I worry about his wife and OW sometimes. Sometimes I worry that my ongoing silence may be contributing to their pain; however, I also know I'm not responsible for their choices or MM's actions. In an attempt to deal with this conflict, I decided to make my peace by posting what I've learned over the past three years here on this forum. My Walter Mitty Dream is that one of them might pop in here, read something I wrote and feel less alone. Also, I'm grateful to many who shared and helped me realize what I was dealing with. It enabled me to turn away from a potentially dangerous situation without getting hurt. Knowledge absolutely is power. I don't think you can easily extricate yourself from a pattern until you can clearly identify the pattern. I couldn't. Edited May 14, 2011 by Breezy Trousers
Author Breezy Trousers Posted May 14, 2011 Author Posted May 14, 2011 (edited) I am the child of a suicidal bi-polar and untreated mother and a benignly neglectful alcoholic father who had long periods of sobriety. I have been in and out of therapy to overcome many vulnerabilities and feel I have emerged stronger and wiser about myself and others. I still return for the occasional mental health "tune-up.":) In regards to seduction, whether innocent or predatory, this is what I do know: The times in my life I felt most vulnerable were the times someone tried to seduce me. A college professor, a former boss, many men during my separation from H after DDay.....pregnant for cryinoutloud! And I truly believe, though no one can spot all personality-disordered people, that if you work very hard to reduce your vulnerability, insecurity, and maintain positive relationships with family and friends that you do trust, the ability to be successfully conned dimishes greatly. I now know that healthy relationships build slowly and over time as trust is established bit by bit in not only words, but ACTIONS. And today, if someone comes on too quick, too complimentary, with no real relational basis for it.....my red flag gut triggers "get away, fast." Also, in therapy, the only proper response for someone new in your life who begins to moan about their unhappiness with their SO, spouse or marriage is: "I know the name of a good therapist. Here is their card." End the conversation, REFUSE to speak of it with them, and watch what happpens......usually they move on to the next victim. Out of many amazing posts here (!!!), this one really hit home. Thanks, Spark. Edited May 14, 2011 by Breezy Trousers
betterdeal Posted May 14, 2011 Posted May 14, 2011 Thanks for the reply, Breezy Trews. I disagree with you still, but you've given me food for thought. I may get back to you later. Just one question, have you assumed I am a woman? I ask because of this: Finally, for me, there seems to be a lot of unexamined misogyny underlying the "you're a codependent" finger pointing. After all, which gender is the most likely to be empathetic, loyal, nurturing? .... As feminist Shulimuth Firestone pointed out years ago, some of the worst misogynists are women. Just sayin'. Given that I am a man, I can assure you there is a massive gender-bias when it comes to people's assumptions about dysfunctional relationships, the roles each party plays, and on personal development in general. You only have to look at a yoga or pilates class (both pioneered by men) to see how biased healthy personal development is.
Heart On Posted May 14, 2011 Posted May 14, 2011 i never use a cover, ever:-) i just dont see what it is about. that men like to have sex with women? i thought we knew that already. is this a shocking news to you? It's about how some men who cheat,betray and exploit women are narcissistic with casanova complexes.Its pretty self explainitory if you ask me and I don't think coming into this thread with the attitude that women just need to be "relaxed" to have sex or that 'men like to have sex with women' was anything but immature considering the nature of the thread. We are talking about ANTI-SOCIALS who seduce women and use them for thier own personal gains and do it through hidden agenda's and then blaming US for trusting them at thier word while they back peddle out of things they start but have no intention of following thru with because they lack consciences. But you can be flippant all you want about the pain and humiliation that some men cause women because "they want to have sex" despite any and all rules of society.I wouldn't expect anything less from a man to be so cavalier about the reality that men break women's hearts to GET LAID at all costs to those around them because they have sex addictions and can't control thier behaviors and blame it on thier "inherant entitlements" as men(Boys will be Boys) when in reality,it's due to thier Unhealthy Narcissism. Now do you understand? Probably not.You seem slow on the uptake.
