The other as ideal maternal figure

Dissolved_Girl wrote:Thank you for the positive words, there are few people in this forum who don't seem hostile. But I guess that's the price you pay for being a narcissist who's opening up to other narcissists.

Anyway, back to the topic. My mom has had severe paranoia and, of course, NPD for many years (perhaps even before I was born). She even refused to go to work because she felt she was too grandiose compared to the other stupid, mediocre people around her who actually have a job. It took me 25 years to realize that she was like a little spoiled child and all my efforts throughout these years were to satisfy her needs. Now that I'm an adult, many other questions come to mind: Do I need to "fix" people because of her? Do I try to "fix" them so I don't have to look at myself? Do I want to feel like the mother figure in a relationship because it gives me sense of power and control?

I guess I'm still looking for the answers

I value courtesy very highly. I hope you find that it is a price worth paying.

Aren't we always still looking?

Those are all certainly reasonable hypotheses, DG.

Perhaps you identify with an ideal maternal image in order to preserve it. That is to say, if you prove that you are a good mother, then good mothers necessarily exist. In turn, I would analyze this as a reaction formation: demonstrating that good mothers exist is proof by contradiction that not all mothers are bad. Maybe you're afraid that you live in a world in which all mothers are bad. As the primary relationship, a world in which connection to our mothers is futile is a world in which connection in every case is futile. Humans want nothing more than relatedness; if we hope that relatedness is worth pursuing and are disappointed by the evidence we witness, then we have suffered a great loss. To most, it's favorable to avoid the realization of this loss.

Taking this line of thought further, perhaps you project your devalued self-image as needy and vulnerable child onto your significant others. You say that you were always meeting your mother's needs: this implies that your needs went unmet. Likewise, you describe your significant others as needy. They had a poor mother, and you had a poor mother. Certainly, you are the mother that they never had, but likewise, you are the mother that you never had. I think this speaks to your hypothesis on power and control, but while I believe that you meant that in a sense of the here-and-now and relationships in general, I refer to it in a very particular, and in my opinion, the original, case, with your mother. I perceive you as changing the past through its repetition. Once again, perhaps you are not only fixing them, but yourself, in effigy, by means of these people.

And of course, as you've said yourself, being an ideal mother certainly fulfills a narcissistic need: without these sorts of people around whom are susceptible to one fantastic projection or another, where has one to put one's weakness? That is to say, when you are a perfect mother, you cannot be a worthless child. But mothers are always vulnerable to the loss of their children, and therein lies the consequence!

I would also argue that multiple causes are not out of the question. I find that multiple determination is a hallmark of social science.

*who are susceptible

I should say that in the above post, when I said that you described your significant others as needy, I confused you with Philonoe. Nonetheless, I think my post has some value.

Ember wrote: I confused you with Philonoe. Nonetheless, I think my post has some value.

Yes. For Philonoe too

Philonoe wrote:

Ember wrote: I confused you with Philonoe. Nonetheless, I think my post has some value.

Yes. For Philonoe too

I am glad to hear it, Philonoe!

Ember wrote:You say that you were always meeting your mother's needs: this implies that your needs went unmet.

Yes.

Certainly, you are the mother that they never had, but likewise, you are the mother that you never had.

Possibly.

And of course, as you've said yourself, being an ideal mother certainly fulfills a narcissistic need

Yes.

That is to say, when you are a perfect mother, you cannot be a worthless child.

Not sure.

Thank you for the food for thought

Ember wrote:I value courtesy very highly. I hope you find that it is a price worth paying.

Aren't we always still looking?

Those are all certainly reasonable hypotheses, DG.

Perhaps you identify with an ideal maternal image in order to preserve it. That is to say, if you prove that you are a good mother, then good mothers necessarily exist. In turn, I would analyze this as a reaction formation: demonstrating that good mothers exist is proof by contradiction that not all mothers are bad. Maybe you're afraid that you live in a world in which all mothers are bad. As the primary relationship, a world in which connection to our mothers is futile is a world in which connection in every case is futile. Humans want nothing more than relatedness; if we hope that relatedness is worth pursuing and are disappointed by the evidence we witness, then we have suffered a great loss. To most, it's favorable to avoid the realization of this loss.

Taking this line of thought further, perhaps you project your devalued self-image as needy and vulnerable child onto your significant others. You say that you were always meeting your mother's needs: this implies that your needs went unmet. Likewise, you describe your significant others as needy. They had a poor mother, and you had a poor mother. Certainly, you are the mother that they never had, but likewise, you are the mother that you never had. I think this speaks to your hypothesis on power and control, but while I believe that you meant that in a sense of the here-and-now and relationships in general, I refer to it in a very particular, and in my opinion, the original, case, with your mother. I perceive you as changing the past through its repetition. Once again, perhaps you are not only fixing them, but yourself, in effigy, by means of these people.

