Ask HG Episode Part 1

You ask. The Ultra answers.

48 thoughts on “Ask HG Episode Part 1

  1. Joa says:

    HG, I thinking about this for a most while. This is not a provocative question. It’s just a question formed in my head, from what you write. And also from the case of a “spectacular death” that I have been trying to understand for over 40 years.

    Question:

    1. Will you shoot yourself (or some other more sophisticated death) if you know, that there is nothing else to do but a decline in power and dependence on others? Will you want to stay ahead of death?

    And one more thing, if you answer – yes.

    2. Will you then use your death to simultaneously inflict the greatest and most lasting blow to someone, that will be with her/him/them for the rest of her/his/their life?

    1. HG Tudor says:

      Irrelevant.

      1. Violetta says:

        Why settle for a traumatic death “that will be with her/him/them for the rest of her/his/their life”? If your work on narcissism is recognized even by the credentialed anal-retentives in the field, as it already is by increasing numbers of lay-people, you can have an effect that will outlast all our lives.

        If there’s a life after death, that would mean an eternity of fuel. Tertiary, perhaps, but if there are other narcs in the ether, you’ll be feeding off their envy.

      2. Joa says:

        Indeed, an answer that does not contain an answer, should irrelevant…

        —————–

        If I were to decide, that death is irrelevant, I would also have to recognize, that life is irrelevant. This is a dangerous area. I would have to opt for one of the options:

        1. My life and my death is irrelevant.
        2. Other people’s lives and their deaths is irrelevant. (!)
        3. All of us life and our death is irrelevant.

        As a child, I didn’t like these thoughts very much. They were quite intrusive. They caused “inner suction”, an unpleasant feeling, and then inertia and indifference.

        I didn’t like it. That’s why I decided not to go this way. I chose otherwise. I decided, that everything should relevant.

        —————–

        Your word is relevant. Your smile is relevant. Your gaze is relevant. Your thoughts is relevant. Your pain is relevant. Your tiredness is relevant. Your irony is relevant. Your anger is relevant. The smell of spring, I felt this morning, is relevant. Your life and your death is relevant.

        I – is relevant.
        You – is relevant.
        She and he – is relevant.

        I WANT, everything I touch and look at to matter.

        —————–

        Your reply HG, did not satisfy my curiosity. But – is relevant.

        —————–

        I will not go into this abyss. End and dot. 😊

  2. Z - zwartbolleke says:

    O wow, displaying the mask exactly on 31 January, you’ve got to admire your timing!

    1. A Victor says:

      Oh boy….note to self, investigate significance of Jan 31…

      Thank you Z!!

      1. Z - zwartbolleke says:

        Ha ha AV,

        a quick search will show you in an instant that the figure displayed by the mask, was taken from the Tower of London on 31 January to Old Palace Yard in Westminster for the execution of his sentence: dead by hanging and quartering.
        It didn’t really go as planned as he, allegedly intended, fell and broke his neck before he was hanged.

        I was just in awe that Mr Tudor captured again this historic moment at the exact moment and waved it seamlessly into blog life, I have a weak spot for these kind of perfections!

        1. Z - zwartbolleke says:

          *weaved not waved 🤦🏼‍♀️

        2. A Victor says:

          Whoa…that is clever! But…fell and broke his neck on his way to his hanging? That’s some odd irony, intended or not! Thank you Z, and also HG, I love little bits of history such as this!

  3. Truthseeker6157 says:

    I really love the fact that you work your way through the questions systematically rather than cherry picking. There are a lot of questions to get through yet everyone feels included. It’s a really fair approach.

    1. k mac says:

      I do wonder if he is skimming over one’s he dosen’t want to answer during those long pauses.🤔

      1. Truthseeker6157 says:

        Haha KMac, maybe, though I don’t think so. I think HG might skip over thank you messages if there are a few together, or sometimes the questions are repeated or more lengthy perhaps and he pauses to frame his answer concisely for the video,

        That reminds me, AV, we got lots of breathing on this series. (We both have a thing for hearing HG breathe! ) Mmmm breathing, Haha!

        1. A Victor says:

          Haha TS, I have noticed that a few times recently also…🥰💕🔥

          1. Truthseeker6157 says:

            AV, haha! 😉

      2. A Victor says:

        Hi K Mac, On previous Ask HG’s I have followed the questions in the comments. He didn’t skip, those times anyway, except where there are more than one question within the same comment, which does indeed keep it quite fair.

  4. Sarah says:

    Fascinating! How does one find out about these in advance so that one can participate?

    1. HG Tudor says:

      You pose your questions in the comment section to the video.

      1. Sarah says:

        Oh, lordy! That could take pages, lol. I did wonder last night as you were talking about being a narcissistic psychopath, are you more psychopath than narcissist or vice versa?? And I was curious when you think the psychopathy started, which is quite different I think than narcissism?? Or do you think differently?

        I find this quite fascinating, HG. Since narcissism does run in my family, Along with a plethora of other anomalies. 🙂

        1. HG Tudor says:

          1. I lean more towards psychopath.
          2. I understand my psychopathy originated from birth.
          .

          1. Asp Emp says:

            HG, what you say here is what I could see, and can understand. My Aspergers is the predominant, followed by what I learned via my LOCEs.

