Knowing the Narcissist : The Holy Narcissist
The holy narcissist is one of the especially effective members of the narcissistic brethren. The attraction of religion but moreover being a member of the clergy carries with it considerable advantages for those of our kind who manage to install themselves within organised religion.
The holy narcissist is nigh on impeachable. What better authority can there be for always being right, always having the high ground and always being revered than as an instrument of God? The holy narcissist has the supreme power in his corner and a book full of phrases and sentences that he can turn to in support of his wisdom. He is here to do good work and by virtue of his position he is assumed to be truthful, kind, compassionate and empathic. The holy narcissist has one of the most effective facades one might hope to see amongst our kind. His is not a façade which has to be worked at through the careful application of community works, diligent industry at work and all round good guy in the neighbourhood. No, the holy narcissist has centuries of instilled goodness to drape around him in an impenetrable cloak of goodness. He has saints and apostles marching behind him, archangels hovering above him, charitable works to point to, the salvation of the sick, the poor and the needy, all woven into this vast façade.
Once he joins the clergy he can avail himself of this façade in an instant. There is no steady and incremental accumulation of the veneer of respectability like the rest of our kind but instead it is akin to placing a cloak around himself and immediately he has a façade and not just a façade, but perhaps the ultimate façade on which to rely.
He is the embodiment of goodness, God’s word flows through him and as such he can act with unquestionable authority. He has zealots ready to support him and to shout down the heretics. Even though organised religion may not wield the power that it once did, one would be foolish to underestimate its effect still. Even those who do not believe and readily bait and insult those who do, are likely to think twice before attacking a man of the cloth. They wear God’s armour and the indoctrination of people, even those who have rejected the notion of such a being, means they would hesitate before launching some kind of attack against a member of the clergy. I have seen it happen. Those who are vociferous in all other aspects still show a deference to that dog collar.
A position in religion appeals greatly to our kind. You are blessed with an instant authority. You have scriptures, texts and readings which are used as a form of law to castigate mortal man and thus allow the holy narcissist to maintain superiority. There are grand and ornate ceremonies which the holy narcissist is the centre of. He dresses differently from the simplicity of the Catholic black which distinguished from others in the community to the papal splendour of the man (almost) at the top. Decadence, shiny and glittering decadence abounds and he even is able to stand at preach at his fellow man and woman. How does he do so? From the elevated position of the pulpit. Proof, if proof were needed that he is greater than those around him and finds himself part way between heaven and earth.
Where confession plays a part he is able to absorb the sins of his worshippers. The narcissist always needs to know and of course knowledge is power. Being privy to the foibles, sins and vulnerabilities of someone on the other side of that screen (who is of course readily known) vests considerable power in the holy narcissist. He is able to scold and upbraid and is thanked for doing so. He doles out devaluation on a daily basis and is met with the grateful thanks of those who seek absolution.
Should you offend him you are not just discarded but you are banished, made a pariah and few can smear you so darkly as one who apparently operates from the side of light. Step out of line with the holy narcissist and see how quickly the community is mobilised against you. You are snubbed at church (if you dare to appear) and this tarring and feathering leaks out into the community as a whole as the holy narcissist does not just have a coterie but he has a congregation. He does not just have Lieutenants, he has vergers and sextons, he has bishops and archbishops who will close ranks and turn their backs on those who speak ill of one of their own.
Try to speak out and expose the holy narcissist and he will describe you as ‘troubled’ and that he will pray for you, further advancing how filled with goodness he is and there must be something seriously wrong and deviant with you if you are resorting to making accusations against man of the cloth.
The holy narcissist has a position of considerable privilege. An ancient and powerful institution which resolutely supports him, the commanding word of God to dispense, the impressive façade and always the capacity to exploit a person’s fear of their own mortality. As it has been stated before, there were no atheists in the trenches. When the chips are down you either call out to God or your mother, usually both. When you know that despite all appearances, a person still has that need to call on a higher power when they are in fear, this places you in a powerful position.
This position comes with many benefits but the most attractive of all is the congregation. A loyal, devout conclave of fuel. Those who attend services, hold coffee mornings, raise collections, operate soup kitchens and so forth are the foot soldiers of empathy. They are inherently good people who care, who are honest and decent and they wish to exhibit their goodness through good acts and deeds. How they respond and light up when the holy narcissist moves amongst them thanking them for their endeavours. Their faces turn to the holy narcissist, rapt with delight, fuel gushing for them as the holy narcissist sweeps through his worshippers, drinking deep of their admiration, their love and their compassion. It is these people who are doing the dirty work, standing in the cold shaking a collecting tin, feeding down and outs in the less desirable areas of the city and walking mile upon mile to gather donations for the charity shop or food parcels. The holy narcissist will tap into this collective goodness and bolt it on to his façade. He will front the mission’s work, the output as he receives the earnest thanks of the disadvantaged and yet more fuel.
This congregation will round on transgressors, they will offer up delicious fuel as a host of secondary sources which has the holy narcissist positively drenched in the positive fuel. With firebrand enthusiasm, the holy preacher will set his sights on those who apparently do evil and will contentedly draw their ire and the associated negative fuel. He is unswayed. The Big Man has his back and with that it is ever onwards Christian soldiers. No matter what form this religion might take, there will always be holy narcissists in their numbers. There is so much that appeals and accords with the narcissist that organised religion will always attract our kind. The ready availability of unquestionable moral authority which is plated and welded to the narcissistic mind set of superiority, omnipotence and grandiosity makes for a heady concoction indeed. Many struggle to escape the clutches of a holy narcissist and if they do not comply, they are hammered into submission by one of the master strokes of organised religion, the concept of guilt.
Empathic individuals are burdened by guilt and with a book full of quotations that support this construct, the holy narcissist has a field day as he exploits this inherent trait of those who he deals with. You must never question him but you must question yourself because you are prone to sin, you are weighed down by guilt and therefore it is always your fault. It is manna from heaven for the narcissist. Everything about organised religion either elevates him or provides him with a set of tools and methods for keeping his congregation and worshippers submissive, appreciative and loyal. He is able to call on near total dedication and loyalty and if the occasional member strays out of line he has the means and the clerical muscle to either bring them back under his control or banish them into the wilderness. Exerting such control and being able to reap the fuel rewards demonstrates how supine his congregation becomes when it is in the hands of the holy narcissist.
No wonder it is referred to as his flock.
87 thoughts on “Knowing the Narcissist : The Holy Narcissist”
Vent Your Spleen! (Please see the Rules in Formal Info)
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Mr. Tudor–
You attended Christian schooling. Within that environment, did you ever indicate your absence of faith or point out inconsistencies in the Bible or hypocrisy amongst church leadership? If yes, why? What was your goal?
Thank you so much for your time. Much appreciated. (This may be twice submitted…but I don’t think so.)
To be covered in Educating HG.
Regarding: Young HG questions clergy, round 1
By says: To be covered in Educating HG.
Yay! Looking forward to it! Thank you!
Hi, Leigh–
Thank you for your thoughtful response on empaths and motherhood. I think you’re right that maybe empaths would have the tendency to second guess ourselves about the ability to meet the moment regarding parenthood. We are, as HG points out, beset by self doubt. Not that a narcissist or normal wouldn’t think things through and come to the same decision, but for the narcissist it would be related to serving the Prime Aims and for the normal it would be any number of other things. I think you might be right that the key to how difficult the topic of children can be for us is related to our empathic nature. With us, I suspect some form of that self doubt predominates. It makes sense that on such a major decision we would doubt ourselves to the point of freezing or, once parents, that we would judge ourselves harshly. Emotional thinking at the forefront. I feel like the world is holding up its end on child production without me.
