So, quite a few years ago I bought a book called: The Complete Writer’s Guide to Heroes and Heroines. It was suggested as a must for any aspiring writer. There is also a website (this is the one for female archetypes) (just scroll down, I just read the types): http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2010/09/10/relationshipstrategies/female-archetypes-and-the-men-who-love-them/
And for male archetypes: http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2010/09/03/relationshipstrategies/is-social-dominance-a-prerequisite-for-female-attraction/
I discovered the websites recently. So, I’m definitely the Waif and the Nurturer. If I was in a book or a movie, I would be the Waif. I thought the Waif fit me extremely well. It was pretty striking. So here is my description:
The Waif
Pure, trusting, kind. Innocent, naive, susceptible. Passive, insecure, wistful. Surprises others with inner strength and fortitude. Does not fight for herself or talk back, but endures hardships until she is rescued. Drifts through life desperately seeking a real home, having been molded by a sense of isolation. An orphan, she remains uncorrupted by the cruel world. Unscrupulous men may be her undoing. Examples include: Ingrid Bergman as Ilsa in Casablanca, Dorothy in The Wizard of Oz, Cinderella, Juliet in Romeo and Juliet, Princess Buttercup in The Princess Bride, Marilyn Monroe in The Misfits. The "Waif" has been attacked by feminists, but her appeal to men is undeniable. Men can’t help themselves from wanting to rescue the "Waif", to be her knight in shining armor. Her yielding, helpless, grateful appreciation is his reward.
So, wow! I thought that was extremely me. I think that my “type” is dying out. It has totally been attacked by feminists. But interestingly, is especially appealing to men. I can attest to that! :) My other type the Nurturer is also not terribly popular. But I identified with those examples as well. But the Waif is more what I would be in a book or a movie I think and actually fits me the best in real life, today, too. I think that a modern example of this is the lost princess Rapunzel in the movie: Tangled. For a person who doesn’t like “chick flicks”, I really liked this one a lot. I did. I thought that the depiction of the mother with Classical Narcissistic Personality Disorder (of the “beauty” kind, obsessed with her appearance) was extraordinarily accurate and a courageous portrayal of what it is like to be totally unloved by one’s parent; this person is using their child. Its courage is what makes the story so good. Also, the songs really stick in your head. I don’t think Rapunzel is a Spunky kid or Free spirit. I truly believe she is the classic Waif. She is literally “stuck” in life, unable to move, locked away in a tower by the cruel and deceptive actions of others. She is very innocent and is pure. I think her courageous actions fit the Waif who often does surprise others with her incredible inner strength. The story surrounding Rapunzel is about her building on that inner strength, and reaching for the stars. I felt the image of the rising lanterns, like a shooting star, was her own symbol as she rose above her circumstances. Like the other Waifs in the above examples she is stronger than she looks once she sees through things better; like Buttercup in The Princess Bride who eventually put down her foot and let Humperdink know enough was enough, and she would marry Westley.
Eugene Fitzherbert (a.k.a. Flynn Rider) in Tangled fits the description of the “Charmer”. His description from the book is:
The Charmer
Creative, witty, smooth. Highly charismatic: fun, irresistible, unreliable. Relies on personality and wit to get ahead rather than hard work. Was born knowing how to please others. A golden boy, he may be a player or a rogue. Examples include Matthew Broderick as Ferris Bueller, Remington Steele, Count Vronsky in Anna Karenina, Petruchio in Taming of the Shrew, Leonardo DiCaprio as Jack Dawson in Titanic. The man most likely to achieve player status. Enjoys the limelight, excellent people skills, makes friends everywhere he goes. Because of his constant supply of admirers, he is irresistible to women but is unlikely to make a good LTR partner.
