Was Betty Broderick actually a victim of narcissistic abuse?

Posted on November 20, 2017 by luckyotter

Originally posted on September 27, 2016

Dan and Betty Broderick at their wedding, 1969

Sometimes the delineation between being a narcissistic abuser and having been a victim of narcissistic abuse is not very clear. A famous example is Betty Broderick, the jilted wife who broke into the home of her ex-husband, Dan Broderick, and his new wife, Linda Kolkena, and shot them both to death as they slept.

The entire story is documented in Bella Stumbo’s excellent true crime book, Until The Twelfth of Never, which I read a number of years ago. The story of this tragedy haunted me for weeks, but Dan’s treatment of Betty prior to the murders haunted me even more. In fact, it downright bugged the bejeezus out of me.

Betty was eventually prosecuted and her appeal for parole was denied. She will probably spend the rest of her life in prison.

Did Betty murder in cold blood? Absolutely. Did she ever admit guilt or show any remorse for her actions? No, she did not. Was she manipulative and did she show self-centered behaviors? Yes. Did she use her children as pawns in her one-woman crusade against her cheating ex husband? Again, yes. Was the diagnosis of Narcissistic Personality Disorder she was given by the prosecuting psychiatrist correct? Very likely. (She was also diagnosed with Histrionic Personality Disorder).

I’m not defending what Betty Broderick did. She is a pre-meditated murderer who killed in cold blood as her victims slept and showed no remorse for her crime. She used her children as pawns against her ex in their hostile, drawn out divorce, not thinking or seeming to care about their needs, only her own. Two of her four children don’t speak to her and one has written a book against her and testified against her in court.

But even taking all this into account, I always had a huge problem not seeing Betty as the real victim, in spite of her heinous crime. From their marriage in 1969 until 1983, when her husband’s affair (which he had lied to her about) came out in the open (and the shit hit the proverbial fan), Betty was by all accounts a loyal and faithful wife, very much bound by her strict Catholic religious upbringing (and probably, how she appeared to others). She was a typical 1950s-early 1960s-style housewife, whose main interests in life seemed to be marriage and family. She wasn’t a go-getting feminist or a a dissatisfied wife who longed for a career or an outside life; she was perfectly happy taking care of the house and playing second fiddle to her successful attorney husband Dan (who had both a law and medical degree), proud of being seen with him at the many functions he attended, and dutifully raising four children (a fifth one died shortly after birth). If she really had NPD, perhaps much of her perfect-wife persona was for show or to be well regarded in the community, but Stumbo’s true-crime book described a woman who, if anything, was doing everything she thought she had to do to be a good wife and mother, who never cheated on her husband or showed any interest in expanding her interests outside their family. Granted, she was never easy to live with, and could be very demanding, needy, and high maintenance, but I wouldn’t say she was malignant, at least not in the beginning. If she was a narcissist, she was a covert one with a lot of borderline traits.

I think it was her husband who was a much more grandiose and obvious (if not more malignant) narcissist. He was charming, overly concerned with his image and status, wildly successful, cold and unfeeling to his wife and children, and seemed to lack any empathy for his wife’s many emotional needs. She did seem to be the more emotionally unstable of the two of them, but such is often the case with the partner who is being victimized–especially if the abuser has flying monkeys (and Dan had a whole community of them due to his power and reputation).

Dan Broderick and Linda Kolkena, circa 1983

When Betty was in her 40s, she had gained some weight (as many women do around that age) and Dan began to show how little he valued his wife and their marriage, now that she was no longer young and beautiful. He started an affair with an attractive young woman in his office named Linda Kolkena, who he promoted to his personal assistant. He spent less and less time at home and even took his new assistant on vacation (saying it was a business trip). Betty suspected something was going on and asked Dan about it. He lied to her and said there was nothing and she was imagining things (sound familiar)? Eventually the truth could no longer be hidden and he admitted he’d been having an affair with Linda all along. But it didn’t stop there. He also told Betty he had fallen in love with Linda and wanted to marry her, and told Betty coldly that he wanted a divorce. Shortly after he left her, Linda fell pregnant. They flaunted their happiness cruelly in front of Betty, who always had self esteem issues.

The divorce was drawn out, dramatic, and ugly. Betty became increasingly deranged, and showed stalking behaviors and began to involve her children in her one-woman crusade against her cheating ex. But Dan and Linda also ganged up against Betty and made fun of her, leaving abusive phone messages where they could be heard laughing together and making fun of Betty’s age, weight and intelligence. Such a thing would certainly make ME see red! For Betty, an insecure woman whose entire identity had been tied up with being Dan Broderick’s wife and the mother of his children, his cruel and malicious behavior must have been unbearable and something eventually snapped.

Dan was able to convince everyone that Betty was insane–not to mention fat, stupid and old. He was expert in gaslighting and triangulation, turning most of their friends and even their own children against her.

What Betty did was wrong. There’s no way around that. She was spiteful, manipulative, and completely out of control. She lied in court. She didn’t seem to have much, if any, empathy for their children (by that point, I would completely understand if she had no empathy for her ex and his new wife, given their shabby treatment of her during the divorce proceedings).

Betty Broderick during the trial.

But I wonder how much she may have been driven to act as she did. Dan seemed cold-hearted and emotionless from the get-go, almost psychopathic. For 14 years, Betty put up with this b*stard and obediently played the role of the trophy wife that he wanted. When she was too old, he unceremoniously dumped her for another woman.