Allison and Leigh,
“I think you’re right that maybe empaths would have the tendency to second guess ourselves about the ability to meet the moment regarding parenthood.”
Firstly, please know that I appreciate your comments and I feel that both of you have good intentions and empathy. I would like to emphasise that I am not responding in a negative or argumentative way.
Sincerely, I want to clarify my thoughts rather than criticise yours.
Having said that, I can see that while you mean well, you are seeing things from perspectives that are not entirely accurate. In addition, even though I think you mean well, I think your perspectives are not entirely empathic either.
In my decision not to have children, my motivations were not based on self-doubt or second-guessing myself with regard to ‘meeting the moment’.
Truly, I would have loved and relished the prospect of ‘meeting the moment’. I did not doubt my personal traits or abilities to raise a child and I did not have emotional thinking about my own desires or thoughts.
My choices were limited, though, by external circumstances that I could not change, or could not adequately change.
I was single and working full-time in a demanding job. I could not rely on anyone but myself to pay the mortgage on the house I lived in. Even if I sold the house and decided to rent a house instead in order to have a child, who would pay the rent? Again, the only person I could rely on would be me, myself and I.
In my 20s and early 30s, I ensured that I had the means to support myself and to live comfortably by gaining an education and working. At that time, in order to do that, I remained single. This meant that if I stopped working, I could no longer support myself. If I stopped working, I could not rely on anyone else. Also, I did not want to become dependent on benefits either and I did not even consider that this was a long-term option.
Therefore, whether or not to have a child became a very conscious choice. It was a choice to either have a child and stop working or keep working and not have a child.
It wasn’t about self-doubt or second-guessing myself. It was a very conscious, rational decision made within a specific scenario. Also, it was a decision made in the space of a specific window of time.
Hi WN,
I apologize. I didn’t mean to imply that all people who choose not to have children are doing it because of self doubt or second guessing themselves.
I was addressing Allison’s comment about her thinking she’d be a terrible mother. I had that same thought about being a mother and I wanted to share that with her.
You’re views are similar to my empath daughter. Being self sufficient is a priority to her as well. Plus she doesn’t know where her career will take her and her career is her priority right now.
I think it was an admirable choice to not bring a child into the world because you didn’t want to be dependent on benefits. So many women do that and the children end up in the system.
I didn’t mean to imply that I wasn’t empathetic to your situation. I hope you’ll accept my apology.
Hi Leigh,
Thank you for your comment, and for the apology. There’s no need to apologise, though.
I can see now that you and Allison were focused on your own personal motivations. Or, maybe more to the point, you were focused on Allison’s thoughts and motivations, maybe?
When I read the comment about empaths being more inclined to have self-doubt and to second-guess themselves, it sounded like your conversation was describing all empaths in a general way. That is, as though you meant that all empaths have a tendency to self-doubt themselves because all empaths would have emotional thinking in relation to parenthood.
When I read Allison’s comment in response to you, this is the way it sounded to me. That’s why I replied, because in relation to my own thoughts about parenthood, it wasn’t about self-doubt or emotional thinking.
This makes me think that it’s inaccurate to consider the category of ’empaths’ as one large homogenous group in which all empaths have the same tendencies.
Perhaps that is not what you and Allison were suggesting and it was a case of the conversation being about only your (or Allison’s) own personal thoughts and motivations instead.
Hi WN,
I can absolutely see how it looked like I was generalizing. I should’ve been clearer.
That’s why I felt terrible about it and needed to apologize. I hope I didn’t offend you too much.
Hi, WN–
When I engage on the blog I’m trying to use what I’m learning, however imperfectly. It takes me practice. It’s significant material. I’m learning about narcissists, psychopaths, normals–and empaths.
I do see empaths as a group, normals as a group, psychopaths as a group, and narcissists as a group. I see groups. I see individuals as well. I see them as a group according to things which group them together and which they tend to share in order to speak about them and analyze them in broader terms. Of course, that isn’t to say that they are a bland homogeneity.
I have an easy one I’m loathe to use. I’m Black. That’s a group. For day to day purposes, for my work and how I move in the world, for relationships, etcetera, I demand to be judged as an individual. However, it would be silly NEVER to acknowledge–especially when discussing relevant issues–that I’m part of that group of people with a certain phenotype even if I differ with the group in many other less superficial ways. I recognize that salad isn’t steak. And they’re each as a class not homogeneous blobs, but there are certain features which make each thing within the steak group belong to the steak group and so forth (I’m hungry. I want a good Kobe). The group labels are helpful for analysis and building a big picture. And for getting what you want at dinner.
(*rumbling*)
Learning what are empathic qualities and tendencies versus NPD and also narcissistic qualities and tendencies has been tremendously beneficial for me. The labels aid in understanding myself and others, where I fit in the grand scheme, and how to frame behavior I encounter. Rules of thumb are just that, and the more precise within a nuanced overall understanding the better. As a class I’ve learned from this work that we exhibit self doubt and I was considering how that might operate in the consideration of parenthood. I was thinking of the particular examples, sure, but how the overall tendency might impact upon that was what interested me.
In terms of thinking about empaths, I’m curious to know what you view as my motivations as a member of that group. Do you think my aims differ from a narc, psychopath, or a normal? What do you think motivates me as an empath, and what do you think are the objects to which I apply those motivations? I’d really like your answers in terms of me as a member of the empathic set.
Hi Leigh,
Happy New Year, I hope you have a fantastic year ahead.
Please know that you didn’t offend me at all. I’m sorry that you felt terrible. I didn’t want you or Allison to feel terrible. This wasn’t my intention, at all.
Instead, I wanted to explain my own thoughts and motivations.
I wasn’t disagreeing with you or Allison about the tendency of some empaths to have self-doubt and emotional thinking with regard to parenthood. I think that there are situations where this happens. In my own experience, it wasn’t based on that.
I enjoy our conversations, Leigh. It helps me to clarify, understand and accept my own views as well as the opinions of others when I comment with you and everyone here.
Happy New Year to you too, WN!
I’m relieved you weren’t offended. I try to think before I speak but sometimes my mouth gets me in trouble, lol!
I enjoy our conversations as well. Many times your comments help broaden my view. I’m very appreciative of that.
Thank you, Leigh. I hope 2025 is a good year for you and everyone here.
I don’t think your mouth gets you into trouble, Leigh. On the contrary. To me, you are very kind as well as truthful. I think the combination of kindness and honesty can be described as thoughtful and genuine – which are lovely traits to have 🙂
Hi Allison,
There’s a lot in your comment to consider and answer.
I think we are all learning here on the blog and we are all responding in our own personal ways to the information we are learning about. The information can relate to groups generally as well as individuals. As a result, the information is multifaceted and multilayered.
Considering that the information we learn about here on the blog is say, multidimensional, I don’t think it’s ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ to categorise people in groups and analyse groups in broader terms.
I think it’s more important to think critically with regard to contexts and situations. In some contexts, analysis in broader terms is more helpful or appropriate, and in others, the analysis of detail is more so. The process of discerning between general and detail is where critical thinking and awareness enters the picture.