In the book that I have, there is another category for men; the Swashbuckler. He is a bit of that. (But it seems that category doesn’t quite exist anymore and is not on their website). The writers of the book talk about how these fictional characters can be layered with other archetypes. They can also evolve. I believe that Eugene kind’ve evolves into the Warrior at the end; ever so slightly. The Charmer is an interesting combination to the Waif. In my book, it says they teach each other in the following ways:
“The Charmer spends a lot of time wooing this woman. She is an enigma he is determined to figure out. When he realizes he has hurt her fragile heart with his games, he decides to stop. For the first time, he thinks about how his actions have harmed others and moves to correct the wrongs. The Waif becomes a little wiser about judging people and their motives. Trusting by nature and habit, she finds out that not everyone will protect her. With him, she feels secure because he understands and supports her. She learns to be more outgoing without losing her protective shield.”
An aspect of their mesh is: “Both understand the need to escape once in awhile and wonder if maybe escaping together might not be more fun. In each other, they find a partner who is willing to believe in the impossible”.
This is a very surprising and interesting combination. I think I’ve always been wary of the Charmer, because he has the potential to hurt the Waif so pervasively; it sounds just vicious. But the cuts in her might seem to be worth it in the end (for him at least). Humphrey Bogart in Casablanca was used in the book as a classic example of evolving from Lost Soul to Warrior. Eugene I think evolves ever so slightly into Warrior. I say this for at least two reasons: (1) He makes a bold and interfering rescue of Rapunzel at the end, doing something nobody seemed capable of doing (also using his “Charmer” natural cleverness) and (2) He abandons his thieving, manipulative ways at the end (to conduct himself more honorably). The Warrior is one of those extinct archetypes in today’s society. But I agree that there are men who seem to "fly under the radar" but live by ideals that seem old like “honor” and “courage”. His description:
The Warrior Tenacious, principled, passionate. Driven, controlled, remote. Focused on righting wrongs, he is the ultimate protector. Honorable and intensely loyal. Examples include Atticus Finch in To Kill a Mockingbird, Jan Schlichtmann in A Civil Action, Superman, Anakin Skywalker, Mel Gibson in Braveheart, Robin Hood. Conspicuous examples are relatively uncommon in real life, though there are many men who fit this description flying under the radar. His commitment, passion and nobility will garner him intense respect among his peers. Sexual attraction is generated via the admiration of women. He is likely to prioritize his work over everything else, including relationships.
I think another modern example of the Warrior is Jack Bauer in 24. Each of the archetypes has their good and bad. For example, the Charmer is creative, witty, and smooth, but on the other hand manipulative, irresponsible, and elusive. The Warrior is tenacious (does not give up), principled (honor, integrity), and noble. But on the other hand self-righteous, relentless, and merciless. The combination of the Warrior and the Waif is as old as time. (It’s the warrior and the princess or the Knight in shining armor and the princess /damsel in distress). “Their story is as old as time. The warrior needs to protect. The waif needs protection. He is the quintessential rescuer and this woman wants to be rescued. They compliment each other’s strengths and weaknesses. Each of them stands back and observes the world around them, unwilling to dive in unless pushed. Both are outsiders. This driving need to be saved and to save draws them together. The warrior finds out he does not always have to fight a battle to win. Her patience teaches him that sometimes doing nothing wins the day. He finds that a soft word instead of a harsh rebuke sways people to his cause. He learns to pick his battles. The waif finds herself growing in self-confidence with this man. He teaches her that being a doormat is making her unhappy and that occasionally fighting for what she believes in is a satisfying experience. His love for her gives her the courage to speak up for herself. She begins to stand firm in her beliefs”. Again, I'm re-saying a lot of things from the book. The example in the book of Warrior and Waif is of Harrison Ford and Daryl Hannah in “Blade Runner”. Another example of Warrior is John McClane in Die Hard. Btw, I think a modern example (besides Rick in Casablanca) of a Lost Soul is Dexter Morgan from Dexter. The Lost Soul and the Waif have an extraordinary compliment, too. It was interesting that they omitted the Swashbuckler from the website. Robin Hood is listed as Swashbuckler in the book, but Warrior on the website. Other noteworthy examples of Swashbuckler are Harrison Ford as and in Indiana Jones and Westley from The Princess Bride. Westley is used as a prime example of Swashbuckler with the