          2. A Victor says:

            HG, would a lean toward psychopathy be true for most narcissistic psychopath’s, because the narcissism is one segment of the three or four necessary to make a psychopath? Would this then also mean that the term ‘narcissistic psychopath’ puts extra weight on that segment, but still not necessarily outweighing the others?

          3. Sarah says:

            Thx, HG. I wondered about the birth thjnvbwith psychopathy. But how much is nurture? I took the MMPI years ago. I scored high on psychopathy, but within the normal range.. It made me quite good at my job in criminal law. But I’m curious what you think… would a different upbringing have ameliorated your psychopathy?

          4. HG Tudor says:

            No.

          5. FYC says:

            Hello HG, Since finding your excellent work, I sought to better understand the origin and nature of both psychopathy and narcissism. After reading many studies on both over the past few years, I am currently of the opinion that psychopathy may not be determined at birth. While I understand your opinion, and many would agree, what appears to emerge from research since 2012 is that psychopathy (and narcissism) emerge from a confluence of events. GPD is requisite, however, the several genes noted to be involved in psychopathy can be found in many people who are not psychopaths. Further research lends insight to these differences by way of necessary gene expression. LOCE is noted. Research conducted in Norway found that psychopaths most often come from an environment of severe neglect or excessive control. The degree to which a psychopath is violent is also greatly influenced by upbringing. Most people note that psychopaths and narcissist have no empathy, however, they do have self empathy much like other people, but lack (or block) empathy for others. Regardless of origin, psychopaths and narcissists seem to embrace their defense/coping mechanism for survival as one that is superior, highly effective and preferred. Therefore, it is unlikely they would wish to change even if it were possible.

          6. Asp Emp says:

            FYC, thank you so much for writing your comment. It was very interesting to read. I note your words about self-empathy. This is something similar I had read about about a year ago or so. I appreciate your explanation here 🙂

          7. WhoCares says:

            FYC,

            So good to see you on the blog, hope you are doing well 💜.

            “Regardless of origin, psychopaths and narcissists seem to embrace their defense/coping mechanism for survival as one that is superior, highly effective and preferred. Therefore, it is unlikely they would wish to change even if it were possible.”

            It’s always very interesting to read of the results of your own learning and research in this area.
            I agree with your point above.

          8. FYC says:

            HI WhoCares! Thank you very much. I hope all is well with you and yours. I still read regularly and comment when possible and of course I always refer others to KTN. I am ever grateful for all I have learned from HG and continue to learn. I appreciate all the kind support, laughs and interesting perspectives I have had the privilege of experiencing with you and others too. I’m just kind of nerdy and like to understand all aspects. In the beginning, I wanted the Ns I know to “heal,” to know love and joy (and to stop the manipulations and pain). But now I am in full acceptance. Just as we prefer our way of being (empaths), Ns prefer their way of being. I no longer judge that. It simply is. Best we can do is go and create the life we choose with those who share our values.

          9. WhoCares says:

            FYC,

            “I still read regularly and comment when possible and of course I always refer others to KTN.”

            That’s good to hear.

            “I appreciate all the kind support, laughs and interesting perspectives I have had the privilege of experiencing with you and others too. I’m just kind of nerdy and like to understand all aspects.”

            I concur with this statement. Even the nerdy part part, cause, ditto here. ❤️

            “In the beginning, I wanted the Ns I know to “heal,” to know love and joy (and to stop the manipulations and pain).”

            As empaths, we can’t help this, or feeling something similar at first: the desire to help/fix/solve.

            “But now I am in full acceptance. Just as we prefer our way of being (empaths), Ns prefer their way of being. I no longer judge that. It simply is. Best we can do is go and create the life we choose with those who share our values”

            A very wise statement.
            Re: narcissism, there is nothing to be done, once we come to terms with it. Once hard-wired, it’s their way of being in the world.

            But I hear you – I always want to understand more…and I also so enjoy applying my learning in practical situations.

            Take care FYC.

        2. WhoCares says:

          Hello Sarah,

          “And I was curious when you think the psychopathy started, which is quite different I think than narcissism?? Or do you think differently?”

          It’s likely you might have a lot of your wondering indulged by the Knowing HG series.

          1. Sarah says:

            Yes, I was waiting for the 50% discount.. Going to go through tomorrow and purchase them all.

  5. lickemtomorrow says:

    I really appreciated the question and answer in relation to your father in this episode, HG.

    It’s one of the areas which affected me from very early on after arriving here. I found it hard to understand and wondered then if your father had interpreted your needs differently to that of your siblings. He may well have been aware that by your nature you were ‘different’ and not impacted in the same way, but I find it hard to accept he still did not feel the need to intervene. I guess we know by the situation with Harry’s wife how men can become entangled and unable to prioritize in the way they should, giving in to the narcissistic wife and her demands, not risking her wrath. But it seems there is another layer when considering how your father viewed you, HG. Your mother viewed you as her prize and her extension, even though she treated you monstrously. Your father, as an empath, would not have viewed you as an extension, but may have viewed you as very ‘alien’ to your siblings, being more like your mother. He didn’t treat you monstrously from what you have said, but in a way it was monstrous to leave you to your mother’s whims and fancy. She got her own way with you and your father let that happen. Even if he was an empath, I have a hard time thinking well of him. I really struggle with this aspect of ensnarement and its consequences.