For what it’s worth, Allison, I have not imagined you (or anyone here on the blog) as being black or of being a certain ethnicity or nationality. To me, everyone here on the blog is equal in relation to their skin colour or ethnicity. When I comment to you or anyone else, it doesn’t even occur to me that you may have a particular skin colour or be from a specific country. Of course, when these aspects are mentioned specifically in comments, they do come to my attention, however, it is in a momentary way according to the specific conversation. I then have that detail in my memory as a reference point, however, it is not a reference point couched in a finite or all-encompassing way.
When I think about it more deeply, I respond to people here with regard to what I am reading about – that is a person’s words; writing style; the sentiments and emotions behind the words; the stories told; the images conveyed through words; the historical details of a person’s life experiences; etc.
The more I think about it, the anonymous commenters here could be purple with pink spots and have three heads and I wouldn’t care about those aspects because I am focused on their comments in other ways.
Also, I am not reading comments and thinking about “dinner”… What are you insinuating here, Allison? (raising my eyebrows inquisitively).
“In terms of thinking about empaths, I’m curious to know what you view as my motivations as a member of that group.”
This is an interesting question.
Firstly, being on the blog has taught me that it’s important not to jump to conclusions about anyone here with regard to whether they are narcissists, narcissistic, normal, or empaths. The anonymity we all share makes it difficult to accurately pinpoint which group an individual belongs within. Going by words and comments alone means it takes longer to reach a conclusive overall impression.
It’s interesting that you say: “….my motivations as a member of that group.” In particular, I find the word ‘motivations’ a little out of place. This is because empaths, on the whole, do not generally approach a friendly conversation or let’s say a ‘prosocial casual interaction’ with preconceived ‘motivations’.
More specfically, when I consider your comments under this post as well as your comments generally since you have been on the blog, my impression is that you can be erratic with regard to your views and sentiments. I can see comments about severe abuse in your past as well as comments that appear to be very self-aware and self-possessed.
I hope you don’t mind me answering in the way I have. You did ask, and I am answering honestly.
I’m well meaning, but I have a less than perfect perspective as demonstrated by less than complete accuracy and empathy. Clearly, I must do better.
Hi Allison,
In my reply to you, I addressed both you and Leigh.
As I just mentioned to Leigh, when I read your conversation, it sounded to me like you were describing empaths as a general category. That is, that all empaths would tend to have self-doubt or would second-guess themselves or would have emotional thinking at the forefront.
The way you grouped narcissists and normals into categories and described their likely thoughts and motivations, it sounded like you thought that all narcissists would think in a certain way, and all empaths would think in a certain way.
Since this kind of categorisation did not ring true in my own case, I thought it was important to reply.
“Clearly, I must do better.”
I’m not sure how or why you think this way. I think you have misinterpreted my comment.
Hi, WN–
I do group people, and I recognize that groups have qualities which do intersect with other groups. Right now this recognition also includes empaths, normals, narcissists, and psychopaths as groups. For analysis I do tend to think at the macro level but I know that there are individual differences. For my worldview, and depending on the circumstance, some groups are more useful than others for understanding certain phenomena. For example, when I find myself getting into a romantic encounter in the future, I’ll be better able to weed out narcissists owing to HG’s analysis of them as a group, and the various subgroups.
I think in terms of normative curves for analysis. I want to determine what the norms are, the averages, the thick part of the graph. That’s my interest. I know myself and I know some individuals, but what’s going on in the bigger scheme of things? Where am I on the curve? Where is this person? That’s what I need to help me in the larger world. Since we have an excellent source of group analysis, why not use it? HG’s work gives me a lot of power in terms of understanding people generally and it’s saved me a lot of grief already.
I don’t entirely subsume my individuality into the group or see other individuals that way–and I wasn’t speaking of a particular empath necessarily and not about you. I don’t know you. Now I know a bit more about where you fit on a certain issue. As I can’t know everyone personally (and it follows I can’t know every empath personally) grouping can be a useful heuristic method. And I have now a very refined and solid heuristic. It’s about me getting information I can use in the wild which has the highest probability of being accurate. I can make adjustments from there and, what’s more, I’ll see the field before I enter.
If it’s confession time, I wear rose colored glasses sometimes and I am a bit of a fantasist in life always wanting things to look better than they are, I go off topic too much but I always mean well and to do no harm. Every living blogger can do better as we are human. But being human is the interesting part, love thy empath warts and all! Swords up! Happy New Year Empaths!
Hi Allison,
I didn’t mean to suggest that you should have children. I should’ve been clearer. I just meant to say that I think you’d be a better mother than you think.
No worries at all, Leigh.
Hi Allison:
Not all empaths. My first child was a surprise. I was flying every week and managing two offices and many multimillion dollar cases. I would fly back home and fall asleep in my suit. I was a vegetarian and craved milk and beef. I went to the doctor convinced I had a blood disease. When they told me I was pregnant, my knees buckled but I fell madly in love with my child. I quit my partnership, left my career to raise my son. I read every book I could and chanted away through 17 hours of hard labor refusing an epidermal as to not effect the child. Every day was exciting and joyous. I loved being a mother, still do. I want to them, poor babies. Joined mommy groups and poured my energy into caring for them for five years. After 5 years, goo goo ga ga and the fellow mothers at the park was not enough, I went back to work two days a week. Thank goodness as I was divorced after 7 years. My absolute favorite part of my life. I never second guessed, it was the best part of me that I feel I was born to be over anything.Both my children say I was a great mom. My greatest accomplishment. I married a man anothers baby. Then I got pregnant with his and he had two kids. Me seen American family, we all had different last names lol. I have two children now that grew up beyond my greatest dreams and I am close to both. I didn’t second guess myself but as a single mom it was not easy. Every night for many years (18?) I prayed to God to let them be ok until they are 18 and then you can take me. I was really there rock, I needed to survive for them. When I divorced I vowed not to remarry and to just focus on them. I met a single hot neighbor who was doing the same thing so we kept it casual and remain friends. I would say your love for that child overcomes everything. You don’t judge yourself, you naturally sacrifice yourself for them. Put them first. I had no problem with that…nothing came easy. I left home after high school bought my own car ( had a Harley roadster before that), put myself through college, studying in UK and law school. I knew poverty. I sometimes worked two to three jobs. I had lots of love not much money when young. But maternity…, those were great years. I love being a mom… still do. I highly recommend it:) My children are not sure they will have children despite the fact I saved all their books for my grandchildren but they are very young… there’s plenty of time!
You’re so cute, my Dani dear. I love your visuals in your responses. Your posts have high production value.
“No matter what form this religion might take, there will always be holy narcissists in their numbers.”
Amen, Mr. Tudor. I’m dealing with politics as religion and religion as academia. Surrounded by assholes. And not in the fun, Las Vegas way.
But your empaths are fuckin’ killing it! I am so proud of all of you. This is good work. Hard work.
(*leaning in*) I wanna say somethin’…
Don’t let anyone take your–your–drink.
Bubbles! Rebecca! Dani! (*burp*)
All you empath people up in dis bitch! (*hiccup*) We’re gonna be so badass!
(*whispering*) Wea-pon-ized. (*hic*)
HG with the big juevos!
All you…you’re all such good good lady ladies! (*hiccup*) And gentlemen. Gents.
Listen to me. Listen to me!!
DON’T YOU LET ANYONE TAKE YOUR POWER. Dontchudodat. M’kay?