Waif (Buttercup). However, it seems as if this category is no longer in existence! Since Robin Hood is now listed under Warrior, I assume the others are now categorized as Warriors as well. Very likely in fact. They could be layered with another such as Bad Boy, Charmer or the like. But I think they're all Warriors now. I have always seen similarity between Swashbucklers and Warriors. Actually, I always wondered about that category; I think the Swashbucklers are all really a style of Warrior. I think we’re all combinations of all of them really. Another description of the Waif, this time from the book: “The waif is the two faces of every man’s fantasy. She is both Madonna and prostitute”. Her qualities are: Pure (truly unspoiled), Trusting (child at heart), very Kind (sympathetic goes out of her way to meet someone’s need). Her flaws: Impressionable (trusting others), Passive (too submissive to designing people and then trapped by fear), Insecure (doesn’t see herself as important). So, anyways I think Rapunzel (even as depicted in Tangled) is a perfect example of this. (Although she is definitely making steps beyond the fear imposed on her by her circumstances). It was a surprising and wonderful romance between her and the Charmer Eugene Fitzherbert (Flynn Rider) who I think may slightly evolve into the Warrior at the end. (I think at the beginning he's a Swashbuckler wannabe but really a Charmer who does evolve ever so slightly into some Warrior qualities – i.e. nobility). (And Rapunzel may seem like a Free Spirit but I believe she really is a Waif at heart). Not sure if Rapunzel has evolved at the end; I think not much, (still her unspoiled self) but I think she has simply tapped into that inner strength with the help of Eugene and his developed love for her. (Ok, because he teaches her that not everyone will Protect her, I believe he nudged her into the Nurturer when she finally settles down and gets married).
Charmer Eugene with Waif Rapunzel:
Great movie. Great songs. I think my favorite aspects of the movie were (for me personally) (in no particular order):
(1) The main character reminded me of myself (artist, waif, dreamer, liked to dance etc.)
(2) The visuals were sparkling and lush
(3) The songs really retold the story and even better (fantastic lyrics and very catchy and fun to listen to)
(4) The cameleon, Pascal, was the best pet ever
(5) Lively romance.
Interestingly, I think I’ve always been attracted to the Lost Soul, but always saw the Warrior as *my man and best match (definitely most attracted); but I also liked Eugene with Rapunzel. Oh, another example of the Warrior; I just saw L.A. Confidential. (yes, first time). It was so memorable, but particularly memorable was the character of Bud White (definitely a Warrior). Anyways, that’s all for now folks!
Quote of encouragement for me today: "Face the fury of those who disagree—in your heart you know they are wrong".
In my last blog entry, I shared my thoughts on love. I talked about how I believe that when two people marry, they should have a thousand common interests and common points of view (or at least have a strong tolerance of each other so that they are building on their quirkiness). I believe that every truly healthy (enjoyable) relationship is built on what those two people have in common; that that is the sweetness and the stickiness of the relationship; the honey. That uncovered, every healthy relationship is built on commonality; the more the better. I also said that I believed that 90% of the relationships out there do not build on commonality (or very much), but rather childhood issues that have not been resolved, dependency needs, and codependency needs (of various kinds which are many; that even these needs can take over the personality and create a disorder, so that these people are driven by these needs). The less the couple has in common the less happy the relationship is, the more they have in common, the more potential there is for happiness. I also talked about how people (I surmise) don’t like to hear this kind of thing, because you’re talking about them, and they’ll have all kinds of justifications for why they married who they did and why it’s not so bad (when it really is). Frankly, I don’t buy any of those things people say. I’ve seen for myself how unhappy people are when they don’t have common interests and viewpoints. It doesn’t complete them, it makes them disintegrate away from each other (especially when truth and falsehood is involved and I do believe in a real truth), it doesn’t inspire them to become better people, it frustrates them from accomplishing what they had in their hearts to do. There are differences (in a relationship), (as I talked about with my theory of complimentary, healing, and bearable (tolerable), (they are there, and have some use), but they aren’t what is important. It’s not what the relationship is based on. You will be divided from each other. Of course suffering alone does make you a better person, but think about the insanity of that defense. Why choose to make things harder for yourself? So, that’s what I was trying to say about that.