    1. HG Tudor says:

      You are welcome, LET.

    2. k mac says:

      I agree LET. No child should be treated will less care no matter what. You may be onto something when you say he may have viewed HG in the same light as his mother. I’m sure his father was exhausted dealing with his mother making little HG take one for the team. So unfair and unjust.

      1. lickemtomorrow says:

        Hi k mac, yes factoring in the exhaustion and dilemma of dealing with a narcissist while trying to juggle multiple priorities no doubt comes into it, and little HG ‘taking one for the team’ may be a way to describe what happened.

        In that sense you could almost say HG was ‘scapegoated’ by his father, or was it a more ‘sacrificial’ act in being left to his mother’s devices? In order to please his wife, HG’s father ‘sacrificed’ HG to her at the same time saving himself from some of the fallout of not doing so. If we factor in the hold she must have had over him, then we see HG’s father also is necessarily making compromises and sacrifices to please her. HG may well have been part of the compromise his father had to make.

        At the same time, he may also have noticed a difference between himself and HG which made that easier for him to do. I think I would put it that way, as opposed to viewing HG in the same light as his mother. You could be on to something there, but HG’s father adored his mother and was ensnared by her.

        The other possibility is HG’s mother favoured HG and this could create another mechanism for rejection by his father. HG was used for the purposes of triangulation, therefore making him an element of competition for his father thus leading to rejection.

        I have so many thoughts around this as I try to understand. None of them will change what happened and we know for a fact HG was predisposed to be more like his mother. I just can’t help wondering if the dynamic between HG and his father had been different, with an element of serious intervention on HG’s behalf, whether things could have turned out differently. Abuse of any child is unfair and unjust, and a predisposition doesn’t have to lead to to the ultimate consequence of NPD.

    3. Joa says:

      Perhaps, the solution is simpler than it sounds.

      Perhaps, HG’s dad just turned to the one who needed him more…

      I don’t know, what kind of empath he was. I can only infer from myself.

      I always turn to who needs me more. Toward, who is weaker. Toward, who is more vulnerable.

      Perhaps, it is not fair… Perhaps, this instinctive oracle fails to notice all the premises behind the veil. I do not know.

      1. lickemtomorrow says:

        Joa, you make a good point, about turning to the one who is most or more vulnerable in order to protect them. If HG’s father saw his siblings as more vulnerable due to their more empathic nature, he may necessarily have come to their rescue in a manner he didn’t feel the need to come to HG’s rescue.

        From my perspective as a parent of three children, I will focus on the child who is the target of the narcissistic parent, understanding that they are bearing the brunt of the narcissistic abuse. All children in my eyes are equally vulnerable. HG was a child and could not protect himself. Regardless of how he was impacted (i.e. tougher than the others), he should have been afforded more protection on the basis he was the main target of the narcissist, not less. Personally, I don’t care how well he handled himself. showed no emotion, somehow failed to connect, that in itself should have been a sign that he needed more input in the circumstances and not less.

        I’m still standing on the side, after saying that, of HG being made a ‘sacrifice’ in the circumstances. He deserved better. Though I do understand your perspective of turning to the most vulnerable who often appear more in need of protection – ‘appear’ being the operative word.

        1. Jasmin says:

          I gave more love and protection to my ‘scapegoated’ son than I gave to my ‘golden’ daughter.
          My daughter resived a lot of love, affection and positive attention from her Father whilst the scapegoat rarely resived any love, affection and in general negative attention. I know now that it wasn’t love that she resived but at the time I believed it to be. I thought that her needs were largely met.
          I often thougt that our son would wonder why his father didn’t love him and treat him like his sister. It broke my heart and I only wanted him to feel loved. I tried to compensate and that resulted in most of my love and affection being directed at him.
          Probably she needed more of me than I realised.

          I think that after years of narcissistic abuse we do not work properly (nor do we think properly). With limited ability our priority will be what we deem to be most important and with the cogitive reduction we may not even get that right!🤯

          1. lickemtomorrow says:

            Jasmin, thank you for your extremely heartfelt and honest answer <3

            There is an element of 'scapegoat' and 'golden child' that comes into the equation in terms of who is in more need of protection, and a golden child would generally not be perceived to be in need of any kind of protection. I think that would be a standard impression in the circumstances, and as parents we have to prioritize in that sense, too. If one child is being treated poorly or worse than another then we need to intervene and try to help shore them up in the circumstances. I absolutely understand this perspective and my two youngest children were in this predicament, the youngest being a boy the worst off. At that stage I had no understanding of the narcissistic dynamic per se, and just understood that my eldest daughter in some way was 'favoured' by her father. More on that later.