In my opinion, Betty Broderick was a victim of narcissistic abuse who was driven to become a narcissist. Even if she was already a narcissist, I don’t think she was malignant or that she would have gone to the extremes that she did on that horrible day in 1983 had she not been driven to to the brink of insanity by her arrogant, compassionless, egotistical cheater of a husband.

This case has always fascinated me, in part because I think so much was brushed under the rug during the divorce proceedings and the trial. I always felt a bit of sympathy for her, in spite of her horrible crime. Here’s another article I found in defense of Betty Broderick. Betty was certainly no angel, but I don’t think Dan Broderick was as good a guy as the press and popular media liked to make him out to be — not even close.

Betty Broderick: Victim or Victimizer

Throwback Thursday: Psychopaths, narcissists, and pets.

Posted on November 16, 2017 by luckyotter

Originally posted on November 16, 2014

There’s been a lot written about the devastating effect psychopaths have on other people, but what about their pets? Do psychopaths even have enough empathy to keep pets?

Unfortunately, yes they do. But for them, pets are a means to an end, a creature that can be exploited in various ways that serve the psychopath, rather than a friend and companion. A pet can be a way to “keep up with the Joneses” (if most of their neighbors and relatives have pets). They have no genuine love for the animals under their care, and often treat them badly or even abuse them. Here is an article I just read last night where the blogger calls out his MN sister about the callous way she puts her cat to sleep because she’s moving, even though there’s nothing wrong with the cat. Later the blogger describes the cruel manner in which the woman’s two beautiful dogs are left outside on a chain even in the searing heat or freezing cold, and are never played with or paid attention to. Eventually, this cold woman tells her brother she will be having her depressed but otherwise healthy golden retriever put down “because he’s old.”

I remember when we lived in a trailer park for about a year, some of our neighbors treated their animals very badly. I don’t know if it was just ignorance (most of the people living in the trailer park were not too well educated) or if we had a surplus of psychopaths living around us, but I remember one poor dog in particular. In fact, this dog was a black lab/Doxie mix who was the sister of my dog, Dexter (who we acquired from a family who lived in another trailer in that park).

Rain or shine, snow or sleet, or on the hottest days of summer, that poor dog was left outside attached to a clanking metal chain in the driveway. The few times I saw anyone interacting with that dog was when the owner, a raging drunk whose wife had called the police on a number of occasions for abusing her, would kick the dog or yell at him. I would have called the police, but was afraid of the repercussions, and also the dog had become so aggressive I knew no one would adopt her and she would have been put down. Maybe that would have been the best thing for her though, but I wasn’t thinking clearly at the time, being embroiled in my own mess with my own psychopath. I did try to interact with the poor dog occasionally, but she would just bare her teeth and growl. I would look at my Dexter, with his sweet, affectionate personality, and think of what his poor sister could have been had she been cared for by loving owners. I have no doubt that owner was a psychopath. Anyone acting that cruel toward his pet is someone without much or any empathy. A person who just dislikes animals would not have a pet at all, not keep one around just to abuse it. The owner probably kept the dog for “protection.” Why else have one?

Is this dog’s owner a psychopath?

In fact, you see that a lot. There are many people who keep a dog, usually an “aggressive” breed such as a Rottweiler or Pitt Bull, as a method of security. No one will try to break into a house or trespass if there is a barking, aggressive dog present. People who keep dogs as a form of security aren’t necessarily psychopathic though. A normal person who keeps a dog for such a reason will still play with the animal and be affectionate toward it when it’s not “on duty.” But if the animal is ignored, or left outside all the time, that’s a different story. Whenever you read or hear a heartbreaking story about a vulnerable animal being neglected or abused, you can bet it’s owner was a psychopath. In fact, pets, being helpless and trusting, often serve the same purpose as a child or vulnerable person: as a scapegoat.

There are other psychopaths who like to brag about how aggressive their dog is. The dog is an extension of themselves, and they take pride in training it to attack or act aggressively toward others, not as a form of security, but as a way to intimidate other people through their dog. Training a dog to be aggressive just to be aggressive is also a form of animal abuse.

Then there are those who, like my MN mother, keep a dog or other animal as a status symbol. They always choose a purebred animal, often a type that is trendy or expensive and makes them appear to be wealthy to others. My mother has a purebred Bichon Freze, a very cute dog, but it’s an extension of herself rather than a companion. She takes it in to a groomer monthly to have its nails done and puts bows on its head. I’m sure if this dog develops health problems, no matter how minor, she will have the dog put to sleep. Several years earlier, she had a purebred toy poodle, and when she got old, callously had her put to sleep, even though she had no health problems other than a little trouble walking due to arthritis. When I questioned her about why she took such drastic action, she just shrugged and told me she didn’t have the time to deal with an ailing animal. I don’t recall her even shedding a tear.

There are purebred animals that have been inbred so much they have health problems. I think anyone who breeds a dog or cat for a certain “look” at the expense of its health is lacking a conscience or empathy, at least toward animals. These people are breeding animals to have a deformity! Imagine breeding humans to have a condition such as Spina Bifida. How is it any different? Persian cats are a perfect example of a cat breed that has been bred to have a pushed in, flat (and in my opinion, ugly) face and as a result they have breathing and other health problems. Some dog and cat breeds, such as the “munchkin” cat or Bassett hound have serious spinal issues or have trouble walking due to their excessively short legs.