I believe so firmly that this is true that I sigh if someone comes to me with marriage problems and yet they don't have many common interests; both people can mature which can improve one's life (because good character can make you feel right), but it will always be a difficult marriage. Those with many common viewpoints and interests, however, have the greatest potential for happiness. Even though some would argue that happiness is not the chief end of man; I believe that God is so good that when we choose to follow a wise path (the Bible applied to our life), we will be following the chief end of man (to glorify God) and be happy. So, yes, I'm saying that marrying someone you don't have many common interests with is not only unwise (therefore a sin ---we are called to be wise, to apply God's word to our life), but will make you very unhappy.
I wish I could cause everyone in the world to not be unhappy, but sometimes there it is.
There is a disease that is permeating our culture and many people are infected with it in some way or another. Psychologists call it a disorder or a mental illness. Most people have some form of it. To carry many of these traits is considered "Narcissistic", (but these people have some ability to be confronted). To have this in a full-blown way is to have "Narcissistic Personality Disorder" often shorthanded as N.P.D. It is love but it is only half of the story and as a result it is warped, the person becomes obsessive with themselves in an inordinate way. So it is not love at all.
What happens to this kind of person is that they can't "hear" anyone else. It's themselves, themselves, themselves. They love to hear their own pronouncements. They imagine themselves to be gifted in things they are not gifted in. No one can tell them differently. They are grandiose and have grandiose views of themselves and talk about themselves from a lofty "on high". They are self-absorbed. No matter what they do, they love it. When their supply is high (it's called Narcissistic Supply, shorthanded as N.S.) they feel grand and can seem "nice". This is when they are actually believing all these lies about themselves and believe themselves to be incredible, nice, and wonderful. They can even purr and give out things to others (feel magnanimous at this point) because they are so convinced their lies are true and they really are "special and unique".
BUT…
They are constantly in need to KEEP it that way!
So they nervously hang out with people they believe to be "special and unique" since they believe that is "like themselves", they are special and unique and they only hang out with these "special" people that they think will continue to make them feel "special and unique". They babble on and on about these special and unique acquaintances to others so that others "know", nay, so that others are fooled into thinking this is all true.
They believe they are entitled to special privileges and well "entitlements" since they are such grandiose, special and unique people.
They believe they are gifted in all kinds of ways that they are actually below average in, or sometimes just normal at. But most of the time, well below average in, no talent at all.
They go on and on about what makes them so much better; their "wonderful" fill-in-the-blank. Everything they have is "wonderful". And this makes them special and unique. Sometimes, they truly believe they are god. They may be striving towards getting others to confirm their incredible "intelligence" "beauty" or be awed by their excessive "power" or that they have "ideal love". They want you to believe all this and affirm this. (Though it is but a sad lie).
They don't just crow and crow they want you to understand that they are "wonderful" and "you are not". They might not say that, but they pay no attention to you, so "you are not" and "they are". It's just implied.
They might imagine you are very envious of them (even if you don't even agree with them) or if they are not seeing everything as wonderful, they want more and become ragingly envious of who and what they want (maybe you). They are really dealing with this all the time.
When they believe these things more calmly, they feel better, when it's harder to believe, they become enviously enraged and cut other people down. All the while, they still continue to believe that they are "special and unique" and "amazing" and … "better". And well, just, god.
Very grandiose, they feel everyone should treat them in a special way. They believe (others) should remember to affirm this. Also, they feel the need.. to take advantage of you. This is all for them, after all. What you have, who you are, should just go into their side of things. They will exploit you. They may be shockingly [to me anyways :)] unethical and lying (sometimes in other areas). They believe they deserve it.
After they hurt you, they can't imagine why you're hurt. That's because you are like a refrigerator to them, and they just took some food out. Why should you be offended? You are just a "thing" not a monster, I mean, "god" like them.