            Here I have gained an understanding that golden children are also victims of the narcissist. Both in terms of being an extension of the narcissist (which all children are) making them puppets on a string, and also in terms of expectations of the narcissist. I'm not sure how much you have read of HG's story, but it's obvious his mother was abusive towards him and also exposed him to further abuse at the hands of others. Some of this abuse appears to have been borne out of her expectations of him as the golden child, and some just out of pure malice. While the other children may have been subject to some of the same treatment, it seems HG was her preferred choice in terms of 'grooming'. Perhaps she locked on to his differing nature instinctively, or perhaps he showed himself to be exceptional in some way and therefore a useful tool for her to manipulate. I'll look forward to HG telling more of his story. In that sense, my commentary here relates more specifically to HG and what we know of that story already.

            This is where the difference lies for me both in your own story and mine (which in some ways are similar), and HG's story which does not necessarily show the golden child as receiving love, attention and affection and which your own daughter did from her father. My eldest daughter was favoured by her father, I could see it but didn't know what it was. I just knew in many ways she was his 'blue eye' and the other two were often discounted on the basis of that. He rarely attacked her the way he attacked them, so she was off the hook when it came to many of his narcissistic behaviours. I understood she was fortunate and had less pieces to pick up for her in terms of the damage my children's father could do. That was a bonus in some ways. I also knew that this status was causing her to develop a more narcissistic nature. There are myriad ways I could explain how this was happening, but the upshot is I knew it was also harmful to her to feel in any way superior, entitled, unempathic, etc. Fortunately she was only exposed to her father on a fairly minimal basis, our separation having taken place when she was 5yrs old, so I had an upper hand in raising her awareness around some of her behaviour. She got exceptional praise from me when it was earned, which was in line with what the other children also received. I find they are all talented and exceptional in their own way, so made sure to try and build them all up in the areas where they shone 🙂 She did not get special treatment in that sense, but she knew I saw her, too.

            My heart broke for my other children, the same as you, that their father did not accept them in the same way. In many ways it is still broken for them. Unfortunately, there is nothing that can change what he is and how that impacted them. My eldest daughter was not impacted in the same way. She did not suffer the sadness or sorrow of the scapegoat and did not need the same level of shoring up in the circumstances. In that sense I would say you were not wrong to protect your son (how could you be?) and your daughter was much 'safer' in the circumstances going by what you describe. It was the same for my daughter. I understand.

            I really appreciate your comment, Jasmin, and the cognitive dissonance we experience with the narcissist will have a big impact on what and how we prioritize in the circumstances. My priorities were much the same as yours in many ways. I think HG's situation was different and the focus on his situation was where I was coming from here.

      2. Truthseeker6157 says:

        Joa, LET, KMac,

        There could also have been a kind of backing away on the part of HG’s father. I agree that every child is vulnerable, no matter what. I agree also that it’s natural to gravitate to the child that needs you most at that point in time. It usually varies though, one child one day, another child another day. Here we have one child who was never put first by the empathic father.

        I’ve found this tough to fathom. HG’s father was an empath and a teacher, used to kids of all kinds of disposition and personality. I think perhaps, he just didn’t know how to approach HG, despite his understanding of kids. In some ways, his understanding of kids might have made it more difficult to relate to HG. We imagine little HG similar to children we have of our own or that we can relate to. What if there is nothing you can relate to?

        I watched ‘We Need To Talk About Kevin’ recently. If it’s accurately depicted, then the child psychopath is already shockingly cold. Also, they can (not always) manipulate and injure siblings, sometimes through intent, sometimes through lack of fear / thrill seeking / impulsivity traits. We know how confusing it is when our kids fight and we have to referee between two people we love. If one child was a psychopath, then there is a fear element that comes into play also. Discomfort probably, not necessarily fear.

        Baby snakes are often more venomous than adult snakes. They haven’t yet learned to control their venom delivery. If you have a psychopathic child and you believe those traits are there from birth, then you’re dealing with a lot of deceitfulness, calculation, impulsivity, cruelty, misrepresentation of self, embellishment and fabrication that are largely unfettered. What’s more, it doesn’t stop, there are no respite periods. The child could potentially appear sweet to a relative, then extremely cold and manipulative to a parent.

        After watching the film, watching the mother (far less emotional than an empath) try to connect with the child, a stepping back might almost be human nature. We don’t like to think that we would ever step back, we step forward, but honestly, in that situation, I’m not sure I could say confidently how I would behave when having more than one child to consider.

        The other thing to consider is some form of agreement between the parents. Matrinarc saw HG as an extension of herself. He was hers. I’ve hypothesised before that it’s almost as if a deal was struck.” I deal with HG, you deal with the others” .I view this kind of deal as sinister, but if HG’s father was concerned about harm coming to the other children, intentional or unintentional, perhaps there was an effort to separate out responsibility.

        My overall instinctive view still stands. Your child, you find a way, you keep trying, no matter what. My view did become a little more open though as regards HG’s father after watching the film.

        It should be noted also that in response to the question as to how to deal with a narcissist child, HG’s advice is to GOSO. Below the age of 18, depending on problematic behaviours, I believe the advice is to distance yourself from those behaviours, whilst still having responsibility for the child. That’s the dispassionate view from HG. Knowing what he knows now, HG might almost understand or even accept the behaviour of his father, at least cognitively.

