Psychopath "Victim" forums

I was jut making breakfast and Lorraine (a daytime show that crosses news with pop culture and women’s gossip) was on in the background. There was a girl on there who was talking about how rehab saved her life of drugs but she derailed the conversation to talk about her ex boyfriend who had “narcissistic traits.” She was well informed on all the buzzwords and kept using self-obsessed and abusive and ‘letting you see what they want you to see’, etc, but never once admitted any accountability for her actions, for going back to him, for sleeping with him to get his attention after he ghosted her (lead to pregnancy), or any number of things. All her life issues were his fault and he was a narcissist who she loved once but she needed to realise it was all fake. Lol.

She could have been on the victim forum. I wanted to ask her whether she thought she was being honest and that she had no blame in this beyond being “naive and stupid.” I wanted to ask whether her minimising of her own deficits and magnification of his is really healthy. Even though she suffered and he did things to hurt her, she moved away from that pain by vilifying and without holding herself accountable for anything.

Hearing all the psychopathfree jargon on tv was kinda funny.

-- Wed Feb 21, 2018 9:02 am --

The woman was some scouser who had been on big brother. I don’t know her name

justonemoreperson wrote:That should prompt a level of, if not sympathy, certainly understanding that the person is prone to these behaviours, whereas, in reality, it amplifies the blame, leading to an open season of blame attribution as I mentioned above.

The problem with that argument is that this is not a one-box-fits-all case. Different people with the same disorder can act in different ways due to having different personalities. Some are more aggressive and malicious and some a lot less so. The line that separates which actions are part of their disorder and which ones are simply due to them being an asshole in general can be hard to determine, especially with AsPD and psychopathy.

Is there anyone here who truly believes that their disorder/condition is always at fault for the negative actions they take on other people when the blame can't genuinely be placed on someone else?

As for me, I can't say for certain which of my actions are influenced by the disorders I have and which ones are influenced by other aspects of my personality and environment. I'd like to believe that I still have a part of me that is truly me, that these disorder do not define my identity. If they do, then what control do I really have?

This begs the question of how much a personality disorder actually affects who someone really is as an individual. How much would they really change if they didn't have that disorder. Can we ever really know?

Part of "healing" in terms of PD's is learning to accept 100% responsibility for your actions. The trick is to accept your part but not "blame" yourself for it. Acknowledgement without judgement. A lot easier said than done, obviously.

Having a PD does not explain or excuse any behaviour / actions you took that caused direct or indirect harm to yourself or others.

That's the first thing you'll learn in therapy. To accept your part and responsibility in your life.

All this separation of "This part of me is actually me, but that part is the disorder" is entirely #######4. You are who you are regardless of what mental illnesses you may or may not have.

The issue with victims is they blame instead of acknowledging without judgement. They're full of judgement.

Taking responsibility for yourself is a necessary part of becoming mature... of growing up.
For everyone, regardless of mental illness or none.
It doesn't just mean paying your bills, providing for yourself with food/housing/clothes/employment, but also providing for yourself emotionally.
It is the antithesis of feeding off of someone else, of seeking prey to indulge your predatory issues, of messing with people to their detriment because you feel bored.
It is learning and applying the increasing ability to provide for yourself without the insistence of taking from others.
That's why it is hard to learn. Hard to do. Hard to consistently do. It takes effort. For everyone.
It's harder for some, PD'ed or not, who have adopted a way of thinking about things that continually suggests to them that taking personal responsibility is not the way to go about life.
That's the main reason why, to grow, one must begin to truthfully challenge their own thinking. Look at it clearly. See the distortions. See the fallacies and the automatic ways of justifying actions.
It's why Knox's therapist is pointing out that he is not chill, not at all, though he tries hard to appear so.
This refusal to take personal responsibility is everyone's duty, disordered or not, if they want to grow up.
Some don't want to grow up. OK, it's everyone else's fault. Yep. Stay just as you are. Take no blame yourself, even for the part you are to blame for.
But if you want to grow, look carefully at how you think and from that how you behave and challenge the legitimacy.

A tangential thought on this: I read here recently some admonition to "Don't say you're sorry. Makes you look weak."
Hmmm. Have you never had someone apologize to you from a position of strength? from a position of their own power and wanting to maintain that power by admitting some fault?
That is not weakness unless it comes from a point of weakness inside of them; if it comes from a position of taking responsibility, it is strength. To insist on one's invulnerabilty is a weak stance.

Apologizing from a position of power to admit self-fault and maintain that position of power by earnestly admitting to that fault is not the same thing as apologizing without sincerity purely to save face in a social situation situation. Saying 'sorry' to do what is "expected".

The former I have no problem with.

The latter is weak.

There is a large difference between the two in my eyes.

Eight wrote:A tangential thought on this: I read here recently some admonition to "Don't say you're sorry. Makes you look weak."
Hmmm. Have you never had someone apologize to you from a position of strength? from a position of their own power and wanting to maintain that power by admitting some fault?
That is not weakness unless it comes from a point of weakness inside of them; if it comes from a position of taking responsibility, it is strength. To insist on one's invulnerabilty is a weak stance.

To some degree it’s also strategic decision on the lines of picking your battles. The longer you insist on standing by an indefensible position the longer I get to keep hitting you.

Not everyone perceives it in terms of 'battle' or 'hitting'. If your position makes more sense than mine, I'll gladly steal it and not feel bad about it. Ideas and truths don't have owners.

Once, during an argument my opponent was looking to question, in predetermined manner, about winners and loosers and my intentions. I thought it was the most absurd thing I'd heard, and not how we're used to SOLVE conflicts.
I'm glad it hasn't been used since.

shanzeek wrote:Not everyone perceives it in terms of 'battle' or 'hitting'. If your position makes more sense than mine, I'll gladly steal it and not feel bad about it. Ideas and truths don't have owners.

Well I was thinking about political debate or professional cock-ups, what are you on about?
I mean this is about apologising being weak isn’t it? which assumes an adversarial set-up, as otherwise weakness or strength would not be relevant.

Also of course ideas have owners, that’s where the whole, taking credit for other people’s work, comes in.

shanzeek wrote:Not everyone perceives it in terms of 'battle' or 'hitting'. If your position makes more sense than mine, I'll gladly steal it and not feel bad about it. Ideas and truths don't have owners.

"Stealing it" seems a bit passive-aggressive. I think I'd rather have someone openly battling me, with mutual hits being given and taken, than I would having someone smile to my face as they steal my goodies.