They are so into themselves they can't enter into your world at all. You are just there for their benefit. In their ideal world, you would just affirm their lies to them all day long, so as to keep a nice neat handle on this grandiosity, by your words and actions. And so would everything else in the world. They would [wish] all the world to just affirm that all day and all night long. Then they could feel good that all their delusions were indeed reality and they could enjoy them on high. In fact, they need you to affirm this so badly, they can't stand anything to the contrary. Unhappily, even when they are happy they are just in the throes of believing themselves to be the magnanimous god who gives benefits to all the "enraptured" world. So, even when they are in a good mood, they are not considering you as a human being with needs. You're just like a slave or a plant or a lamp, book, sweater, any object to meet all their needs.
Your needs don’t exist, because you are a thing and not a human being, and they don’t have time/don't want to enter into your world. Their needs are all important and the only thing that exists. You exist for them. In a nutshell, they lack empathy. You and your needs just don’t matter to them. Don’t stay in a relationship with these kinds of people.
What's so completely sad to me is that their fixation is so complete they can never snap out of: (1) I'm wonderful, I'm wonderful, and (2) you are here to serve me. They just can't snap out of this self-absorption.
Why do they need to believe that they are grandiose and better than everyone? Why can't they steep themselves in the reality that we are all worthwhile human beings? And why are others lowly and beneath them? (I'll address this a couple of times in this entry). Basically what they have is a no-go solution. They are in love with their solution. [Explanation Part 1] They don't have time for other people. One day, they were staring at their reflection in a glass and they fell in love. Then they had a psychotic break from the rest of civilization. They no longer loved others, they only have this self-love. This false love. Which is really no love at all. I mean they don't really "love" themselves, they just got stuck on themselves. There's no love here at all. This might have happened when they were very young and got stuck in the childhood Narcissistic phase. At any rate, they think that this is the solution to the hole inside of them. They are trying to fill themselves up and they can't see anything else but this solution; but it's only half of love.
Interacting with them in a normal honest way, involves getting verbally abused. They get very "upset" at all the things that you say and do that don't fit the picture they are trying so hard to believe. (This lie they think works and they love). It also involves listening to lots and lots from them about other "special and unique" people and then boasting about talents that they are not talented in. (Their pride in non-talents most of the time, can be very confusing and disrupting to those who are trying to find their talents and recognize their gifts which are not even being acknowledged. Narcissistic parents may not only fail to recognize their children's talents while crowing about their non-talent in an area but prevent/ literally stop their children from pursuing their interests. In fact, Narcissists can be very unsettling in general, because they so often seem to "believe" their lies).
If you try to "help" them by trying to nudge them into reality so that they can be happier (not believing this exhausting, enraging, nervous, isolating lie), they may attack you worse. The term is what Psychologists call "Narcissistic Rage", but it's not anger at all, it's just like some sort of self-absorbed fanatical destructiveness towards the outside. They generally hide this, by doing mean things to you subtly or if so inclined attack you flat-out. The more upset and hurt you are emotionally the more inclined they may be to attack you flat-out because they enjoy having power over others. What I mean to say is vulnerability, pain, and original innocence enrages them to the extreme because it confronts them the fiercest. This may be relieved by throwing you under the bus. Of course, I am moving into a discussion of a deeper form of Narcissism. There are several varieties. Deeper forms include Malignant Narcissism and something M. Scott Peck dubbed Evil Narcissistic Personality Disorder. He believed Evil often comes in pairs; the most common being a couple who are parents and the victims of evil being their children. As you can see in my profile section, his book as well as Quo Vadis by Henryk Sienkiewicz are my favorites. Abusive parents will come from these two deeper forms which are often broadly grouped as "sociopathy". (1) Malignant Narcissists take on additional (from Classical N.P.D.) characteristics of sadism, anti-social traits (criminal), and lack of conscience. (2) Evil is characterized by the need to blame, scapegoat an innocent "lamb" for their sins and kill them (or kill their spirit) and lie (far more convinced of their lies) and feel above the law. Another form, the Psychopath, like the Malignant Narcissist lacks a conscience but the Malignant Narcissist has the ability to feel like a member of a gang and adhere to a gang leader; but the Psychopath can't internalize that and isn't quite as characterized by the gleeful cruelty of the Malignant Narcissist. (Some consider Malignant Narcissism the same as Evil Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Erich Fromm called Malignant "the quintessence of evil". But I see some differences in accord with the same lines as M. Scott Peck. Yes, I have a library of books I read about these subjects at home lol :) ).