Persian and munchkin cats.

Some psychopaths use pets as a way to torment or control their children. They will purchase or acquire an animal for a child, and then if the child misbehaves, hold the threat “I’ll have Fido or Fluffy put to sleep if you do that again” over the kids’ heads. This is mental torture. My N-ex’s mother was a narcissist herself and used this tactic to manipulate him. When Michael was five, his father brought home a white puppy. He loved that dog and spent all his free time with him (he may not have been a narcissist yet, it’s hard to say). One day when he was five, he was coloring with crayons on the hardwood floor, sitting in a patch of sun that came in through the living room window. Buster, the puppy, was sitting next to him watching. There was also a pair of child’s plastic scissors on the floor. As children will do, he left to do something else without putting the crayons and scissors away. But before he came back, Michael’s mother discovered the crayons had melted all over the wooden floor. Surely she couldn’t have really thought the melted red and purple crayons were blood, but when Michael returned to coloring, she pointed to the waxy, melted mess and the scissors and accused him of “cutting the dog.” Buster did have a little red crayon on his fur but was not cut and wasn’t hurt in any way. To punish Michael, his mother announced she was having the puppy put to sleep, in order to “teach him a lesson.” And so she did. So psychopaths will use animals to manipulate, control and torment their children.

Some psychopaths and narcissists will acquire a pet to control other people. My ex, Michael (the grown up version of the little boy in the last paragraph) did this. Now he actually was an animal lover (and always said he preferred animals to people), but he also used them as a way to say “fuck off” to me. I’m an animal lover and have always had pets, but I remember when in 2011, he adopted a dog without asking me how I felt about it. At the time, I already had three cats and Dexter, my dog. The house I live in is small, and there wasn’t room for another dog. For several weeks he had been combing Craigslist looking at puppies. He wasn’t working and was basically freeloading while I paid all the bills. Not only was there not room for another dog, I couldn’t afford one. I begged him to not get any ideas. Michael assured me he was “just looking” and to stop worrying.

Well, lo and behold, one day I came home from work to find a puppy in his arms on the couch. I was angry and told him there was no way I could take care of another pet, and he would have to take it back. He said he wouldn’t. “Too bad, he’s here to stay,” he said.

The puppy was a Jack Russell/Beagle mix and the loudest, most undisciplined, and hyper dog I ever met. Michael refused to train him and a year later this dog was still pooping and peeing in the house. He also tore up everything, and I’d regularly come home from work to find the house in a shambles. Michael never bothered to pick up the mess. He’d just make excuses for his pet, whining “but he’s just a puppy!” even though the dog was a year old. If me or my daughter tried to discipline him, Michael accused us of being cruel. Talk about gaslighting!

The dog (who he named Barnaby) also barked constantly and ran away at least 3 times a week. We’d hear Barnaby barking and howling somewhere in the neighborhood but he wouldn’t return for hours, no matter how much we called him. He was a neighborhood nuisance, and three times neighbors called animal control. Still, Michael refused to discipline or train him. That job fell to me and my daughter, but of course we were “cruel” or “hated animals.”

The third time animal control showed up, I told them to please take the dog. I never wanted him in the first place, and I couldn’t control him. I didn’t want to pay a $75 fine to keep him, so away he went. I felt bad about the fact he would probably be put down, but there was nothing else I could do. Michael, of course, was livid, and said “I never realized how much you hated animals.” Of course only HIS needs mattered. He didn’t care that all the training and financial expense of the dog fell on me. He also didn’t care about Barnaby’s needs: he was wel aware that Jack Russells (and Beagles) are extremely active dogs that need to run. It’s in their genes. We were living in a small house with a tiny unfenced yard, and that’s not an appropriate setting for a dog like Barnaby. But like all narcissists, Michael was like a three year old: “I want a dog and I better have one and I don’t care what you think!” Now I love dogs, but in Barnaby’s case, I was never so happy to see the last of that animal. I hope someone with a large fenced yard and time to train him appropriately adopted him.

So yes, psychopaths do keep pets, but they are kept for all the wrong reasons–to control others, to serve as scapegoats or status symbols, to guard property, and generally to serve as extensions of the psychopath. And that’s about it. Psychopaths and narcissists have no genuine love for animals, just as they have none for other people.

5 reasons why you should never tell a narcissist they’re a narcissist.

Posted on October 8, 2017 by luckyotter

Originally posted on July 1, 2015

In my dealings with narcissists, it’s sometimes been tempting to tell them to their face that they’re narcissists, thinking maybe it could be the wake up call they need. It’s a nice fantasy to think they might take a look at their obnoxious, abusive, insufferable selves and try to make some changes, but unfortunately that’s just a fantasy. It won’t work, because narcissists cannot feel remorse for their actions or empathy for hurting you. In fact, they may take pleasure from it.

The following reactions are far more likely if you “out” a narcissist to their face:

1. They might rage. Or give you the silent treatment. Or laugh at you. Or deny it. Or abuse you. Or call you names. Or tell you you’re crazy or deluded. Narcissists hate the truth, and if they know you have their number, they feel threatened and will attack like a cornered rattlesnake. It’s in their nature.