And of course, as you've said yourself, being an ideal mother certainly fulfills a narcissistic need: without these sorts of people around whom are susceptible to one fantastic projection or another, where has one to put one's weakness? That is to say, when you are a perfect mother, you cannot be a worthless child. But mothers are always vulnerable to the loss of their children, and therein lies the consequence!

I would also argue that multiple causes are not out of the question. I find that multiple determination is a hallmark of social science.

As Philonoe said, thank you for the food for thought.

The only thing I'd like to add is that probably the main reason for my behavior lies in the idea of giving unconditional love. The one I never got from my mother. That's why I love my partners the most when they're vulnerable and sensitive, like little children. And perhaps that's why I want to have children of my own someday - just to "relive" the past and give them everything my mother never gave me.

Dissolved_Girl wrote:

Ember wrote:I value courtesy very highly. I hope you find that it is a price worth paying.

Aren't we always still looking?

Those are all certainly reasonable hypotheses, DG.

Perhaps you identify with an ideal maternal image in order to preserve it. That is to say, if you prove that you are a good mother, then good mothers necessarily exist. In turn, I would analyze this as a reaction formation: demonstrating that good mothers exist is proof by contradiction that not all mothers are bad. Maybe you're afraid that you live in a world in which all mothers are bad. As the primary relationship, a world in which connection to our mothers is futile is a world in which connection in every case is futile. Humans want nothing more than relatedness; if we hope that relatedness is worth pursuing and are disappointed by the evidence we witness, then we have suffered a great loss. To most, it's favorable to avoid the realization of this loss.

Taking this line of thought further, perhaps you project your devalued self-image as needy and vulnerable child onto your significant others. You say that you were always meeting your mother's needs: this implies that your needs went unmet. Likewise, you describe your significant others as needy. They had a poor mother, and you had a poor mother. Certainly, you are the mother that they never had, but likewise, you are the mother that you never had. I think this speaks to your hypothesis on power and control, but while I believe that you meant that in a sense of the here-and-now and relationships in general, I refer to it in a very particular, and in my opinion, the original, case, with your mother. I perceive you as changing the past through its repetition. Once again, perhaps you are not only fixing them, but yourself, in effigy, by means of these people.

And of course, as you've said yourself, being an ideal mother certainly fulfills a narcissistic need: without these sorts of people around whom are susceptible to one fantastic projection or another, where has one to put one's weakness? That is to say, when you are a perfect mother, you cannot be a worthless child. But mothers are always vulnerable to the loss of their children, and therein lies the consequence!

I would also argue that multiple causes are not out of the question. I find that multiple determination is a hallmark of social science.

As Philonoe said, thank you for the food for thought.

The only thing I'd like to add is that probably the main reason for my behavior lies in the idea of giving unconditional love. The one I never got from my mother. That's why I love my partners the most when they're vulnerable and sensitive, like little children. And perhaps that's why I want to have children of my own someday - just to "relive" the past and give them everything my mother never gave me.

I have, in the past, had fantasies of providing ideal parenting to future children of my own. However, I don't intend to have children without having spent quite some time with a therapist. I'm good at providing help and even at caring for children, but I know that a child that was around me constantly would perceive my oscillations between love and hatred. I think that in my current state I would devalue my children, as I have my partners, and thereby continue the cycle of intergenerational mental illness.

Ember wrote:I have, in the past, had fantasies of providing ideal parenting to future children of my own. However, I don't intend to have children without having spent quite some time with a therapist. I'm good at providing help and even at caring for children, but I know that a child that was around me constantly would perceive my oscillations between love and hatred. I think that in my current state I would devalue my children, as I have my partners, and thereby continue the cycle of intergenerational mental illness.

I've had those fantasies too, at times. I like principles of non-violent communication and education, and like imagining that I'd be a mother giving my child unconditional love and support. But in reality I'd probably hate and devalue them all too quickly. When I was younger I intensely wanted a rabbit, but I became completely disinterested in it when I realized it couldn't do what I wanted. My mother was left having to take care of it, and I didn't bat an eyelid when it died. I'd probably be a lot like Dissolved_Girl's "spoiled child" mom...

I also get my NS from taking care of "broken" men, mostly alcoholics. My father was an alcoholic (quite possibly N) and for years I didn't realize what that "familiar" smell on other people was, but there was something strangely reassuring about it. I also noticed, back when I was at school, that my taste in actors was very different from that of other girls in my class. Turns out, Al Pacino, Gary Oldman, Anthony Hopkins and such all had a problem with alcohol or drug use. It appears my subconscious spots them a mile away