Resource Narcissistic injuries - What they are and how to protect yourself from them

[mahakaliSS_MahaDurga]

A very useful article: https://psychcentral.com/lib/narcis...ey-are-and-how-to-protect-yourself-from-them/

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

Good article, but it seems to me like the post is sending out a not-so-covert message to someone, i.e., flaming, shaming without naming.


Edit: There was some good stuff and also some weird stuff in that article, and it was sales heavy, too. I decided to do some digging, was actually considering purchasing some of his products because of the good stuff and the promises, but I decided to first watch some of his YouTube videos to see what he's like. There were weird little red flags, including a sexual one and other subtle greenlighting moves, so I looked up his reviews as a therapist, and he's seriously abusive. In fact, when he was put on one of the rating platforms, over two days there was over a page of reviews praising him, one even preemptively said that bad reviews (that didn't even exist yet) were people blaming him instead of owning their own shit...followed by four pages of consistent low reviews and horror stories. I wouldn't recommend the linked article as much of a source unless one is already far along in narcissistic abuse and/or trauma recovery, and can spot what's helpful and what's either bs or a hook for a product that promises a tool that's only hinted at. For instance, he conflates dissociation with PTSD; one can have a PTSD reaction and not recognize that it's connected to a retained, non-dissociated memory. I know this because I've done EMDR work on PTSD and was able to connect with the traumatic experience that I had never forgotten, I just didn't know how it had impacted me. In his videos, he says that people who have PTSD from war trauma or something like a car accident disassociate the memories and don't remember the experiences, and that's just not true. They may be aware of the cause of their PTSD response, or they may have a response like I did that they don't connect to the experience. In short, the guy plays fast and loose with research information that an uninformed lay person can't recognize he's revised, talks like he knows stuff and can help but then doesn't fully deliver, and for those who go to him personally to get the rest of the delivery, it's a bait-and-switch, and what they actually receive is manipulation and psychological assault. He himself seems to be a narcissist.

 

[mahakaliSS_MahaDurga]

Good article, but it seems to me like the post is sending out a not-so-covert message to someone, i.e., flaming, shaming without naming.

Wikipedia article on flaming: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flaming_(Internet)
I do not see how my post fits into this category.

Regarding dissociation and PTSD, I agree with you. PTSD is connected to dissociation, imo, but not in the way he presented in the article. I have talked to a few people who suffer from PTSD (combat veterans) and they told me that they sometimes experience dissociation from their immediate surroundings, as in something triggers them and in their mind they go back to a time when they were at war. I am not sure if that is dissociation or just a psychotic break with reality due to trauma though.

As for the author of this article, I admit I do not know much about him, but I think that narcissism goes with the territory with most authors/self help gurus/motivational speakers/life coaches etc.

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

@mahakali88, thanks for responding. Yes, dissociation and PTSD are related. And yes, many such authors and speakers are narcissistic, and I think it's good to be aware when a source of supposed support is not really supportive and in fact may be sprinkling in harm with things of value; the author left lots of harmful little breadcrumbs in that article, and instead of ingesting the article, I followed the trail.

The rest of my comment is in response to this in particular:

_____________________________________

GoodPersonEffed said:
Good article, but it seems to me like the post is sending out a not-so-covert message to someone, i.e., flaming, shaming without naming.

Wikipedia article on flaming: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flaming_(Internet)
I do not see how my post fits into this category.

______________________________________

Apologies for the lengthy response. It is a nuanced issue.

The context of my use of "flaming" was sending a covert-but-not-really message to another on the forum, in other words, flaming or shaming without naming. I note you only took exception to the term flaming, but it does indeed apply.

The Wiki entry on flaming is great. I've referred to it many times. While it focuses on overt aggression, such as foul language, there is much that shows covert aggression can have the same impacts mentioned in the article, and flaming is about the impacts. For example:

"The pleasant commentaries within a chat room or message board can be limited by a 'war of words' fight or 'flaming' with the intent to seek out a negative reaction from the reader."

Making multiple posts to shame another member is an act of war against that member. It's a fine line as to whether calling something out has an intent to garner better social behavior or to make that person feel like crap about themselves, and draw in others to add to that with reacts and comments -- I can't judge what side of the line you're on, I'm not in your head or heart. That said, communicating covertly to that member -- out in the open and yet being able to plausibly deny it was about them -- is imo manipulative/knowingly aggressive, rather than direct and honest. Referring again to the quoted section of the Wiki entry, there are also multiple readers, not just the target, and so the forum is witness to the war of words fight between you and the other member, with covert and overt posts directed at one another across multiple spaces: recovery, off topic, and suicide discussion.