        Xx

        1. Joa says:

          I disagree that all children are equally sensitive.

          Every child should get attention, love, support, care – in the amount and quality they need, in various combinations. Each child is a separate person. Each has its own “code”, that you must evaluate and discover.

          That is why the proper upbringing of the child, noticing his needs (which he does not talk about for a long time), adapting to them (as far as you can!), taking into account elements of resistance, pride, individual sensitivity, interests, the need to follow one’s own paths or not, the need for solitude (which everyone has too!), the need to explore the world – and a thousand other needs, is so important.

          Raising a child is a tremendous job. It is a constant estimation, determination and filling of these variables in time of need. Women are very good at it, genetically determined. Men have a little harder time recognizing this kaleidoscope of features. Often with confidence, this is the task they entrust to a woman, being ready to help and fulfill tasks in this area under the “leadership” of the woman.

          And that, in my opinion, quite naturally, could have happened here. I theorize in general.

          None of us are members of this family, so investigating the truth in this matter is pointless. There are so many nuances, personalities, places, changes and events in time and in life that only members of this family unit can analyze.

          And one more thing, to recognize that all children are equally sensitive is a bit like objectifying them, equating them. HG does the same with its devices.

          You can’t treat everyone the SAME. Even if they are your children. Or maybe even ESPECIALLY if they are your children.

          ‐‐————-

          My daughter, even as an infant, hated tight wrapping (which most kids like). From the moment she gained strength in her arms and legs, she was pushing away. I was identical as a child. All alone. Don’t hug. Go away. I know from my grandma’s stories, that my mother was like that too.

          I was put a lot of effort into hugging my daughter “forcefully” at the right moments, with a smile and happiness in my eyes, while maintaining the tact and distance she so needed. I believe, that timing the right moments, was the most important task that I did.

          Even in infancy, would a man be able to see a yawning black hole screaming: “Hug me! Love me! Please save me!” much louder than a nice, polite child who loves to cuddle? I do not think so.

          ‐———

          Sorry if I have a slightly dictatorial tone. I’m in frenetic combat mode at work right now and need to be in this mode for at least a few months. Set as a shield on the public candlestick (again!!!). From the outside, jerking by thousands of people (representation mode, protection mode, weak spot targeting mode and crowd dispersion mode) and simultaneously extinguishing fire sources inside (fuels units support mode, volcanic eruptions suppression mode and stabilization behavior mode). I’m quite… annoyed.

          1. lickemtomorrow says:

            Joa, first off I’m sorry to hear you are in frenetic combat mode at work and feeling the pressure. Who wouldn’t be feeling annoyed in the circumstances? I hope things improve soon.

            I found your comment interesting and also comprehensive in pointing out the various nuances that exist in individuals, families, circumstances, etc. This is true, and we make decisions based on a whole host of factors. Many times it’s not so cut and dried. Perhaps the issue is with generalizing or speculating in terms of the topic while not being at the coalface of the actual experience. How could we possibly know? There are too many variables.

            I think it’s interesting that you bring it back to the differences between men and women in some ways, and there’s no doubt that plays a part. Women are generally expected to be more attuned to their children’s needs, unfortunately we can’t make that assumption when it comes to the narcissist. The narcissistic mother is attuned to her own needs. In HG’s case we know his mother was a narcissist. The person usually attributed to hearing his cry was fundamentally deaf to it. That is very sad. At the same time we know that he was disconnected from some of the usual elements or emotions children use to bring attention to themselves. From our perspective that is also sad. In some ways it may have saved HG a great deal of pain. It may also have caused him not to be seen. This is one of the things that challenges me when it comes to HG’s father. Did he not see, or did he turn a bind eye?

            His father is the only one available to intervene in the circumstances of the immediate family. I would have to consider him very insensitive if he could not tell the difference between a child who is crying out for attention and affection and one who is acting without the same sense of need (i.e. polite, etc.) In HG’s father’s case, because of the way HG describes him, I do expect a level of empathy. HG calls him an empath. If I judge it on my own empathic response then maybe I misjudge it because I am a woman and not a man. Its true, I can’t possibly know how an empathic man would respond in the circumstances. I think I’ve suggested here before that HG did not show his father that he needed anything from him, so that could fit into your thinking, in a way that his father was oblivious due to HG’s personality and not his father’s own lack of care or concern.

            It’s true you can’t treat everyone the same and a lot depends on their needs. Also whether we see those needs or not. Children will have different levels of sensitivity as will we. There are enormous variables and I think there are some standard responses, too. You’ve listed those, Joa, in attention, love, support and care. Children are individuals who rely on adults to give them what they need. Children may not always make it obvious and adults may not always get it right. Your daughter obviously indicated to you what she needed which was to be free from the swaddling and you listened to her. Even though other babies usually like the security, your daughter wanted to be free of the restriction. Children can give us many signs long before they talk and tell us what they need. Sensitive parents will often be aware and observant. Narcissistic parents will not care unless it serves their purposes to do so. There are parents in between who may be struggling with their own issues or pressures in life which somehow overtake them. Maybe HG’s father was in that situation being married to his narcissistic mother. He was not able to be there for HG even if he wanted to be due to his ensnarement.

