The Good, The Bad and the Nothing Else
We all like to attach labels to people. People do it instinctively in respect of someone who they have just met, someone they have read about, a person they have known for a long time or someone they have seen on television. It is rare for someone to say that they do not have a view or an opinion about someone. Examples might include: –
“He’s a dependable chap, always there when you need him.”
“He’s a funny looking fellow.”
“She is very catty.”
“She is stunning looking.”
“A complete attention seeker.”
“A genius musician.”
“Really annoys me, I don’t know what it is but he does.”
Those are just classifications based on looks and personality. One can classify somebody by race, religion, birthplace, occupation, gender and so much more. Labels are used all the time as people are placed into boxes and compartments. Our kind do the same, but we differ in a fundamental way. We have an instant classification of people which is very straight forward. We will place people into further categories after this initial categorisation often using labels you would not and then we may well attach additional labels similar to the ones you use. What is this initial categorisation? It is simple. A person is either good or bad. That person is either with us or against us. They either do what we want or they do not. There are no ifs and maybes about these classifications. There is no grey with us when it comes to deciding into which camp someone should be placed. You are either white or black. You cannot be light grey, mid-grey or dark grey. We do not do the middling; it is one or the other. Let me give you some examples of those around me at the current time.
Julia (my boss) – Good
My mother – Bad
Paul (a lieutenant of longstanding) – Good
Andrea (predecessor primary supply) – Bad
Rachael(sister) – Good
Eric (colleague) – Good
Tania (lieutenant) – Good
Lesley (It Girl) – Bad
Elizabeth (litigious former girlfriend) – Bad
Phillip (lieutenant) – Good
Colin (competitor at work) – Bad
Not one of them am I indifferent to. You should be aware that this categorisation is based on my view of them irrespective of their behaviour towards me. Lesley for instance responded to a hoover a little while back and still messages me with pleasant comments from time to time. I play along as I am a far from finished with her but she is a bad person because of what she has done and moreover I know she will be looking for an opportunity to unseat me and seek some form of revenge over me as a consequence of my repeated thwarting of her ambitions. I know her game.
These categorisations are fluid. In fact, they are extremely fluid with some people, usually our intimate partners who are our primary sources of fuel. You may begin as a good person when I wake-up but by breakfast you are a bad person. Sometimes you will be utterly unaware of why your status has altered and it may appear capricious and arbitrary but it is not; you will have done something or failed to do something which has shifted your classification. Most often it is linked to your failure to provide me with fuel and therefore you will be designated a bad person and subjected to treatment in accordance with such a status; devaluation and denigration. Conversely, one can also move from bad to good in the blink of an eye. You won’t necessarily realise why this is, but we do. It is entirely logical to us.
As I mentioned once we have classified you as good or bad, we will classify you further, usually linked to the fuel you provide and how under our control you are. After that we will use similar labels to you – an interesting, handsome person and so on. Thus, take Paul my longstanding side kick. He is naturally a good person but I also regard him as a very good source of fuel, a highly reliable source of fuel and completely under my control, loyal and dedicated. My mother is a bad person. Whilst she is a good source of fuel for her emotional outbursts and temper tantrums, she is only fairly reliable. I have little control over her, she is a traitor and scheming to dethrone me, she has no concept of loyalty and is actively plotting against me. Thus whilst she may provide fuel the other factors cause her to be placed in the bad classification. I do not consider her to be grey just because she provides fuel but cannot really be controlled.
Why do we regard people in this manner? Why is it that we cannot take a holistic view of them? For instance, one might suggest that with the ex-girlfriend Lesley that she at one point was loving, dedicated and did much for me. Yes, she became a broken appliance and let me down, she also caused affront to me for which she must be repeatedly punished. She continues to try to be pleasant to me. Do I not look at this myriad of attributes and factors (plus more besides) and place her on some kind of spectrum between good and bad? No I do not. Why? Because my need of fuel is such I cannot have wishy-washy, amorphous classifications of people. This person is good – I can rely on them to give me positive fuel and do as I say. This person is bad – I can get negative fuel from them but I must be careful as they are plotting against me and seeking to avoid my control. This then enables me to apply my manipulations appropriately. It is also necessary to enable me to maintain my superiority and my self-worth. I need to keep those two aspects alive at all times. If you do not do what I want, you are calling into question my superiority. You are suggesting that I am worthless. Thus you are a bad person and I am the person who is admirable and worthy, you are wicked and evil. If you do as I want, you are confirming my superiority by submitting to my will. I am full of self-worth because you are acknowledging this by acting in accordance with my wishes. Deviate from that and you become a bad person.