2. It might give them twisted narcissistic supply. Some narcissists may actually take a perverse pride in being called narcissistic. Rather than making them feel shame and remorse, telling a narcissist they’re a narcissist may flatter them and inflate their ego even more, which could lead to them becoming even more narcissistic and abusive than they already are.

3. They might project it back onto you. This is surprisingly common. Projection (attributing their own bad behaviors to their victims) is one of the more common red flags of a narcissist, so if you call a narc a narc, don’t be too surprised if they start telling everyone YOU are the narcissist. They might even turn the tables and play the victim (see DARVO).

4. They might learn more to hone their weapon. Taking #2 a step further, some bright narcissists may actually decide to learn more about their disorder–but not to learn how to control it or improve the way they treat people, but rather to educate themselves about abusive narcissistic mindgames they haven’t already tried in order to use them against you. I actually know someone this happened to when she called her ex a narcissist. He started reading every book he could get his hands on about NPD and narcissistic abuse, and systematically started using the information to “prove” his girlfriend had NPD and that he was the real victim (see #3).

5. They might not be a narcissist. There is always a possibility (even if small) that the person you think is a narcissist really isn’t. If you’re not a mental health professional qualified to make a diagnosis based on standardized testing and interviews, your own bias, lack of knowledge, or just plain dislike of a person could be influencing your judgment of them. Perhaps they are having a bad day (or a bad life), or suffer from some other disorder that can mimic narcissism. Even non-disordered people can act like narcissists at times. All of us can. So if you’re certain someone is a narcissist, you may be right, but it’s still best to keep that information to yourself–or only tell your close friends.

Grumpy old men: narcissists in old age.

Posted on October 8, 2017 by luckyotter

Now I just think “Donald Trump.” I get irritated at the mainstream media that keeps looking for his nonexistent empathy, and keeps speculating that the smallest “nice” thing he does means he is changing. All it means he is appeasing his base/donors or he has been ordered to act that way. Giving him a gold star for just doing his job (which is hardly ever) only enables him. Donald Trump is incapable of changing and proves it daily. He doesn’t even have the self-awareness to realize he is a pathological narcissist, as someone like Sam Vaknin was able to do. Without that, there is no hope for change at all — especially not at age 71.

Lucky Otters Haven

It’s been said narcissists grow worse with age. As they lose their looks and mental acuity and become less sexually desirable and more unemployable, they lose the ability to attract the supply they need to feel like they exist. Most will fall into deep depression and a few might even commit suicide. Growing old and having to confront one’s own mortality is the ultimate narcissistic injury. The only thing they have left to obtain supply is their advanced age itself.

Some will become the stereotypical “get off my lawn” grouchy old man or woman, demanding their entitlements (or what they think are their entitlements) be met, no matter how unreasonable. They don’t bother with “charm.” They don’t even try to hide their self-centeredness or contempt for others anymore or make any attempt to be “nice.” They’ve given up playing the games they used to attain supply when they had their…

View original post 394 more words

Fake empathy.

Posted on September 5, 2017 by luckyotter

Most US Presidents, following a national disaster like Harvey, have spent time with survivors — comforting and talking to them, serving them food, and sharing hugs and even tears.

Donald Trump not only took several days to visit the people of Houston after Harvey left it devastated, when he arrived there, he spent more time bragging about the size of the crowds (as if he was at one of his rallies instead of at shelters where he had a captive audience) and what a “huge storm” Harvey had been. He talked more about how Texas could handle things because it was so strong than he did actually offering words of support and comfort to its people. Most outrageous of all, he told the survivors — people who had lost everything and were staying in crowded shelters — that they seemed “happy.”

Sure, he provided some good “optics” — picking up and kissing babies and pretending to serve food to the survivors — but his words to the people who were his captive audience were hollow, inappropriate to the occasion, and extremely awkward. He also didn’t miss an opportunity to diss the media and Hillary Clinton.

The mainstream media gave him a pass, fawning all over him for having at least tried to act presidential, when they should have been calling him out on his inappropriate, callous, and outrageous words of “support” to these devastated people.

This morning he decided to put an end to the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program (DACA), an Obama-era program that ensured that young people who were brought over from other countries as children — a program that required its recipients to either be working or attending school. By ending DACA, he doomed these productive, intelligent young people to deportation back to the countries their parents brought them from (with a six month delay). That would mean that these kids and young adults, the vast majority of who are high achievers and are benefiting our economy, would lose everything. They would be stranded in foreign lands they couldn’t remember, in some cases knowing absolutely no one. For a party that calls itself “pro-family,” his heartless and cruel decision will tear families apart and destroy lives.

Trump also had a history of failing to acknowledge Americans who have died in tragic accidents, most recently the 12 sailors who died in an accident on a Coast Guard ship. Not one word was ever mentioned about those sailors, but this was far from the first incident in which Trump — unlike past presidents — just didn’t seem to care.

Watching Trump, I believe he not only has no empathy, he also has no conscience. That to me indicates a sociopathic, not merely narcissistic, personality. He actually seems to delight in causing pain and suffering. I do think he is in fact sadistic, and enjoys pushing policies that will traumatize and hurt people.

When he talked about Harvey, he seemed almost gleeful over how “big” and “powerful” the storm was. He seemed almost proud of it and acted like the Houston survivors should be proud of it too, as if it were some national monument or sports record. I think he could relate to the storm. He can relate to anything that’s powerful and destructive and destroys lives, because destruction and chaos is the only thing he understands.