            I’m glad you shared your thoughts, Joa, and we are reliant on what HG tells us at this moment in time to understand the dynamic that existed amongst his various family members. He has shared some of that with us in his articles and he encourages us to consider different aspects of his life as we come to ‘know’ him. For me this conversation has been another aspect of trying to understand his experience. I appreciate his sharing and I hope he appreciates our contemplation. A good teacher will always want their students to put their ideas out there for possible correction. We also enlighten eachother. Hopefully we will hear more of the ‘little boy lost’ soon <3

          2. A Victor says:

            Hi Joa, I just came upon this comment and just wanted to say I agree, each child is different, each a unique individual. I like the way you say it, each has a “code” that we must decipher to parent them effectively. Obviously the same basic care is needed by all humans but to raise them to reach their fullest potential, we do well as parents to discover their specific code and work with them from there.

        2. lickemtomorrow says:

          TS, as always you make relevant and interesting points and in many ways I don’t disagree. You have put yourself in HG’s father’s shoes in a manner where you’ve also been able to utilize HG’s recent comments in relation to narcissistic children.

          Perhaps I am pinpointing an earlier stage in HG’s life before the narcissism became entrenched, when there was still a possibility of intervention making a difference. We know this typically needs to be before the age of 7-9yrs and that is also when many developmental stages are taking place as well as when the child is most vulnerable. The child being vulnerable makes way for two possibilities – one to influence in a positive manner, the other to influence in a negative manner. The element of psychopathy could be beyond a parent’s ability to influence in the sense that it may be a physical difference in the brain which prevents them.

          That takes me to your comments about the movie “We Need to Talk About Kevin”. Great film, brilliantly acted, and disturbing in the extreme. The dynamic between mother and son is interesting, as you say she would not be viewed as empathic. Now, imagine a non-empathic parent being confronted with a non-empathic and even psychopathic child (though we cannot label children psychopathic). How is her lack of empathy going to bounce off his psychopathy? In the film we see she is torn about her pregnancy in many ways, does not seem to bond with her difficult baby (which Kevin was from the start), and her attempts to bond seem to constantly miss the mark. This is frustrating for the child and for her. Kevin seems as unable to connect as his mother as she is to him. We can’t blame her, but we can’t blame him either. It is an unfortunate dynamic that no one could have anticipated.

          Then we have the father. He only sees good in his son and overlooks his wife’s frustrations, including the concern around their second child. This is partly because Kevin shows a different face to his father. Manipulation all the way. The father is blind to his son’s machinations and unaccepting of his wife’s frustrations. He sides with Kevin in many ways, and ultimately is killed by him leaving his wife to continue coping with what they have created. There is a sense Kevin wants her alive to suffer and continue with his hold over her. I see an element of malice in his make up and his act of killing is also one of punishing her. This is the narcissistic/psychopathic child which shows no remorse, total lack of conscience, and a complete inability to empathize who needs to be left behind. Much like that young man Paris we have spoken of before.

          I’m not all in for the continued suffering of a parent in line with the connection they have to a narcissistic/psychopathic child, but my understanding is there is a window, and it needs to be taken advantage of if possible. We cannot think of children as inherently bad unless we have given them a chance to be good. A lot of that comes with how we approach the difficulties they experience and the type of home we can create. At the same time, we are human, too. HG’s father may have decided to focus where he felt his focus could be most beneficial, perhaps feeling HG’s needs were beyond him, or that he wasn’t really needed by HG. HG’s mother may have been clear in staking her claim over HG in a manner his father found it impossible to intervene, fearing the loss of his marriage or whatever threat she felt she could hold over him.

          HG in one of his articles calls his father “spineless”. That is a judgement, and perhaps the cry of a wounded child, maybe the superior attitude of the narcissist. A narcissist would have more spine with their black and white thinking, but not necessarily hear the cry of the wounded child. HG’s creature now embodies that wounded child, and he is all spine, if I can put it that way. His father was unable to strike the happy medium as an empath due to his ensnarement with a narcissist. It’s not easy to protect your children when a narcissist is involved. In fact, it’s very difficult indeed. I wonder what might have been different for HG if his father had been able to break away from his narcissistic mother early on?

          Some things we’ll obviously never know xox

          1. Truthseeker6157 says:

            LET,

            Thank you for your thoughts on this. You’re correct children aren’t classified as psychopaths, but rather as having conduct disorder with callous and unemotional traits. I have wondered why this is the case. Is it that humans cannot accept that psychopaths are born and so a different term is used? It kind of offends their view of children as being innocent? Or, is it the fact that psychopaths are not born so a different term is used? There is still debate as to the born or made theory as far as psychopathy goes. I find it very difficult to accept that the psychopath is born. I believe that it forms in much the same way as the narcissism, possibly with more traits visible and set in place sooner. As usual, I’m not sure if this is what I prefer to believe or if it’s actually what I do believe.