The Classical Narcissist may simply see innocence as an easy opportunity for taking advantage; easy prey. This is the whole evil concept of "kicking a man when he is down". With a Narcissist, they probably put him down first, and then started the kicking. The person with Classical Narcissistic Personality Disorder (N.P.D) won't have the additional characteristics that I was talking about with the deeper forms, but is definitely a verbal abuser towards honest conversation (twisting truths a lot too). They might escalate into a physical inappropriateness of some sort, but won't necessarily be sadistic like the Malignant.
My theory (and others) since all of these have the basis of the main symptoms of narcissism in them is that they are a family of this disease, and some of them are worse.
At any rate, with N.P.D., they are not going to lift you up or care for your self-esteem. In fact, they don't want you to have any.
Why don't they want to care about others and they must have this grandiose view of themselves? [Explanation 2] Many psychologists believe it is because they don't feel good about themselves. But that doesn't really follow. Why would you need to have a false grandiosity or to put down others? It's not enough. I believe it's because they don't feel good about themselves and believe that their grandiosity and lies is the way to acquire self-esteem and feel good about themselves and happy with themselves. It makes sense. If you believe that this is the only way to feel good about yourself and to be happy. Ironically, neither one of those sentiments are true. It is not the only way, it is not the way at all, you will not be happy/deeply content.
The only way to feel good about yourself and be happy is to believe that God has made true and finalized that you are totally competent, completely valuable, and wholly loved. Since what he says is true, since he is the truth, and expresses the truth, this is to be accepted if you can receive it. This gives self-esteem and it reveals who you are. All these other forms will lead nowhere. (They can't really work).
This is true and the only thing to believe. This comes down to why? someone would cling to an empty lie rather than listen to God and be relieved and blessed; but that is the mystery of iniquity.
--Another form of narcissism called "Inverted Narcissism" has to do with someone who believes the lies of the Narcissist. They too want to have the feeling good and being happy. They believe the Narcissist's crazy lies and think they have what the Narcissist says. They think this is the only or attractive way to feel happy and that the Narcissist is happy. They might believe that. Or at least they feel this is the only way. Since they also were made to feel that they didn't own themselves (being made to feel that you don't own yourself in its extreme form is Dependent Personality Disorder –D.P.D and Inverted Narcissists always have these traits as well), they depend on the Narcissist to maybe give them some. So they hang around them and/or hope to become invaluable to them by being needed so that the Narcissism (grandiosity) can rub off on them.
These are all lies.
Shifting from having self-esteem then to how to act on that. That is the knowledge that you have self-esteem and you are a loving person. Love is the gift of God. God is love and we are in God. What is love? Love is an action flowing out from us. But who is love/loving? God is love. But He is in us and we are in Him. We are filled with love and we are in love. So who is love? God is love and I am love and you are love. We are all love.
Once a Narcissist would have self-esteem, they can have time to "get off of themselves" and start thinking about someone else, enter their world (love).
One of the hardest things to face with Narcissists is their lack of empathy. On one side of that coin they simply don't think about your needs, so you will go without and they will not feel bad. They simply don't think about your needs or bother to see your perspective, so you will go without and they simply won't care and you will be dry. You won't feel fulfilled or satisfied being around them, they leave you with emptiness. Or they won't be able to empathize deeply so you're left with something feeling "wrong" with the picture when they're through caring for you. They may not care for you on a very deep level (it's very missing) and it may be very shocking how callous they are about your suffering. They may also on a pervasive level be using you. They might become quite addicted to doing that. They may be (I'm talking about evil) twisting your motivations and lying about who you are to you so that you cannot see yourself clearly but are taking on the role of their innocent lamb "scapegoat".