Other members have the choice to respond to that war that takes up emotional and psychic space on the forum in a variety of ways. They can report it to the mods and hope the mods intervene; they can block both members and miss out on other content from those members that has nothing to do with their interpersonal war; they can take sides and focus on the turmoil and its two main participants, even take up weapons and shields in the war, and become soldiers for one or the other; they can get fed up with the environment and leave a portion or all of the environment, and lose beneficial resources to gain peace, which means they are casualties and losers in a war that has nothing to do with them.

That paragraph I just wrote is reflected in the article as well:

"The individuals that create an environment of flaming and hostility, lead the readers to disengage with the offender and may potentially leave the message board and chat room. By leaving the flaming situation, the reader has reacted calmly with limited misinterpretations. The continual use of flaming within the online community can create a disruptive and negative experience for those involved and can lead to limited involvement and engagement within the original chat room and program."

Finally, in the Rules and FAQ, flaming is briefly mentioned:

"Mods may delete content that is against the rules, and lock threads that are provoking flame wars or chaos."

How I apply it to this thread -- and, respectfully, others you have recently posted that seem to be plausibly deniable but obvious arrows directed at one member -- is that there is an active war of words and cues (e.g., reacts) between the two of you, and it causes chaos for the forum such that one either feels compelled to take sides or do something to self-protect from the toxicity. Of course, as in the article you shared in the OP, one can "observe don't absorb," but having a war between members in one's own "home," the sanctuary of the forum, is not only uncomfortable, honestly, the toxicity sucks to have around, and it's avoidable because it is a totally personal, non-forum-related issue, between two members who are using the forum for their stage and battleground.

You have the ability PM each other, you have the ability to ignore each other. I politely and respectfully ask that both of you take your private relationship issues off public display and work things out -- or don't -- in private between you. I ask this because I value this shared space, and because I'm being personally impacted by the toxicity between you, and it's not like a soap opera that I can change the channel, it's permeating all three posting areas of the forum and I can't really escape from it. So please, respectfully, peer-to-peer, with no desire for power over either of you nor to be overpowered, would you consider taking your personal relationship -- whether it's happy, unhappy or neutral -- off the open forum?

Thank you for reading.

 

[BipolarGuy]

@mahakali88, thanks for responding. Yes, dissociation and PTSD are related. And yes, many such authors and speakers are narcissistic, and I think it's good to be aware when a source of supposed support is not really supportive and in fact may be sprinkling in harm with things of value; the author left lots of harmful little breadcrumbs in that article, and instead of ingesting the article, I followed the trail.

The rest of my comment is in response to this in particular:

_____________________________________

Wikipedia article on flaming: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flaming_(Internet)
I do not see how my post fits into this category.

______________________________________

Apologies for the lengthy response. It is a nuanced issue.

The context of my use of "flaming" was sending a covert-but-not-really message to another on the forum, in other words, flaming or shaming without naming. I note you only took exception to the term flaming, but it does indeed apply.

The Wiki entry on flaming is great. I've referred to it many times. While it focuses on overt aggression, such as foul language, there is much that shows covert aggression can have the same impacts mentioned in the article, and flaming is about the impacts. For example:

"The pleasant commentaries within a chat room or message board can be limited by a 'war of words' fight or 'flaming' with the intent to seek out a negative reaction from the reader."

Making multiple posts to shame another member is an act of war against that member. It's a fine line as to whether calling something out has an intent to garner better social behavior or to make that person feel like crap about themselves, and draw in others to add to that with reacts and comments -- I can't judge what side of the line you're on, I'm not in your head or heart. That said, communicating covertly to that member -- out in the open and yet being able to plausibly deny it was about them -- is imo manipulative/knowingly aggressive, rather than direct and honest. Referring again to the quoted section of the Wiki entry, there are also multiple readers, not just the target, and so the forum is witness to the war of words fight between you and the other member, with covert and overt posts directed at one another across multiple spaces: recovery, off topic, and suicide discussion.

Other members have the choice to respond to that war that takes up emotional and psychic space on the forum in a variety of ways. They can report it to the mods and hope the mods intervene; they can block both members and miss out on other content from those members that has nothing to do with their interpersonal war; they can take sides and focus on the turmoil and its two main participants, even take up weapons and shields in the war, and become soldiers for one or the other; they can get fed up with the environment and leave a portion or all of the environment, and lose beneficial resources to gain peace, which means they are casualties and losers in a war that has nothing to do with them.

That paragraph I just wrote is reflected in the article as well:

"The individuals that create an environment of flaming and hostility, lead the readers to disengage with the offender and may potentially leave the message board and chat room. By leaving the flaming situation, the reader has reacted calmly with limited misinterpretations. The continual use of flaming within the online community can create a disruptive and negative experience for those involved and can lead to limited involvement and engagement within the original chat room and program."