Now he’s traumatizing the entire country by playing chicken with an equally unhinged narcissistic sociopath using nuclear weapons. Nuclear war is a real possibility. We are in grave danger of annihilation. But it’s just a game to these two — and we are pawns in their game. We are expendable because we aren’t people; we are merely objects to be played or discarded at whim. Trump’s ego is much more important than human life, and he is willing to kill us all to save his ego.

A friend told me her young daughter comes home everyday crying because she’s so afraid of nuclear war. She’s just 12, and can’t sleep. She can’t concentrate at school and is withdrawn and depressed. My friend told me she has had to send her daughter to a therapist to try to address this trauma. But this girl isn’t alone. Many people are being traumatized by this president’s actions and threats, but he will never care. Nor will he stop his destructive and dangerous behavior.

Going back to Harvey, Joel Osteen, the multimillionaire Prosperity Gospel preacher who holds his church services in a huge stadium, refused to open the stadium to flood survivors until he was finally shamed into it. He held a service to pray for the survivors– and passed around a collection plate for donations to the cause — even though the people at the service were the survivors themselves! Who does that?

Trump’s evangelical “spiritual advisers” offered only “thoughts and prayers” to the flood survivors– not any real tangible help such as money, food, clothing, or time spent comforting families. Of course, there’s nothing wrong with praying for people, but when “thoughts and prayers” are used as a substitution for any real help, they are as meaningless as a Hallmark card.

I’ve noticed this is something narcissists will do in lieu of offering any real help. They will condescendingly say, “I will pray for you,” or promise you they will send their “thoughts and prayers.” Another thing they will do is offer you phony and hollow platitudes, slogans, and sayings in place of actually offering you a listening ear, compassionate advice, or any real empathy. There’s a huge emotional disconnect — they can’t relate to you with any depth or as a person with real feelings. Instead, they try to mollify you with a few canned words printed on a card or a meme — and then put a guilt trip on you if you aren’t grateful for their lame and shallow efforts at “comfort.”

They also victim-shame. They airily tell you your life would be better if you just acted more happy, smiled more, or acted more positive. Now sure, there’s a place for positive thinking, and I agree that positive people tend to draw in more positive things in life (I have seen this work for myself). However, there is a limit to this. There are times such an attitude is just plain callous and insensitive, a way of dismissing the very real needs of people who have suffered misfortune through no fault of their own. Narcissists absolve themselves of any responsibility or having to offer any real help by insidiously blaming the victim by telling them “if only you were more happy/positive/smiled more, etc. ”

During his sermon for Harvey survivors, Osteen told the people — most who had just lost everything they owned — not to play the victim. I’m sorry, but how are people who have just lost everything they owned playing the victim? They are victims, and as such, they should be showered with real compassion, not condescending platitudes about positive thinking. They should also not be expected to donate to their own cause (especially when Osteen himself owns a 15 million dollar home and is one of the wealthiest men in the country) and most of these people had no access to cash or their bank accounts.

I think this conscienceless, heartless administration has been especially hard emotionally on people who have suffered abuse at the hands of people like them and also on people who are empaths and very sensitive to their spiritual darkness.

Truth or Dare?

Posted on August 22, 2017 by luckyotter

Elizabeth Mika writes probing, fascinating, and, well, creepy posts about Trump’s malignant narcissism and the ways our narcissism as a nation inevitably led to an election of someone like him. She also writes about the psychology of his most ardent followers, who seem eerily reminiscent of cult members. This is a phenomenon she accurately dubs “Trumpism.” When under the thrall of a cult leader, many people seem to forget their own morals and not have minds of their own. They will continue to deny truth and support their leader even when there is irrefutable proof of the leader’s immorality and even criminality held up to their noses.

In fact, I believe Trumpism is a cult, and Trump qualifies as a cult leader.

cult_definition In Ms. Mika’s most recent post, she writes about this disturbing trend and the true intentions of the criminal mob who hijacked the White House in November.

Truth or Dare?

Would you want to know ahead of time if your future president suffered from a dangerous, incurable character defect — not mental illness — that was typical for all tyrants in the history of human race?

What if that defect, with its predictable manifestations and consequences, was described to you early on, so you could perhaps help prevent the tyrant’s rise to power? Or, if too late for that, at least understood what to expect and pursue appropriate action as his reign took hold?

Would you want to know?

This knowledge is easily available, though for some reason we prefer not to find it, and that’s as our government, country, and the entire world come under threat from just such a characterologically defective leader and his circle of similarly impaired enablers.

Yet we don’t want to see it, and we loathe talking about it, even though, as Lee Siegal reminds us, avoiding questions about Trump’s mental unhealth is “a betrayal of the public trust, a denial of human nature, and an insult to posterity.”*

In a September 2016 post, The Red Herring of the Candidates’ (Physical) Health, I wrote:

If / when Trump is elected and proceeds to dismantle our democracy (yes, we know this is a very real possibility, thanks to correct diagnosis, as chaos and destruction are assured by his character defect; but he also said so, should there be any doubts), will we perhaps revisit and rethink the Goldwater Rule? If we have that chance, of course, and courage and a desire to do so.

The dismantling of our democracy is in full swing now and proceeds according to schedule.