The other side of the coin when it comes to this lack of empathy Narcissists have is blame. This may be the last thing that an abused (victim of Narcissism) person deals with when getting out. (But being free of confusion will not be enough when getting away from tyrants ). In psychological terms it may be called Blaming the Victim. But the abuser does it completely because they see themselves as completely faultless. They don't take any responsibility for their actions. Since they feel that they have done their "duty" by you and done you well, everything wrong in your life is your fault, because clearly THEY have been innocent lambs. Everything that they have done wrong in their lives is your fault too. They really like to use the American idea of personal responsibility to their advantage, in the ugliest twisted form of all time. You can never recover if you stay trapped in that. At least that's my own theory. This is the other important thing. (First, facing how they don't enter into your world and so will leave you starving in a barren wilderness and that you can't make them care (to help them be happy or for the both of you) and Second, that they are not taking any responsibility for their actions; i.e. that those actions ever happened or had any effect on you). THEY hurt the people around them and inflict short and long-term damage on them that is monstrous and REAL. The victim may have done EVERYTHING in their power to be un-confused, seeing the truth, doing the right thing out of caring and concern (although remember not to take responsibility for them), reduce the effects on their system, and try to get away, but that's all they can do. If they've done everything they can, then that's all they can do. THE REALITY IS IS THAT ALL THE PAIN AND THE BAD THINGS ARE THE ABUSER'S (NARCISSIST'S) FAULT, BOTH IN THE ACTIONS AND LASTING AFFECTS.
Boy, do Narcissists HATE this, they are so quick to tell people not to "blame" them; this kind of statement makes them feel desperate and enraged and many people are fooled by this. Narcissists believe that they weren't controlling anything or effecting anything and that their actions were faultless and justifiable and the ill-effects are actually good or minimal or not at all existent or caused by the other person.
They don't admit to their control, and want you to believe and see how they wouldn't bring anything but good to the person they mistreated. In addition, they feel or want you to feel that this is confusing since they "need" those things, the demands placed on them are silly since those people aren't important and all of this is an attack on them. They are the victim and the victim is actually victimizing them! (for suggesting that all the good they did was really wrong. They were well-meaning after all). I do believe that they were well-meaning in everything TOWARDS A WORLD THAT IS ABOUT THEMSELVES AND FOR THEMSELVES. This they want preserved with purity. They're extremely well-meaning and pure in that edifice. There is nothing wrong in focusing on yourself, you MUST take care of yourself, God asks us to be stewards, but….well, I'm sure everyone can get the point.
Why must they defend and rail and prop up themselves? [Explanation 3] Well, because they've made an idol OUT OF THEMSELVES. (The image of themselves). It's the old idea of idolatry; they don't TRUST GOD to fulfill their needs, take care of them, love them, so they reject his way and do it their way, with their solution. Looking out for their needs ALL the time, they have nothing left because they must ALWAYS put themselves FIRST. They just can't let go. They just can't let God fulfill them his way. They might not have the answer to how he would do it and they don't trust it or they've simply distrusted him and rejected him.
Whatever it is, they "enjoy" their ways now, or they may be oblivious to the idea (as is the Classical Narcissist) that enjoyment is important in life and they're empty, sad and bitter and no fun and don't realize it, or as in the case of the evil person they just don't like God. These people have fallen too deeply in love with themselves. They like themselves too much and don't know it's bad for them or don't think being relaxed, carefree, spirited, childlike, hopeful, and FUN are important in life. They're either convinced this is working for them or resigned to it. At any rate, they are serving their idol; their own interests. Their pleasure is in sadism and hatred, or just themselves.
I'm reminded of the bible: (Philippians 2:4): Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others.