Finally, in the Rules and FAQ, flaming is briefly mentioned:

"Mods may delete content that is against the rules, and lock threads that are provoking flame wars or chaos."

How I apply it to this thread -- and, respectfully, others you have recently posted that seem to be plausibly deniable but obvious arrows directed at one member -- is that there is an active war of words and cues (e.g., reacts) between the two of you, and it causes chaos for the forum such that one either feels compelled to take sides or do something to self-protect from the toxicity. Of course, as in the article you shared in the OP, one can "observe don't absorb," but having a war between members in one's own "home," the sanctuary of the forum, is not only uncomfortable, honestly, the toxicity sucks to have around, and it's avoidable because it is a totally personal, non-forum-related issue, between two members who are using the forum for their stage and battleground.

You have the ability PM each other, you have the ability to ignore each other. I politely and respectfully ask that both of you take your private relationship issues off public display and work things out -- or don't -- in private between you. I ask this because I value this shared space, and because I'm being personally impacted by the toxicity between you, and it's not like a soap opera that I can change the channel, it's permeating all three posting areas of the forum and I can't really escape from it. So please, respectfully, peer-to-peer, with no desire for power over either of you nor to be overpowered, would you consider taking your personal relationship -- whether it's happy, unhappy or neutral -- off the open forum?

Thank you for reading.

You are of course correct GPE, and you and I know who this is aimed at.

I've made my apology thread.
I am happy for the moderators to allow the OP to choose how she responds, whether it's "flaming" or otherwise, as Norfolk Constabulary are now involved anyway and have access to things that were said off-site, such as repeatedly asking me to commit suicide with her in a hotel.

Have a nice day.

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

You are of course correct GPE, and you and I know who this is aimed at.

I've made my apology thread.
I am happy for the moderators to allow the OP to choose how she responds, whether it's "flaming" or otherwise, as Norfolk Constabulary are now involved anyway and have access to things that were said off-site.

I observe in this ongoing war, each of you is aggressor and victim to the other, and each of you has folks either sticking up for you or going after you, so the war has spread.

The apology thread kept your personal relationship issues on the stage of the forum as well. I'm not going to critique that thread, but I will say that as an obsersver, it didn't feel any more good than this one. I did some reacts on various comments and removed them, because it was participation in your interpersonal war. If I have an issue with either of you individually, I'll keep it to non-relationship-related subjects. In the case of this thread, I have an issue with each of you because the toxicity of your personal, private relationship is spilling into my experience of the forum, and I feel like slinging arrows at both of you for it -- so I stepped back, said what actions are bothering me and why, and made a calm, respectful request of each of you to do something other than act out what is between you in our shared space.

I respectfully ask that you please refer to the last paragraph of mine that you quoted. It was a request to both of you.

Thank you for reading this comment and the one you quoted.

 

[BipolarGuy]

I observe in this ongoing war, each of you is aggressor and victim to the other, and each of you has folks either sticking up for you or going after you, so the war has spread.

The apology thread kept your personal relationship issues on the stage of the forum as well. I'm not going to critique that thread, but I will say that as an obsersver, it didn't feel any more good than this one. I did some reacts on various comments and removed them, because it was participation in your interpersonal war. If I have an issue with either of you individually, I'll keep it to non-relationship-related subjects. In the case of this thread, I have an issue with each of you because the toxicity of your personal, private relationship is spilling into my experience of the forum, and I feel like slinging arrows at both of you for it -- so I stepped back, said what actions are bothering me and why, and made a calm, respectful request of each of you to do something other than act out what is between you in our shared space.

I respectfully ask that you please refer to the last paragraph of mine that you quoted. It was a request to both of you.

Thank you for reading this comment and the one you quoted.

Thanks for your reply to me which is fair.

Yes I could have done a better job with my apology thread, but it was an apology nevertheless.

I wish to make no comment on the original post in this thread, partly because I've passed the issue, which mostly concerns things said off-site, on to Norfolk Constabulary.

Thank you for your fair and correct remarks regarding both of us.

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

Yes I could have done a better job with my apology thread, but it was an apology nevertheless.

I wish to make no comment on the original post in this thread, partly because I've passed the issue, which mostly concerns things said off-site, on to Norfolk Constabulary.

I respectfully repeat my peer-to-peer request to please consider keeping such things out of our shared space on the forum. I explained how it feels like a soap opera and I can't change the channel, and how it impacts me. If you consider my request, thank you. If you honor my request, a huge thank you.

 

[BPD Barbie]

I'm going to go ahead and be THAT person here. Please, whatever you guys discuss between yourselves, that's fine, but stop it from spreading into numerous threads. That doesn't need to happen and the forum doesn't need to be a part of it. You 2 have your issues with each other, that's fine, but please stop bringing the whole forum into it. This is your personal and private business, far too much has been shared already here and over the other threads.