Make no mistake: What we are witnessing is not some incompetent bumbling of political novices, but purposeful and vengeful destruction of our government, country, and possibly — if the pathocratic Trump/Bannon cabal is allowed to remain in power unopposed— the world.

*****

Read the rest of this post here.

I highly recommend Ms. Mika’s blog on Medium. This is where hers and other’s articles on Trump, Trumpism, and the normalization of sociopathy/narcissism in general can be found.

Trump’s personality disorder brings out the worst in everyone.

Posted on August 12, 2017 by luckyotter

manbaby

I think it’s pretty safe to say Donald Trump has a very malignant case of Narcissistic Personality Disorder and appears to fit all of its psychiatric criteria. Unfortunately, he’s only the tip of the iceberg, merely a symptom of America’s soul-sickness.

Trump has surrounded himself with a staff of other Dark Triad or Cluster B personality-disordered types. Congress and the Senate are also populated by people who appear to have no conscience or empathy, and only feel entitled to take from others to enrich themselves. Many of them appear to have antisocial or psychopathic personalities.

Narcissists like Trump become codependent and simpering in the hands of psychopaths, because of their emotional neediness. Vladimir Putin appears to using him to achieve his own nefarious ends of world domination or at least the destruction of western democracy. Trump, being a narcissist and therefore far more emotionally fragile than Putin, doesn’t realize he’s only being used and exploited.

I could go for pages speculating about the psychology of Trump, his enablers, and those who are using him for their own ends (and many have), and I feel pretty confident saying that almost his entire administration is made up of sociopathic and codependent types, the latter of which have mostly already left or been fired (Reince Preibus and Sean Spicer seemed more codependent to me than personality-disordered themselves).

I don’t see any obvious Borderlines in the Trump administration, although Trump himself appears to have a few Borderline or Histrionic traits. As far as I can tell, Trump is the only obvious case of NPD. The rest seem more like people with ASPD or psychopathy to me, seemingly emotionless and willing to use and enable Trump for their own ends.

How Trump brings out the worst in everyone.

Authoritarianism and racism are highly correlated with antisocial and narcissistic personalities, and we saw the worst of society become violent at the KKK rally and protest in Charlottesville, Virginia today. The undercurrent of hatred in this country runs deep, and our election of a black president in 2008 and 2012 did nothing to quell it — if anything, the hatred and racism that were always lurking beneath the surface became even deeper and more toxic than at any time since the Jim Crow days.

America is a sick country and only a sick country would elect a malignant narcissist for its president and psychopathic or antisocial people for high political positions. Trump isn’t the problem, since the problem would still be there whether or not he was president. He is the ugly symptom, and is now bringing all the darkness out in the open. We are finally seeing how deep this cancer runs and hoping against hope it hasn’t reached Stage Four.

In some ways this is a good thing, since now we can see exactly how sick our nation has become and how deep and dark the divisions between us really are. But Trump also has a way of bringing out the worst traits in everyone he comes in contact with, even indirectly — in his administration, in his supporters, in his enemies, and in his opponents. Even though I’ve never met the man, whenever he’s on TV I feel as if all the oxygen has been sucked out the room. He’s everywhere. You can’t get away from him.

Trump enables his cabinet members and sycophants in their lack of empathy, lack of conscience, and crass greed and selfishness. They use him for their own ends and they know he will never call them out if they just keep on flattering him and giving him the praise he wants.

Trump brings out the worst in his staff. He causes drama and chaos whenever his bottomless need for admiration and approval isn’t met — he will attack, devalue or discard whoever he believes isn’t giving him the approval he craves, even those who could benefit him. He always has a scapegoat, always — even among those who have been loyal to him, like Mitch McConnell or Jeff Sessions. Never in my life have I seen a White House so filled with drama and discord. Even the Nixon administration at the height of Watergate seemed like a sanctuary of sanity in comparison. Trump brings out the very worst in his staff, while anyone with a semblance of a conscience or a soul left has already resigned or been fired.

Trump brings out the worst in his supporters. He enables them to display their authoritarianism, racism, hatred, and ignorance — even to the point of violence, as we see happening today in Charlottesville. On social media, the rhetoric of his supporters has become increasingly hate-filled and ugly, to the point of threatening non-supporters with terrorism and even civil war against them. Trump appears complicit in all this, and acts as if it isn’t happening.

Trump brings out the worst in his non-supporters. Many people are suffering from PTSD or even C-PTSD that has been retriggered by his constant gaslighting, projection, threats, need for revenge, and denial of the truth. Depression, despair, feelings of dissociation and unreality, and dread are problems for many Americans right now, and therapists even have a name for it: Trump Traumatic Stress Disorder (TTSD). Anger is also being triggered in his non-supporters, though not in quite the same way as in his supporters. Righteous anger differs from hatred, and it may be the only good thing he’s bringing about. He’s forcing his opponents to expose the truth about what has happened in our country over the past few decades and demanding that we change course — drastically, if necessary.

I was involved in a discussion on Twitter about Trump’s fragile ego, and we agreed that he seems to be a collapsed narcissist, who knows it’s only a matter of time before the whole house of cards comes toppling down and he’s exposed, even to many of his supporters, as the criminal and fraud he really is. As he grows more desperate, he increases the volume on his endless demands for admiration and approval, holding more hatred-enabling rallies and even threatening nuclear war over a perceived insult from North Korea’s equally unhinged leader. That’s how bottomless Trump’s emotional void is: that he would be willing to send millions of people to their deaths — even the entire planet — just to save his fragile ego. It doesn’t help that many far-right religious leaders are stroking his ego even more by telling him he’s been anointed by God.