            I’m so glad you have watched “We need to talk about Kevin”. I thought it was excellent, I found it believable, rather than the usual psychopathic child killer horror fare that would ordinarily depict psychopathy.

            If HG’s mother had been an empath, it’s less likely his narcissism would have formed but would his psychopathy have formed regardless? When I watched the scene with the mother rolling the ball to Kevin, she was clearly frustrated, he clearly didn’t want to play. Would this frustration have translated to Kevin as “You aren’t good enough.”? I watched and thought, “Change the activity, play a different game, paint, run barefoot outside through the garden sprinkler, do anything but change the game.” Would the empath mother behave differently? Or would Kevin just grind her down in a similar way? The same scene I thought was shocking in that Kevin clearly built her up with the intention only of knocking her back down. Would a child that age know how to do that though? I struggled with that a little. Were they placing adult psychopathic behaviours onto a child character? I’m not sure.

            I could talk about that film all day with you, seriously, it asked so many questions.

            The last scene where the mother visits Kevin in prison, after everything he has taken from her and she still shows up, I thought, that would be me. If he was my kid, that would be me. Heartbreaking. Worse, my interpretation of Kevin in that same scene, was that he felt some derivative of remorse, or at least, realised all of the actions, done really just to get her attention, didn’t need to have been done, because she loved him anyway.

            I do wonder what message they were attempting to convey with that scene. In terms of films about psychopathy, I think that one is the most accurate film I’ve seen. Outstanding.

            Xx

          2. lickemtomorrow says:

            TS 🙂

            The issue of psychopathy in children is a difficult one to confront, and that may partly be down to the fact that they are not fully formed human beings until they reach adulthood. There are many divergent paths they can take and the nature v nurture debate rumbles on. Certainly their environment has to have an impact, as well as their genetic makeup, and one will feed off the other. I thought it had been proven that there is a definitive difference in the psychopathic brain, but then there is also primary and secondary psychopathy, primary related more to genetics. I believe HG answered a question the other day where he indicated his psychopathy was present since birth. I know I asked him once if he’d had a brain scan and he said he had. It’s possible that HG accepts his psychopathy was inherent, though his environment may also have had a dramatic effect on how it was expressed.

            Perhaps what we are talking about is the ‘expression’ of psychopathy. HG has only recently reposted “Burn” and one of the things he mentions in that article is not just his fascination with fire, but burning photographs of family members. Is that because they have harmed him in some way or because malice is inherent in his narcissism and psychopathy? This is a big question for me. Is there an element in the child’s environment that encourages the psychopathy to act out in the way it does? Would a more positive environment be a barrier to that acting out, or at least acting out in certain ways? HG also said recently he believed if his father had removed him from his mother’s influence he may have not become the narcissistic psychopath he is today. I don’t think he’s said either of those things before, at least not since I’ve been here (i.e. having a primary psychopathy and the possibility of a different outcome). Seems like an impossible combination, but I think there is work being done in terms of trying to create more positive outcomes for children diagnosed as callous-unemotional, some of that linked to reward as opposed to punishment.

            “We Need To Talk About Kevin” – Interesting take on the mother attempting to connect and I felt throughout the movie she experienced a sense of rejection towards him almost from the moment of conception. I don’t think she turned him into a psychopath, but the movie had you questioning on a certain level how much was down to her parenting. This is often how these situations are viewed in terms of parent’s being responsible for the outcome. The movie generated for me a sense of discomfort throughout re: the mother’s interactions with Kevin. She could not bond, and it was almost like he was punishing her for that. Where a child would normally cry out in some way for that bonding to occur, Kevin rejected his mother while showing an ability to manipulate from a very early age. It was awful to see him break her down in the manner he did and there was an element of spite attached to that. He had a mindset she did not know how to handle or counteract.

            I would guess he was born with that mindset (primary psychopathy) and her rejection of him basically exacerbated it. I saw that rejecting behaviour as a two way street. She was never comfortable with him from the start. He was never capable of encouraging her acceptance.

            What would an empathic parent do? You’ve come up some ideas, TS, to try different kinds of play or interaction. That’s probably one outcome. Rather than force a specific activity on a child. Is the child going to behave any differently if they seek to manipulate you due to their nature? That’s maybe where some uncertainty exists. It reminds me of the narcissist where you are being played like a violin as they pull you this way and push you that. Children will do that in some ways naturally as they try to get their needs met. It’s up to parents to recognize it and find a way to manage it.

            I’d guess a child with a tendency towards psychopathy is going to challenge the status quo, partly because they will not have a level of empathy or conscience to prevent it. Probably the first step would be not to be confrontational with them. If they think they can gain something they might be more responsive. It’s not a need to win as the parent or adult, it’s more about they need structure like any child but coercion will not work so you accept to give them an element of control, but within parameters you set. At least, that’s one way I might approach the situation.