(*crying*) I fuckin’ love you guys…No!…te a goid pershon…
Allison,
A quick glance at your comments shows the following:
1. On 5 December, 2024 at 23:56:
– A comment to Rebecca under the post ‘I Smell Victim’ (date of post: 17 Nov 2024)
– Your comment to Rebecca is sober and shows supposed concern with a question.
2. On 6 December, 2024 at 00:59:
– A general comment under the post ‘The Holy Narcissist (date of post: 4 Nov 2023)
– Your comment appears to be written while in a drunken state, complete with elaborate punctuation and with burps and hiccups included in brackets.
3. On 6 December, 2024 at 01:13:
– A comment to Rebecca under the post ‘I Smell Victim’ (date of post 17 Nov 2024)
– Your comment to Rebecca is again sober and shows concern and support
Allison,
You have apparently fully recovered from the drunken state you convey in the comment above in less than 15 minutes. Miraculous.
It’s unclear to me why the pointed condescension is required in a thread in which extreme abuse of children and adolescents is discussed. While unclear, it’s telling.
Allison,
I suggest you refrain from commenting during your 15-minute episodes of drunkenness.
Hi, WiserNow. Your take is interesting. What do you mean by “it’s telling”? I’m curious.
Hi Allison,
I think that your (drunken) take was interesting.
Before I answer your question, could you tell me why you commented the way you did in this thread about extreme abuse of children and teenagers?
Why did you comment in a drunken way by slurring your words, adding a burp and hiccup, and being patronising about the effects of abuse on children and teenagers who did not become narcissists?
I was thinking about the holy narcissist and our nation’s Auntie Kamala with all she represents. The broader effects of her impact and the consideration of harmful religiosity in its wider sense moved me strongly. Her kind are causing problems for me that promise to get more thorny and insidious.
I don’t belittle the effects of abuse. I was introduced to aberrant sexual behavior as a child early and often by many of the adults in my life. I learned to offer oral sex like a greeting before I hit puberty. My matrinarc broke my hymen. I was fair game to any grown up, at any time, for anything they might want while I was still playing with dolls. I don’t claim to know how child abuse impacts upon everyone else, but I know how it shaped me. I know the way it sifted my soul. I was thinking about my current situation and its connection to the trouble America finds itself in now.
Oh Allison, some people are just fucking pieces of shit! I hope all of your abusers suffered in some sort of way.
From my perspective Allison was posting in a jokey way in a discussion thread, WN, not in response to points you and some others made about child abuse. Her post is not related to child abuse and did not need to be. She’s just being herself, and sometimes is silly, which is fine.
Allison,
Your explanation appears incongruous to me. It makes me wonder why you would post about Kamala Harris in a thread that has nothing to do with Kamala Harris.
“I was thinking about the holy narcissist and our nation’s Auntie Kamala with all she represents.”
This part of your comment made me think of Donald Trump holding up a bible (which was upside down…) when he stood outside a church in June, 2020. The photo op occurred during a time when there were riots and protests about the force used by the policeman who killed George Floyd.
Trump admitted that he hadn’t even read the bible. When asked about his favourite verse, he said he didn’t know and that he just knows that “it’s a very special book”.
Even though he hasn’t even read the bible, he uses it to manipulate his base, and more frighteningly, his manipulations actually work to incite his followers.
“The broader effects of her impact and the consideration of harmful religiosity in its wider sense moved me strongly. Her kind are causing problems for me that promise to get more thorny and insidious.”
I saw Kamala Harris’ speech that you’re referring to. I agree that she looked and sounded like she had been drinking.
In her speech though, she did not mention religion or God or the bible. She mentioned American history and ideals and Americans’ “purpose”, whatever that means.
To me, Trump has used “harmful religiosity” in a much more obvious and egregious way. His stalwart base of supporters are often described as ‘white conservative evangelical Christians’. This large swathe of voters are brainwashed by him and believe wholeheartedly in his lies and disinformation. These so-called ‘god-fearing Christians’ were prepared to vandalise the White House and lynch some of those inside – all because their leader incited them to do so.
Allison,
I’m not a fan of Harris nor Trump. If I was an American voter, I would not want to vote for either of them.
In relation to your stance that Harris is causing problems due to her “harmful religiosity”:
1. I don’t see how that has any relevance to the comments under this post, yet you have tied your comment to the “good empath people up in dis bitch”.
Kamala Harris and her speech have nothing to do with the comments here about cults, holy narcissists and child sexual abuse.
2. If anyone in American politics is using religion in a harmful and manipulative way, it’s Trump.
WiserNow, you are too wise.
nata43tm,
Is it possible to be “too wise”?
Maybe what you mean is that I am too honest? Maybe you think I am too wise because I say things that others would not?
It’s a little amusing to me that you say I am “too wise”. I have been described as being “too compassionate” and “too empathic”. These traits have been described by HG himself as “weak” and “naive”.
– – – By the way, I don’t think it is ‘weak’ and ‘naive’ to be compassionate and empathic – I’d like to emphasise this. – – –
Are you suggesting, nata43tm, that I should go back to having magical thinking and relying on hope? Should I look for the best in people instead of thinking logically and considering evidence?
I don’t wish to make you uncomfortable or to put you on the spot.
It’s just that I am being honest. I am thinking as logically as I can. Isn’t that what HG teaches people to do?
Hello WiserNow, sorry, I meant “serious”, in a friendly manner. But, please disregard my comment, I sometimes just say random things, especially, when I’m not sober. Have a great holiday.