You should have learned by now that because we look at the world through a different lens to you, there are many things that you will do (which you will not be aware about) which cause us to oscillate from regarding you as good to bad and then back to good, often in the space of an hour or less. This is all based on how we perceive your compliance to be. During our seduction of you, you are only ever a good person because you represent that wonderful potent source of positive fuel which we desire. You represent the prospect of an undimmed source unlike the bad person we are devaluing and about to discard. You always respond positively to our overtures, our love-bombing and you give us what we want. Hence you remain a good person. Those who are in our coterie, our lieutenants and those who form our façade remain good people. Challenge us, defy us or even worse see through us and you are challenging our need for superiority and self-worth and you must automatically be designated as a bad person, irrespective of what may have come before, that would create a more complex view. You failed to do what we want; you are a bad person. You then change and do what we want, you become a good person. It is a simple and necessary classification that we utilise.
Accordingly, everything is either good or bad with our kind. Admittedly, though it usually turns ugly as well….
12 thoughts on “The Good, The Bad and the Nothing Else”
That explains a lot.
Is this the woman that gave birth to you? Or a step “mother“?
Is she the narc?
My mother is a narcissist, yes.
Do you have this same view (black or white) regarding the readers and bloggers here on Narcsite?
Naturally, I am what I am.
Thought so. I won’t be so bold to ask you whether you have painted me black, though! Thanks for answering HG.
You are welcome.
Changing your name does not affect how you are painted by the way.
Ha ha, I do not know how my name changed? Is na; Not Applicable? Seems I still have the same picture.
Perhaps I will ask you if I’m black or white in a few. Of course, I may not get an answer.
I know that was a joke before, however do you know when someone changes their name on here? I asume you know who we are by our email address.
I can very much relate to the good or bad classification. The difference is that I don’t move people around. It isn’t to do with appearance or what a person says or does. It’s to do with a vibe. Working more off ‘genuine’ ‘ not genuine’ ‘trust worthy’ or ‘not trust worthy’ but yes in some cases I think you can feel ‘good’ or ‘bad’ in a person.
Which brings me on to three questions.
I have seen your explanation as to how narcissists are made. Are you able to tell me how empaths are made HG? The crazies on the internet claim that we are ignored or suffer abuse as kids. Similar in many ways to narcissists. I don’t fit that profile. Could you refer me to any of your own articles please?
Secondly, I can’t find a bespoke article for the Contagion school of empath. I have read your articles about the other schools and cadres. Do you have anything further about Contagion yet please?
Lastly, you have said that 99.9% of narcissists fall within the Lesser and Mid Range. Do you have a rough split for school and cadre of empath too please? I realise we are rarely one element in either school or cadre. We do often have a lead element though, if I have understood you correctly.
I’m researching more about me and less about him for now. I have a 12 yr old daughter. There is a very valid reason for me wanting to understand more and gain an unbiased view.
Empaths are forged from a genetic predisposition which is combined with the Prevailing Environment. This does not mean it is always an abusive one at all. Different types of environment combining with the GPD create different types of empaths. Ignore the crazies on the internet, that is precisely what they are.
No, not yet.
That information is in the accompanying material to the EDC.
Thank you HG, will re look at EDC. I was so interested in what the result was going to be I’ve probably not paid enough attention to general background.
Your view as to how empaths are forged makes far more sense to me. I didn’t fit the profile for the widespread theory I was finding on the internet. Plus, it just isn’t logical.
Ignore the crazies. Noted! The only worthwhile information I found when searching was a recommendation for Joe Navarro ‘Dangerous Personalities’. I’m still reading that. His view of narcissism is reasonably in line with yours, but no where near as detailed, or well explained.
Thank you again for your considered response.