So anyways, what prompted this essay on love was in a movie I heard this quote:
the whole point of love is to put someone else's needs above your own
I really thought about that for awhile and thought that was one of the best definitions I had heard (outside of the bible, but it is included in God's truth :) ).
In the movie, he added after that: Maybe that's why I'm here, maybe that's why we're all here.
It's moderation. Idolatry is NOT moderation. You HAVE to look out for yourself, but when you look out for others, too (as the Bible suggests)…isn't that whole love? What is love? Isn't love supposed to be about putting someone needs above your own? Isn't that why I'm here, maybe why we're all here? To love people???
I think that's why love and truth are so similar, and beauty too.
When you are loved you can hear the truth, and when you love you can tell the truth. And all of it is beautiful.
Lies are ugly and they destroy.
When you consider someone else besides yourself, you can live in truth and that is beautiful and that is what life is about.
One more thing, I've always believed that love is the answer and that love is so simple. It really is. You can't love when you have Idols in your life, just as it inhibits you from feeling good as well (about yourself or others). But a dedication to the truth (i.e. purity –in your life --before God, no idols, God is truth) and hard work will bring you there. It's just that so many people have lost their way.
That is why God is sometimes called the light and those who can see and now are living in the light are called the light of the world. The light dispels the darkness and the path of love is revealed.
Walking in that path is enabled by the light. Love is the answer and it is a simple one. But those who walk in darkness miss this. Because they do not trust the one from whom it came, or they eventually just don't like it (they have been lying too long and just don't like it anymore). But they are deceived. [Narcissism is not the only way, is not a way to feel good about yourself. It's an ugly lie you have to keep raging to believe. It only props you up and falls apart underneath, but God's truth builds you up. Only God can give you the truth].
Love is simple but not always done.
FINAL THOUGHT:
Love is an impossible
I have seen her
Broken and beautiful
Rising up above my remaining ashes
Kneel
Higher power
From a Mark Salling song. Knowing what love is, knowing Who love is, knowing where it comes from and its Miraculous power; that is the key. For the last decade I have basically refused to listen to anything except Bob Dylan (ok and some other things like Japanese music), but basically Bob, and that will be. BUT...recently I heard Mark Salling who was the lead singer in Jericho in his album: Smoke Signals. I was only going to listen to a few songs but listened to it all the way through, I couldn't help myself. The album gave me a whole new feeling I had never experienced before. I felt so RELAXED and good. I never felt "that" way before. It was like drinking a long refreshing drink/glass of water. I felt so quenched but didn't know I needed it and now want it so much. He has a beautiful light folk/rock feel. with a little bit of country Texas boy thrown in. You feel Relaxed but the lyrics are so thoughtful. In "Smoke Signals" you could tell he was raised a Christian and thought those things through for himself with his own convictions today. The lyrics blew me away and he's so relaxed and mellow. His voice is as smooth as ribbons. He's also the pinnacle of manly handsomeness. And he's my age!! Ahhhhhh….if only I was a Hollywood glamorous girl.
Anyways, yes, he's also the "bad boy" with the "Mohawk" named "Puck" from "Glee". Here he is in his new album "Pipe Dreams" (not the other one that I was talking about that changed me, "Smoke Signals").
One thing, also, I always "hid" my love of birdwatching for a long time (all my life), because I was afraid I would be cut off as a nerd. When I saw a few pixs of him in the press for events he always had these variety of birds t-shirts, kept seeing it repeatedly. This confirmed what I had suspected from his song "Echo Park Ornithology Club" from "Smoke Signals" that his music is personal. Then I read he donates for the protection of birds. I love it beyond! (It gave courage).
The following video almost has 60,000 hits. And yes, all of those were me lol.
In the video on a personal note, I loved how the dancing girl has my red hair; (my hair has gotten so dark red as I've gotten older), it's finally nice to see someone of my coloring, (and she really looks like me!), represented.
The lyrics, now I don't include anything that doesn't make my point.
I love the "almost fight" thing he does at the end of the video. He's so cute...