Wiser now and all:
My brother is an atheist. And he looks down at and even gets angry at those who aren’t. My father and his family were devout Christians. My brother controlled my father’s funeral and kept religion out of it. This did not affect my father as deceased but I personally felt it was not a proper reflection of his essence. And the funeral was to be about my father. My soon to be ex husband lost his mind and called many in my circle this year… about 15 clients who he accused of having an affair with me. One aptly said in re-telling the call that he was about to say “ yes and she was the best sex I ever had” ( joking) …but the guy was so un-hinged and so obviously crazy I actually felt bad for him. “ my ex called my Friends, my children, some of my ex boyfriends and my brother. The ONLY person who betrayed me was my brother. My brother wrote the most scathing revolting untrue things about me. Basically saying if my father had been with him he would not have died. ( Ummm advanced cancer he fought for 8 years that was in his bones, and organs? ) My ex sent it to me to show me that he was right about me. My character. I immediately messaged my brother and said “ I forgive you. I love you. Stay out of my marriage. “ He replied he “wanted nothing to do with my marriage.” Good enough. I saw him at my mothers 80Th party a couple months later where my brother hugged me, said he loved me and felt I should see a professional due to my relationship with my father who I adored, and was very very close but who died of cancer at 64. I am perfectly mentally healthy. This weird advice came out of left field. Maybe from my ex? ( My ex was under forced mental health care at the time… ) Still I was kind to my brother. Am I close? No. Do I see him a lot? Very rare. Family events. Do I love him? Yes. Sigh. I even love my soon to be ex. But I see no future with my soon to be ex. And I forgive both of them. I don’t even have to work at it. Was I angry, and embarrassed by my soon to be ex calls? Yes. Did I do something? Yes, I threatened to sue him for a million dollars in California for interfering with my business, get a judgment and keep it until he inherits and take every penny if he ever called my clients or interfered with my business again. And I got my walk away divorce too:) 🙂 :). My ex even offered to write to my clients to say he was under psychiatric care. Not needed I said. Everyone knew he was nuts. And they know me. And there were NO affairs. Would I have done it? Yes. I don’t make threats I won’t carry through with and I have in the past. ( I will come after my bank in January). The UK police called me here in California to offer me support and protection. ??? . I called back and said whatever he has said or done, I don’t want involvement with police but thank you for your offer and kind consideration. Do I trust my brother or my ex? No. HG is right. No contact is best BUT I also feel if you take the high road you see the clearest. If my brother slings mud, it’s his hands that are dirty. I won’t get in the mud with him. And I need to have a clear heart, I don’t want to carry anger or hate or resentment. Not easy at times. Both set aim at harming me. And I am ONLY dealing with jealousy and pettiness and hurt people hurting people…not sexual abuse. I am an adult not a child. It’s different. Anyone hurt my child, I may even think of killing them. First, I would do anything and everything to help my child. And I have no words for those children who were sexually abused. Bubbles said it best “who cares what they are lock them up and throw away the key”. Still… if there was one area I would volunteer, it would be child trafficking. I used to donate. I was a mentor to a disadvantaged child and I set up a national arm for a charity in my youth for a children’s home that runs to this day. I did help prosecute a pedophile long ago with ice in my veins. It’s an injustice that has long caught my attention but I don’t do much about the cause today. Maybe I will again. There are various forms of abuse. But as they said in Sound of Freedom, we must protect Gods Children. I use my brothers example to contrast the difference. And to make another point;) HG does weaponize us by educating us on narcs ( and psychopaths… but I am keen to learn much more on them;) But narcs and psychopaths don’t love so they don’t have to deal with the complicated issue of what to do with the internal struggle an empath has loving someone who has abused them. You can go no contact or limit it as I did with my brother but the hurt heart? …. this is where the power of forgiveness comes in. And I don’t know how a sexually abused child could ever do it? You don’t do it for the abuser. You do it for yourself. And it doesn’t mean you trust them or ever will, or accept their behavior or ever will. It’s a form of no contact as you let it go. I sometimes force myself to pray for that person and ask God to take away the anger and wash away the darkness. My personal choice. Mostly I focus on the good people in my life including my furry ones. lol And this “ forgiveness” is an ever ending process at times for me, not perfected;)
Hey Alison: in reading your comment, it made me laugh … and I mean this good naturedly, as I once told my mother who always drilled being “ lady like “ into me. “ A lady doesn’t do this.” “ A lady sits with her knees together or crossed” “ A lady doesn’t wear ripped jeans.” Etc… Etc…Etc….infinity Etc…
My reply “ I don’t want to be a lady, mom. I want to be a lawyer!”
Hope you guys got a laugh… true story. 3rd grade.
I just wonder and marvel at the true survivors out there, children who have suffered greatly and hope and pray they are ok today. I read about the DID person who partook at trial in the prosecution in Australia. She amazed me. True hero!
Hi, Contagious–
“A lady doesn’t do this.”
No harm done. I have a lot of things going on where I have to be me and not worry about whether I’m considered a lady. The idea of the holy narcissist was really potent in considering my situation. I’m hacking my way through American academia and it’s awash with ideology, dogmatism, and groupthink. My department is like ground zero for that on my campus. I nearly started a fight the other week pointing out the damage that people like my avatar Drunk Auntie Kamala and her kind actually do to the “marginalized” they supposedly “ally” for. There’s a certain kind of Marxist pink haired nose ring wearing lunacy that’s taken over, especially among the humanities professorate. They can’t build a proper argument, they denigrate all the other disciplines without understanding them, they can’t do valid research, they disavow the importance of evidence, and yet they expect a cozy life at the expense of the public while offering little of value in return. Take away their avocado toast and you’re a fascist. It’s a slap in the face to the humanistic tradition. They disgust me. If it weren’t for the statistics and psychology courses I’m taking outside my department I’d lose my tiny mind.
Sometimes I do cross my legs and put my hands in my lap daintily, though. It’s nice.
I have been following the news and HG’s videos about John Smyth, who inflicted horrific beatings on boys and young men over a long period starting in the 1970s.
The case is shocking. It is even more shocking that the abuse continued in a so-called ‘christian’ environment by a so-called ‘respected’ man and was covered up by those who preach about mercy and humility.
HG’s videos to date have focused on a report about Smyth’s abuse called ‘The Makin Review’. There have been a number of reviews, reports and a book about the case.
My own interest led me to attempt to understand how it was that Smyth was able to operate for so long in such an egregious manner. In so doing, I came upon a report available online that outlines the way Smyth groomed the boys and young men and the environment that enabled this to happen. This report is called: ‘Review into the abuse by John Smyth of pupils and former pupils of Winchester College’ by Jan Pickles and Genevieve Woods.
In effect, Smyth created and operated a cult. He infiltrated Winchester College and treated the boarding school as his hunting ground. He targeted teenage boys and invited them to join a group which he was instrumental in forming called the Christian Forum (CF) in 1974. This group was operated on the premise that it was an extension of the existing bible study groups at the College. The group met after Chapel on Sundays with a weekly evangelical speaker. The CF’s first meeting had about 25 boys in attendance. Interest in the meetings grew to the point that about 50 pupils became committed members.
The report outlines the way Smyth groomed the boys over a lengthy period. He essentially made them feel special by focusing his attention on them and providing them with an ‘inner circle’. He was especially kind to them in a place where the general boarding school environment was cold, impersonal and could be boring, especially on Sundays when the boarders had little structure in their day. In this way, he offered them relief from boarding-school life and offered them a ‘loving-family life’ instead, especially when he began to invite selected boys to Sunday lunch at his home.
The report goes on to describe the way the CF became a secretive group in which boys were controlled. The evangelical lectures were given by high-profile speakers who the boys respected and admired. The boys were encouraged to be especially mindful of having sinful thoughts in order to please God to divulge their ‘sins’ in order to be assured of being great Christian leaders. The boys were also encouraged to spy on each other and report ‘transgressions’ to Smyth. New boys introduced to the CF were indoctrinated into an ‘us and them’ mentality in which those who chose not to be involved with the forum were sidelined, ostracised and described as ‘unsound’ with regard to religious beliefs. The CF members were especially defensive of the group when anyone questioned its activities. This defensiveness acted to stonewall any prying questions or further criticism and investigation.
The way the CF operated – in plain sight – as part of Winchester College is particularly telling because it shows how the boys were selected, indoctrinated, and mind-controlled over a period of years before the physical abuse began. This could not have happened over a long phase without other adults in positions of authority in the College in effect being duped into either knowingly or unknowingly ‘allowing’ it to happen.
Interestingly, the report also describes the suspicions some had about Smyth. There were housemasters at the College who suspected that Smyth’s regular attendance at the College and control over a select group of boys was ‘not right’. His ‘counselling’ of the boys was questioned because the counselling was provided outside of the College’s structured operations and without any College oversight. There were also parents of boys who did not permit their sons to be part of the CF or to attend Smyth’s home for Sunday lunch. Smyth was described as ‘creepy’ or ‘sinister’ by several parents. In one case, a boy’s parents met with Smyth and told him they did not want their son to be part of the CF. They thought Smyth was odd and sinister, and described the way he was staring at their son while the boy was sleeping in their car.
Despite suspicions and the disapproval of some, Smyth was not confronted effectively.
The report also includes impact statements from two of the boys who Smyth abused. Their personal accounts of his mind-control, the life-long harrowing damage he had on them, and the Church of England’s lack of action are stark.