            In the cookie story HG was told he could choose his favourite type of cookie, but he had to restrict himself to the one cookie of his choice. That seems reasonable. He was still being given a choice. HG did not like being told he had to restrict himself in that manner and decided he would later steal multiple cookies to eat and even implicate his brother in that act, not as a means of avoiding detection but for the mayhem he could create. He was the controller and creator of mayhem. How could mayhem be avoided? It’s an interesting story to reflect on in that sense. We know in “Burn” he was wounded but chose to contain his fury for a later moment of retribution. This is not the case with the cookies. There is no wounding, just an act of defiance. Acts of defiance are normally met with punishment. This is where a vicious cycle can be instituted, but in this case we don’t know the outcome. I still haven’t worked out what age HG was in this story. Either way it gives an insight into how his mind works and that would be very differently to ours.

            It would be easy to talk all day about these issues, they are so captivating in terms of trying to understand, and imagine the professionals have been trying to do it for decades. What chance have we got?! We are fortunate to have some of the insight being handed to us here in that sense. At least in terms of maintaining our own defences and protection.

            “The last scene where the mother visits Kevin in prison, after everything he has taken from her and she still shows up, I thought, that would be me. If he was my kid, that would be me. Heartbreaking. Worse, my interpretation of Kevin in that same scene, was that he felt some derivative of remorse, or at least, realised all of the actions, done really just to get her attention, didn’t need to have been done, because she loved him anyway.”

            That is a heartbreaking scene, but the coldness and callousness still exists for me. As we know by Paris’s story, there are parent’s like this out there who have to make these incredibly difficult choices. Imagine cutting your child off. It goes against every parental instinct to do so. We created them, we brought them into the world, they are a part of us. In that sense, it’s like rejecting a part of yourself. As empaths we want to heal and fix that broken part, somehow make it better, revive the life that should have been, not dismiss the life that has appeared. I think her dedication proved her love, but he was incapable of receiving and returning it. In that sense you could say her love was wasted, but what love is ever wasted? I think as empaths it’s not possible to imagine love going to waste, but our experience with the narcissist has taught us differently. The dilemma remains, TS.

            Maybe that is the message of that final scene. To challenge us to ponder all these things – the judgements we make, the heartache we endure. It draws us into the complexities of life. Outstanding indeed.

            <3 xox

            (PS: HG thank you for moderating our sometimes tortuous thinking processes here)

        3. Truthseeker6157 says:

          Hi Joa,

          I think you make some interesting points here.

          There is a subtle difference between sensitive and vulnerable I think, and you’re right not all children require an identical amount of attention at all times. What suits one child in terms of care, attention, contact, might not suit another or be perceived as stifling to one who is more independently minded.

          I think all children are vulnerable though. In different ways perhaps, at different times and in different circumstances. I still see little HG as being vulnerable in that environment, mostly because I have come to understand how a narcissist parent operates, so little HG had to be vulnerable also, despite perhaps being less sensitive than his siblings.

          You are right, family dynamics differ and parental roles differ too. It does still often fall to the mother as primary caregiver to be more ‘ in tune’ with the child. If HG’s father was unaware of Matrinarc being a narcissist, perhaps he did defer to her, assuming that she would be better in tune with HG’s needs. If HG’s father was away from home a lot with work, perhaps he didn’t actually see a lot of what went on and, when he did catch a glimpse, he perhaps didn’t want to appear critical, or rock the boat. As you say, without knowing the family dynamics it is hard to tell.

          You made me think when you mentioned the swaddling of your daughter. Children do let us know what they need, way before they can speak. One way they do this is through crying. The mother understands the different cries and what they mean. The father can do this too but often with assistance from additional cues, is it bed time, nap time, close to meal time etc. The thing with HG, is that HG didn’t really cry. Even as a small child, in situations where a child would be scared on his own in the dark, HG didn’t cry. He just thought being locked in a dark cellar as punishment was “Strange”. He wasn’t demonstrating distress indicators. It’s possible that HG went unnoticed by his father, in part due to this.

          HG was asked recently if he thought that his narcissism might not have developed if his parents had divorced. He responded that possibly yes, his parents divorcing might have resulted in a different outcome. I assume the thinking here is that the visitation rights that his father likely would have received would have ensured that HG had more one on one time with the intervening influence of his father. I have to assume that HG’s father just did not see HG’s vulnerability, the typical indicators I just don’t think we’re there. It’s very clear that HG received extremely limited one on one time with his father.

          I have been really disappointed at times with HG’s father. I’ve felt angry with him, I’ve felt confused by him, I think HG was let down by him. However, as you say, I can’t know what went on behind closed doors. I do think that his father felt regret much later on. The scene where HG told his parents his exam results and the response of his father when his mother left the table, that response to me was pride for his son but it was also regret and a silent apology. If so, then as an empath HG’s father has my sympathy, guilt and regret are almost impossible for us to ever come to terms with.

          I hope things are getting easier for you at work Joa. Just remember you aren’t a bottomless pit of energy reserves. If they are draining you down, you need to find a way to pull away if only for a time and top up your energy.

          Xx

  6. Rebecca says:

    HG,

    You had my husband and I laughing at your answers. We enjoyed it and you’ve got a healthy sense of humour. Thanks for the laughs, I needed them.

    1. Sarah says:

      Agreed. Wicked sense of humor, HG!!

Vent Your Spleen! (Please see the Rules in Formal Info)

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.