Spark1111 Posted May 14, 2011 Posted May 14, 2011 I will concede this point because I had to deal with this in therapy too: There are also many disordered women out there: They too lie, manipulate, and use seduction to empower themselves. They leave a wake of devastation and destruction in their paths. They often can be more disarming, destructive, competitive, power hungry and act as guileless, innocent angels as they chew men up and spit them out. I call them Spider Women, as in Black Widow Spiders. Trust me, they are out there too! And they can be harder to spot than Cassonova. Why? Women are more socialized to talk and compare notes on male behavior with our closest friends. Men, as a rule do not. And if she is wildy sexual with him, he will not notice the damage she's done for a long, long, time.
Author Breezy Trousers Posted May 14, 2011 Author Posted May 14, 2011 (edited) Thanks for the reply, Breezy Trews. I disagree with you still, but you've given me food for thought. I may get back to you later. Just one question, have you assumed I am a woman? I ask because of this: Given that I am a man, I can assure you there is a massive gender-bias when it comes to people's assumptions about dysfunctional relationships, the roles each party plays, and on personal development in general. You only have to look at a yoga or pilates class (both pioneered by men) to see how biased healthy personal development is. I'm a woman, BetterDeal ... You could be right about the massive gender bias. I mull this over from time to time. With regard to PD, I know that PDs can be women just as much as men. (The disorder controlled my mother all of her life.) But it appears that the dynamics of relationship between PD and non-PD's are essentially the same even if the genders flip-flip. The same relationship issues arise regardless of gender. (My dad could have easily been characterized as a "codependent," though I never saw him that way.) I observed this from reading posts by spouses of BPDs. The female & male non-BPD's could have been interchangeable. But gender bias has had a profound and even horrible effect on the diagnosis of PDs. I originally thought -- and still suspect -- that the MM in my situation was BPD, not NPD. He occasionally surprised me with his seeming overreactions to me emotionally, esp. if perceived abandonment issues might be triggered, but once I tried to bridge the "gap" between us in the tiniest way, he immediately calmed down.... Eventually, when I felt I needed to turn away, MM's fury and hatred terrified me, because I recognized his pain had to do with a deep & ancient pain, not with me, so there was nothing I could do to contain the volatility. (The weird thing is that we didn't really have a relationship in form. But it was one of the most oddly intimate "relationships" of my life in content.)..... As I was exploring PDs, trying to make sense of what I was experiencing with MM, I began to suspect he was suffering from BPD. But the experts' literature confused me, because everything I read kept saying that mostly only women suffered from BPD ....Now I'm reading that experts are changing their mind about this, saying men * can * have BPD and women *can* have NPD. They are recognizing that gender bias had a lot to do with their original diagnostic assumptions.... As if you can't be "emotional" or fear abandonment if you're a man! And, likewise, as if you can't be lacking in empathy (NPD) if you're a woman! MM is uber-masculine - loud, swaggering, etc. Most people use the word "very masculine" when describing him. Seeing his underlying "feminine" vulnerabilities, it's not hard to imagine why he appears this way. I tended to think his outer persona might be a social defense against his inner truth... My husband is the same way, though not nearly as amplified as MM in his emotional responses because my husband is now very comfortable with who he is. In public, my husband is the boss man. In private, my husband is a nurturer and connector extraordinaire. Then I read a book about a "philanderer/domestic abuser" written by Ann Rule. He was convicted for killing his third wife. This guy had an uber-masculine air -- much confidence and bravado. Surprisingly, though, psychological testing showed that the guy actually tested more "feminine" than his wife, who also scored high on empathy, caring, etc. I found that fascinating. I wondered how much of this guy's apparent "dysfunction" actually had to do with trying to adapt his true nature to rigid gender roles -- i.e., proving to himself and others via domination and sexual conquesting that he was, indeed, a "man." To do that, he would have to disconnect from his true self, and that disconnection would probably show up in his relationships. Something to think about. I'm sure there are plenty of examples of this with women, too. Anyway, Better -- thanks for inspiring me to think aloud this morning! I've enjoyed reading to your viewpoints. Not to belabor this point -- I'm curious about the yoga/pilate connection. Can you say more on that? Edited May 14, 2011 by Breezy Trousers
Recommended Posts