I hope that HG continues his analysis of John Smyth by discussing the ways his cult-like indoctrination of victims occurred.
In this report and the Makin Review, it is evident that Smyth had a ‘modus operandi’. He would essentially ‘ensure’ that a beating would take place by ‘creating’ a fictional basis for punishment in a victim’s mind. He created this fictional basis by using so-called ‘transgressions’ or ‘wrongdoings’ that then needed to be ‘punished’.
In fact, the boys and adolescents were just behaving like normal children and teenagers. To turn their ‘normal’ teenage thoughts and actions into persecutory ‘sins’ and ‘wrongdoings’ was the way he made them believe they ‘deserved’ the violent and sadistic beatings. It is particularly sick and twisted. And the life-long psychological and emotional harm it caused to the boys is devastating.
The creation of a group – or cult, or clique, or religion, or camp, or mindset, or practice, or perspective – is the way a narcissist gains a foothold. Within this ‘group’, the narcissist’s modus operandi is enabled and allowed to take hold and grow. Members of the group are ‘infected’ by the ‘groupthink’, which becomes the group’s collusive protective shield against scrutiny and accountability. Secrecy, justification, collusion and lies all serve to protect the narcissist and the narcissist’s aims and the group both serves and promotes these aims.
Total grooming atmosphere. Like shooting fish in a barrel.
Wiser now: sadly, it reminds of Joe Paterno at Penn State: Jerry Sandusky, the assistant football coach who molested teenage athletes. The grooming, the “ make you special”, the physical attacks. And footballers are very macho, many victims did not come forward as embarrassed by the abuse. Joe Paterno was was renerated statewide … then he became a pariah as how could he not know as his head coach was anbusing so many male anthelites… and the accusations as well were covered up. This was the 80s. I think child or teen predators are the WORSE and I don’t understand it. Is it a separate category than narcissism or psychopathy? It is separate on the DSM but I don’t why. Talk about pure evil, lack of empathy. I prosecuted a case of a male owdiphile who had been raping his daughter since 8. She still “ loved him.” He was this big fat greasy 40 + year old. She was a drop dead gorgeous Hispanic cheerleader. I sat next to him during the trial. All I could feel was this scratch scratch scratch like a rat in your walls. His energy was compulsive and relentless. No empathy. None. He would look at her like a rat going into a trap at trial. Filthiest man I have ever sat next too. Hands down. Murderers are cleaner HG has not touched on pedophilia directly. I hope he does. To me, the worst crime ever and disgustingly per Sound of Freedm a 5 billion enterprise thanks to the internet! If this is a narcissism or psychopathy overlap, it is a topic we most need HG! Let’s save the children! Sorry as a former prosecutor and as I sit today: life in prison, castrate, end it. If ever my empathy goes low, it’s HERE.
Contagious,
The world has devolved beyond ‘bread and circuses’. It’s a cesspit where bacteria thrive. A cesspit where the scum and sleaze rising to the top is getting thicker, both figuratively and literally.
The lunatics have taken over the asylum. It makes me glad I don’t have children. I’m relieved I haven’t subjected my offspring or added my genes to the wasteland this world has become.
I think there are some social things that have gotten weird with all the DEI, the general hatred of Western heritage, etc., but people generally always have been pretty awful. Prehistory and history are not chock full of good times, and overall much has improved.
However, if your comment is about what’s happened with Jaguar, then I agree unreservedly.
Your comment made me laugh, Allison.
Thank you for lightening the topic a little. I was getting bogged down (pardon the pun) with thoughts about holy narcissists and the aspects of the world that are heinous.
What don’t you like about the ‘new’ Jaguar? hahaha
To me, the new ad looks like someone let a group of art and fashion students loose with a project titled, “What does ‘avant-garde’ mean to you?”
I think the concept of breaking with tradition is very risky when the product is an esteemed and iconic ‘legacy’ product. If it has its own ‘legacy’, that means its image, design, historical significance, or character has earned a respected and defined place in people’s minds.
Its image should not have to be transformed to appeal to a new generation.
It reminds me of the perfume Chanel No 5, which is also a legacy product.
I recently watched the new ad for Chanel No 5 as well as a short video about numerous past ad campaigns for the perfume. The marketing is taken very, very seriously and there is a lot of thought that goes into how to merge and combine traditional aspects of the perfume with current trends and attitudes.
What Chanel is very careful about is preserving the image of the perfume and facets of it that are iconic. These aspects remain staunchly the same over time. Meanwhile the peripheral advertising – for example, the model, the campaign ‘story’, the setting, the fashion, attitudes about feminism, social mores, etc – are changed. Chanel also adds a forward-thinking aspect which almost subliminally directs social attitudes in a certain direction. It does all this while keeping the actual product – the perfume itself and the bottle it comes in – largely unchanged.
In this way, Chanel No 5, which is now about 105 years old, keeps appealing to and attracting current generations and it’s still one of the most popular perfumes. And it’s ad campaigns are generally received well.
In my view, Jaguar should have approached the marketing of the new cars in a similar vein.
Hey Allison: Jaguar 🐆 included. I agree history shows this has always been an issue. But why not a crackdown?
Dear Allison,
Our greater narc friend drives a Jag, but then again, he’s old and pretentious haha
We’ve been in it, not a lot of leg room in the back, noisy and it stinks!
The Jag ad speaks for itself …. totally weird ! Big fail !
What I have noticed lately here, is a lot of younger people are driving Beemers.
Back to the drawing board Jaguar haha
Hello WiserNow, your comments depress me even more, than some of HG’s articles. The world is not doomed, it’s just changing at many levels, and people with rigid beliefs are struggling to accept that. Children are going to be fine. They are smarter than us. They will figure out something, how to clean up this old school mess.
Hello Nara:
Nice to meet you here! I agree with you! I think our children are our hope!
Do you believe they are the future? Teach them well and let them lead the way?
HG, thank you for the earworm. I am going to exercise caution and take a dose of 20 Christmas carols to counter its effects now.
Dear Mr Tudor,
Everybody searching for a hero, people need someone to look up to.
Hello Mr Tudor, in case a question was addressed to me.
Yes, I believe children are our future. Particularly, the ones who are 15 years old and younger. I think, they are not going to be susceptible to brainwashing and polarized world view as older generations. Future is going to be interesting. I can talk a lot about that, but I’m affraid my active vocabulary due to lack of practice, is not sufficient to articulate my thoughts properly on that matter, so I stop here.
I love children. They are open, pure, honest, optimistic and just fun to be with. I’ve got two of my own. Daughter from 1st marriage and son from 2nd. Guru and a little Viking, as I called them.
Do I teach them well? I don’t know. I’m not an ideal mom. Boy is only 6, I play Minecraft and Fortnite with him. He keeps saying “Mommy, don’t worry, I will protect you”. I try to teach them to have an open mind, critical thinking and just wish them to have an interesting and fulfilling life.
Anyway, I’ve got a question, HG:
Can an empath or normal exhibit a behavior, where he cares/loves so much that it feels controlling and suffocating?
Feels controlling to who?
Nata43tm,
I agree, my children, and their children, give me hope, they see what’s going on and are strong and able to stand against it as needed.