We can never begin to think of what he’s doing is normal, because it’s anything but.

trump_2

That’s the sound of your soul being sucked into oblivion.

****

Further reading:

The Soul-Sucking, Attention-Eating Black Hole of the Trump Presidency.

Sean Spicer is suffering from PTSD and that’s why he resigned.

Posted on July 22, 2017 by luckyotter

spicerinthebushes

Sean Spicer has resigned as Press Secretary. The reason he gives is because his boss Trump hired Anthony Scaramucci as his new Communications Director.

This video explains Spicer’s decision. He feels that Scaramucci lacks experience (what else is new in this White House?) and Spicer would wind up doing two jobs for the price of one:

I guess this was the last straw for Spicer, who was obviously crumbling in his thankless role of having to lie for his boss all the time. The job of Press Secretary is generally one of the easiest cabinet jobs, but in this White House, under this president, it’s probably one of the hardest.

Personally, I think Spicer was looking for a way out and this was the best opportunity for him to escape from his hellish role. I don’t despise Spicer the way I despise 99.9% of Trump’s staff. Sure, as a conservative, he accepted the position, but I don’t think he had any idea of what he was signing up for. Every time I saw Spicer speak to the press, he seemed more angry, more defensive, and more nervous, even to the point where I was sure he was going to run from the podium in sheer panic. He seemed to really hate his job, and I don’t think it’s because he hates the press.

But his boss does hate the press (most of them being the truth-tellers in this hot political mess), and undoubtedly instructed Spicer to lie to them about what his intentions were and the things he was doing (and I’ll even speculate he may have threatened him if he didn’t lie).

In spite of his combative manner, Spicer doesn’t strike me as a bad or immoral person. He strikes me as someone suffering from a bad case of PTSD. In other words, he’s a victim of narcissistic abuse under the most malignantly narcissistic, sociopathic president this country has ever seen. PTSD often manifests as anger and defensiveness. What gives him away is his jitteriness and what often appears to be terror in his eyes. He carries himself around like a whipped dog. We all remember when Spicer hid in the bushes to avoid having to speak to the press. It was farcical, but also a sad indication of a man completely unsuited to be doing this type of dirty work for a blackhearted boss.

There was also some evidence that the vulnerable Spicer was in a scapegoat role in Trump’s cabinet. White House Chief of Staff Steve Bannon said the reason Spicer was appearing less in public (replaced by the insufferable Sarah Huckabee Sanders) was because he was “getting too fat.” I think that was a lie and smear tactic. Bannon ought to look in the mirror at his own bloated, unhealthy-looking body before he fat-shames someone else.

I rather like Spicer. Or more accurately, I feel sorry for him. He seemed to crumble more by the day and lose his composure easily. Imagine standing in front of reporters from major newspapers, TV news stations, and other news outlets, most of them hostile to this president, having to field their pointed questions that flew at him like bullets. Imagine having to answer these questions with grace and intelligence, without losing your cool or sounding like you’re lying your face off.

Spicer tried, but he couldn’t do it. That’s because I don’t think he’s like the rest of them. I think he still has some semblance of a conscience and sense of right and wrong. I don’t have any proof of this, but I sense it from him. He knew he was lying for a boss who is trying his damndest to be dictator-in-chief and dismantle democracy, and he hated it. He couldn’t deal with it anymore; if he continued doing it, I think he knew he would be spiritually destroyed. That’s the danger in not breaking away from a malignant narcissist like Donald Trump and the cabal of flying monkeys and enablers he has surrounded himself with. Spicer had to go “no contact” with his boss before he lost his own soul.

I also think Spicer knows a lot he’s not saying — yet. But I think he will, when the dust settles. I’m waiting for his tell-all book.

I just saw a clip of him on the news leaving the White House, and he was smiling like a man who just won the lottery. It’s the first time I ever saw him look happy.

How DARVO could prove which of us is telling the truth (reblog)

Posted on July 16, 2017 by luckyotter

darvo

This is a good article I reblogged from Nyssa’s Hobbit Hole. I think this information about determining accountability is not only useful on a personal level for those of us who have had to deal with narcissists, but as a useful way to decipher who are the real liars and truth-tellers in the current political mess we’re in. Narcissists and sociopaths use all kinds of tactics such as gaslighting, smear campaigns, and playing the victim while making the real victim the “enemy.” Of course, in our current political situation, both sides accuse the other of the exact same things, so it can be hard to determine who are the real victims and perpetrators. Personally I think a quick determination of who are the real liars and truth-tellers can be made by observing who protesteth too much and which side acts more aggressive. This can also be applied to dealing with people on a personal level and is very effective if you’re paying attention.

I have left Nyssa’s links in place. Her ongoing tale about narcissistic abuse by two former close friends who sunk to new lows by stalking her blog is riveting and educational.

How DARVO Could Prove Which of Us is Telling the Truth

By Nyssa McCanmore, Nyssa’s Hobbit Hole

DARVO refers to a reaction perpetrators of wrong doing, particularly sexual offenders, may display in response to being held accountable for their behavior.