Nara:
Kindness is the light in the darkness that seems like a miracle at times. This world has cruelty, anger, selfishness and above all greed for money and power. If kindness is passed on, there is hope for the future generations;) I am lucky ….at my darkest moments when I feel hopeless, or full of anxiety, or a weight that may be grief or depression, my default is I land into kindness to wade my way out. If close ones are awful to me, ( not big companies- I go to anger and justice), but those I love, I find myself reaching deep to take the high road to find a core of kindness. When my am most fragile, it is this core of strength that gets me through it all and it was a gift to me of growing up with a kind father and many kind family members. I learned it was a strength to get through tough times. As we grow older we realize we have two hands, one to help ourselves and the other to help others. If it saves me through the tough times, it is not a weakness. Some say it is an improper default. But to me it is a flame, bigger and brighter that makes the others look small even evokes pity for their bad acts. It is an incredible strength. Not easy to reach but a treasured part of my deepest depths. Another word for kindness is love. We must pass it on. Swords up!
Contagious, HG, Anna Plyance, Bubbles and AV,
Your comments have given me food for thought and much to ponder – and remember.
Contagious,
Isn’t hope supposed to be a false mistress according to HG?
Therefore, if children are meant to be our hope for the future, then if HG is correct (and I’m sure everyone here would never, ever – not even for a second – consider that he’s incorrect), then thinking of children as our ‘hope’ is a fallacy, isn’t it?
In addition to hope being a false mistress, I also see this idea – that is, children being our ‘hope’ – as a form of scapegoating.
If the adults in the house have trashed everything, broken the windows and the furniture, killed the pets, made a mess of the garden, and are fighting with the neighbours, why should the children be burdened with fixing everything? How are they supposed to do that?
Children will most likely find it harder and harder to fund their education and find jobs. It will be a rat race in which buying a house to live in is like a pipe dream for many. They won’t be able to trust most people. They’ll be subject to overlords like Donald Trump and Elon Musk. And they won’t be able to read the news, look at photos and watch videos without researching several other sources to deduce what they should actually believe.
If I sound depressing, maybe those who want to read less depressing things should open their eyes and consider the reality they see around them every day.
HG and Bubbles,
That song – The Greatest Love of All – was sung by someone who later became a drug-addicted mother who died at the age of 48 in 2012. She left her daughter, who was 19 at the time, motherless. Her daughter died three years later, aged 22, from causes very much the same as the causes that killed her mother.
Ah, yes, “teach them well and let them lead the way.”
The father of this small family is still alive. He fathered seven children including the daughter who died aged 22. His 28-year-old son also died from an overdose of various drugs. This man has been arrested numerous times since 1989 and has a laundry list of his offences that the world is aware of.
…again, “everybody searching for a hero, people need someone to look up to…”
The irony is stunning.
Anna Plyance,
Jingle those bells and dust off the Christmas albums! It will help to drown out the advertisements for the Boxing Day sales.
A Victor,
I recall the time when you commented about your teenage son who was contemplating using drugs. At the time, I remember you said there wasn’t anything you could do because he was old enough to make his own decisions, or something to that effect if I recall correctly.
I also remember the time when your daughter committed suicide. Thankfully, she survived. It must have been a terrible and very frightening experience for you and your family.
How are your son and daughter doing now?
Hi, Nata–
“…a world doesn’t need more narcissist or empath with a mother, who can’t love…”
I think that’s interesting. I did say I’d make a terrible mother, but I didn’t say I couldn’t love my children. I hadn’t thought of that and you making that inference is fascinating. Now I wonder.
It’s a fair assumption because we believe in the sanctity of Mother’s Love. And in all fairness was what I’ve experienced as love, love? I’ve learned my ideas about it and actual sense of it were strongly shaped by narcissist-influenced media, by falsity. So, maybe I haven’t loved if my understanding of it is tainted. I believe I would love my children–but how much of that is from songs, books, and images? What if Whitney Houston and others did shape “love” for me? What if I as an empath haven’t actually loved? After all, I was swimming in soul murderers growing up–how would I learn love? How would I know? You’ve made me think. But there are other considerations regarding the choice not to breed.
I’d be a terrible mother because I’m not stable in that way. There’s a certain amount of emotional and situational security that a child needs that I’d simply never be able to provide. My interests change, my work absorbs me to a great extent and I need to follow that. I don’t know where I’ll be living in a couple of years or if I’ll be on this continent. I follow my research. I like it that way. Also, a child would benefit from an extended family and I have no involvement with family. Nothing roots me to any place but my own two feet.
And I couldn’t do all the myths about Santa and the Easter Bunny and such–children need those kinds of things and I just can’t provide that. Furthermore, it seems when people have children they get everyone else’s children in the bargain: play dates, fights, bullying at school, birthday parties and so forth. Bad empath who doesn’t want to get close. I’m uncomfortable with getting that involved in other people’s lives as I’m pretty self sufficient and emotionally solitary. Then there’s the fear of something happening to them that I can’t control. And if I did somehow manage to shape my life to welcome and raise a child, it would involve sacrifices that I’m certain I would come to resent. I know that about myself.
So, all in all it’s just not for me. I spent years working with kids in bulk, feeding them crisp Gala apples and filling their minds with books, then sending them on. Operating from a spot where I could do the least damage. That was my limit. That may make me a bad woman or a shoddy empath by lacking the maternal instinct, but there you are.
HG,
Feel controlling to me. The question was not related to children/parents, originally. Separate topics. Though, now I can see how it might be applicable to a child upbringing by non-narcissist as well. Anyway, I may do a narc detector later if needed, but I’m sure he is Normal, just a bit controlling. This week is “white”, will see how long it would last.
Hello Alison!
You are definitely not a bad woman or shoddy (had to google this word) empath. Don’t say such things, please.
So yes, I meant, that one of the reason for an creation of empath or narcissist is an prolonged abuse from a parent. Lack of love. But can a non-narcissist be so abusive and controlling to damage a child to an extent that it becomes a narcissist or an empath? I doubt that, actually. Therefore you cannot be “a bad mother”. Though certain events still can cause trauma to a child, like a divorce, for example. Btw, according to HG EDC, I’m also an empath.
Anyway, sorry for my reply. It’s your life, your choice, your view and none of my business. It just brought back memories of some past conversations I had. I had my first child when I was in my 20s. I really wanted to have children, despite a fear of becoming like my mother. My pregnancy/breastfeeding went very smooth, I got back to shape very quickly. I was like an energizer back then. 5-6 hours of sleep was enough for me, I didn’t feel tired. Money wasn’t an issue.
So later, during gatherings with my female friends, who either were single or just dating at that time (I was only one married), and all childless, after a couple of drinks, someone (not me) would always bring a topic, of why and how on Earth I decided to have a baby, sacrificing my carrier, health, social life, not drinking alcohol for 1.5 years, when my maternal instict woke up, how possibly I can love this demanding creature called a baby, how did I know that I would love my child, etc. I always felt like I need to explain, defend myself and that, somehow, I should convince them, that having children is great. It would annoy me, and my explaination that I don’t insist on anything, ” you want to be childfree – your choice, I’m totally fine with that” oddly was not satisfying for them. Finally, I would say ” yes, you are right, you will be an awful mother, you would miss out on many things, so, please keep being childfree, so no more unhappy/ damaged child is born”.
Therefore, your reply just triggered in me an old reaction.
Ironically, most of them have kids now, although some struggled with infertility for quite awhile. Have a great holiday 🙂 I like falling snow at this site. Looks cool.
Hi Nata,
Are you saying that you felt suffocated and controlled by your partner’s behavior?