DARVO stands for “Deny,, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender.” The perpetrator or offender may Deny the behavior, Attack the individual doing the confronting, and Reverse the roles of Victim and Offender such that the perpetrator assumes the victim role and turns the true victim into an alleged offender.

This occurs, for instance, when an actually guilty perpetrator assumes the role of “falsely accused” and attacks the accuser’s credibility or even blames the accuser of being the perpetrator of a false accusation. –Jennifer J. Freyd, What is DARVO?

While re-reading this article on Shrink4Men, I came upon a section which hit me as proof to my readers (who can read Tracy and Richard‘s bizarre, intimidating and remorseless e-mail to me in the “Now I’m Being Stalked” post, and how they’ve been trying to stalk and intimidate me online and off for the past few weeks) of which of us is telling the truth:

Of course, not everyone who denies wrong doing is engaging in DARVO. Many partners and exes of abusive women are accused of things they didn’t do or of things that never happened.

Naturally, when this happens, you deny the accusation and perhaps feel a little (or a lot) bewildered. How do you know if an individual’s denial is the truth or an instance of DARVO? Freyd (1997, pp. 23-24) proposes:

“It is important to distinguish types of denial, for an innocent person will probably deny a false accusation. Thus denial is not evidence of guilt. However, I propose that a certain kind of indignant self-righteousness, and overly stated denial, may in fact relate to guilt.

I hypothesize that if an accusation is true, and the accused person is abusive, the denial is more indignant, self-righteous and manipulative, as compared with denial in other cases.

Similarly, I have observed that actual abusers threaten, bully and make a nightmare for anyone who holds them accountable or asks them to change their abusive behavior.

This attack, intended to chill and terrify, typically includes threats of lawsuits, overt and covert attacks, on the whistle-blower’s credibility and so on.

The attack will often take the form of focusing on ridiculing the person who attempts to hold the offender accountable. The attack will also likely focus on ad hominem instead of intellectual/evidential issues.

Finally, I propose that the offender rapidly creates the impression that the abuser is the wronged one, while the victim or concerned observer is the offender. Figure and ground are completely reversed. The more the offender is held accountable, the more wronged the offender claims to be.”

Please click on this link to read the full article.

Why isn’t a mental health assessment required for a new president?

Posted on July 9, 2017 by luckyotter

danzcolorplus7013

Credit: Increasing Number of Psychiatrists Challenge The Goldwater Rule / FFRF Maine

My son is applying for a job as a police dispatcher. Like all government jobs, it’s a good paying job, with great benefits, including comprehensive health care, dental, and an actual pension. He’s already passed two of the tests and the pool of candidates is down to just a few. He thinks he has a good chance of snagging this job, but he still has to pass a mental health examination, since a dispatcher’s job can be incredibly stressful. You have to be able to act quickly and make life and death decisions. You can’t let your own emotions get in the way if you get a frantic call from someone threatening to kill themselves, or from a terrified woman whose ex-lover is holding a gun to her children’s heads. You can’t dissolve into a handwringing puddle of indecision when you get a call from someone saying their husband is having a heart attack. You must be able to act efficiently and quickly, and keep your wits about you at all times. The job, though it pays well and is stable compared to many other jobs, has a lot of turnover because many people find they can’t handle this type of life-and-death stress for very long. There is good reason then, to give a candidate like my son a mental health assessment, to make sure they are emotionally stable enough to be able to handle the type of situations that will come up without snapping, becoming depressed, or even blaming themselves if something goes wrong (because sooner or later, it will: some who threaten suicide will succeed; some who have a gun pointed at their head will actually be shot).

But the job of police dispatcher is far, far beneath that of President of the United States. Only one or two individuals will be affected at a time by the choices a dispatcher makes, while the President’s decisions have the potential to affect an entire country, or even the entire world.

We have a president who obviously has a severe mental illness. He appears to fit ALL of the 9 DSM-IV-TR criteria for Narcissistic Personality Disorder:

A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:

(1) has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)

(2) is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love

(3) believes that he or she is “special” and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)

(4) requires excessive admiration

(5) has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations

(6) is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends

(7) lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others

(8) is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her

(9) shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes

If that’s not bad enough, Trump shows signs of severe paranoia and even a possible degenerative illness like Alzheimer’s. It doesn’t take a trained psychologist to be able to see what is obvious: Donald Trump’s behavior is not normal. At best, he’s incompetent and unfit to lead a nation; at worst, he’s a clear and present danger to the planet.

Armchair psychiatrists’ speculations aside, no official diagnosis of NPD or anything else has been made for Donald Trump. That’s because of The Goldwater Rule, which was instituted by the American Psychiatric Association to address the idea that diagnosing a public figure (Barry Goldwater’s fitness to run for president in 1964 was in question) without an official psychiatric assessment was unethical.

It’s my opinion (and that of some mental health professionals) that an exception to the Goldwater Rule should be made for Donald Trump, who is visibly mentally ill enough to pose a real danger to America and to the world. But why wasn’t he given a psychiatric examination to determine his fitness to lead our country in the first place?

Personally, I don’t understand why a psychiatric assessment isn’t required for all incoming presidents, or even for anyone who makes the final two candidates in any election. If my son has to take one to qualify for a job as a police dispatcher, then I definitely think it should be a requirement for any incoming head of state.