Considering that you feel suffocated by the behavior, I would consider that a huge red flag. Listen to your gut. It’s telling you something.
No worries, nata! I like thinking. Writing to answer questions or address other responses helps me. So, thank you for engaging! I appreciate people who want to be parents and are good to their children. And you had every right to state your views. I like the rough and tumble. Thank you.
WN,
Huh.
Just saw this comment:
“A Victor,
I recall the time when you commented about your teenage son who was contemplating using drugs. At the time, I remember you said there wasn’t anything you could do because he was old enough to make his own decisions, or something to that effect if I recall correctly.
I also remember the time when your daughter committed suicide. Thankfully, she survived. It must have been a terrible and very frightening experience for you and your family.
How are your son and daughter doing now?”
They’re doing great, really great actually. Thanks for asking.
Wiser now:
I agree with you ! The income gap is the worse it’s ever become causing all kinds of collateral damage. The internet has mixed blessings with instant info but causing mental health issues and increasing crimes like trafficking! HG has not addressed pedophiles ( Savage yes) but I see pedophiles as either narcs or psychopaths, not sure which but people with the absence of empathy. The film says it’s increased because of the internet BUT I think it’s been an evil crime me since the beginning of time and one that governments don’t tackle. And I don’t get it. I don’t get the WHY? I don’t get the lack of crackdown. And for me, the death penalty should go to them. I see nothing worse in this world…
“Your bones do separate giving birth.”
That sounds like THE way to sit in my own stunning and brave organic authenticity.
I’m so happy you got a chuckle out of it. I know the world we live through can get heavy, but humor and a little history reading help me keep perspective.
The new Jaguar ad is very narcissistic in my view, as well as the rebrand overall. It’s grandiose but vacuous, it’s full of stimulation but empty, and it uses portentous words to say nothing. And why the fuck get rid of the Leaper? We’ve gone from pussy tamer to right pussy.
Stepping out of line here, I hope your decision to not have children isn’t only because the world gets dark–it’s always been dark. I’m sure your genes are very good! I don’t want children but it’s because I know I’d be a terrible mother, regardless of the state of the world. And also because the idea of having a fleshy parasite build its own cocoon in my abdomen, suck away at my precious bodily fluids, then emerge like something out of Alien tearing its way through my tiniest of orifices scares the living shit out of me. And I hear that actually happens!
But kids are little angels. America! Miracle of birth, something, something…
Alison, your beautiful description of pregnancy and the way you blended it with the word and idea of Alien…made me think of…drumroll!
Allison and Dani,
Your concepts regarding birth – that is, the thought of a “fleshy parasite” growing inside your abdomen and then emerging like an alien – wasn’t the scary part of having a child.
The scary part for me was being responsible for another human being for at least the next 18 years. That is, being the main person as the child’s source of food, comfort, physical health, development, guidance, education, security, material needs, and safety every minute of every day for almost two decades. That was much more terrifying than having a fetus growing inside me.
…and that would be the case if everything turned out fortunately with a healthy birth and child. What if there were complications?
It would not simply stop when the child turned 18 either. The responsibility would continue to a lesser extent for life.
Having grown up in a family where things in general were difficult in various ways, being responsible for my own well-being and future security was arduous enough. To bring a child for whom I would also be responsible was a level of difficulty I did not even want to think about.
Allison: you forgot to add 1. Your bones do separate giving birth. Fact. 2. You will never get that 10 pounds off. 3. If you breast feed, especially more than one. National Geographic time. My feet even went up a size. BUT I loved every single second or minute of it, and still do. Even 17 hours of unmedicated labor was worth it. ( With my second child, I scheduled the epidermal upon learning I was pregnant lol). There is life before children and life after. It’s a love like no other! And you can adopt too;) But motherhood can come in many forms. I have seen childless women mother their parents, their spouses, their clients and ESPECIALLY their pets. I have seen men be great mothers too. It doesn’t have to be a biological child, many women are mothers in life in various forms. It’s a beautiful empathetic trait. X
“Fleshy parasite”… it hurts to read this…but if you don’t want children, it’s good you don’t have them, a world doesn’t need more narcissist or empath with a mother, who can’t love. And nothing is going to happen to your precious “tiniest orifice”…it all gets back to normal, and with bonuses, which I didn’t know that exist.
Hi Allison,
I didn’t want to have children either. I thought I’d be a horrible mother too. I knew I wouldn’t end up being like my mother but I still didn’t think I would be good enough. I don’t think I was necessarily a terrible mother. I obviously made mistakes. Good is subjective though. One of my daughters is a confirmed narcissist by Mr. Tudor, so how good of a mother was I? Did genes play a role, absolutely. Both of my parents are narcissists and so is her father. She had a lot against her. But for some reason, my empathy still wasn’t enough to be her intervener.
My empath daughter, also confirmed by Mr. Tudor, doesn’t want to have children either. I think that proves our empathy. We’re not sure if we can give them what they need so we’d rather not do it. How many people have children just for the sake of it and then those children end up in an abusive situation just like we did.
It turns out having my children was the best thing that ever happened to me. Like you, I had a skewed vision of love. Having my children, cleared it up for me. I finally understood real love. I didn’t think I had a maternal instinct either but it kicked in.
One last thing, I wasn’t a fan of young children either. Although now that’s somewhat changed. I still don’t like screaming children but when calm, I find children fascinating. I like watching them experimenting and learning and there’s light up when they’ve figured it out.
Allison, Contagious, nata43tm,
To add to my earlier comment about raising a child…
It’s obvious that all of the comments here have focused on the mother of a child. That is, aspects of the mother such as, giving birth, the mothering instinct, a mother’s responsibility, the needs of a child that a mother must meet (such as stability, [emotional and situational], routine, groundedness, material needs, etc).
What about the father???
Everyone has conveniently (and curiously) forgotten about the father’s responsibility.
It takes two to tango. It takes two to make a child.
Why does the father suddenly disappear from the scene once a woman is pregnant? Suddenly the responsibility is all heaped on the mother’s shoulders.
If I was in a relationship with a man who was committed and wanted to have a child, I would have been much more confident and willing to have one.
It’s not only down to a ‘mothering instinct’. That’s only part of the picture.
Like with other aspects of life, survival takes precedence over other considerations. The survival instinct will take precedence over the mothering instinct, even if the mothering instinct is there and is strong.
Why is it ok for the father of a child to simply ignore his responsibilities and no-one mentions or questions it?
Dear WiserNow,
Wonderfully apt description. Couldn’t agree more.
Hello Bubbles,
It’s lovely to see your comments here again. I hope you’re well.
Hello also to Allison, Contagious, nata43tm, and of course, HG.
I’d like to respond to everyone with one reply, mainly because I have limited time and would still like to respond to all of you.
About the new Jaguar, Allison, I agree, getting rid of the Leaper is a bad idea. The Leaper makes the car instantly recognisable and it’s an iconic logo. It’s what marketing campaigns for new products strive for – a unique, simple, and prestigious logo that is well-known worldwide. The decision to transform it is unusual – unless it’s a long-term plan where the Leaper will be reintroduced at some point in future amid great fanfare and a new ploy for publicity – or perhaps used only on a line of the brand’s ‘high-end’ range of vehicles?
nata43tm,
I can see how my comments can be seen as depressing. The abuse of children and teenagers is depressing though – there’s no getting around that.
To me, it’s more depressing to gloss over such abuse by not talking about it or pretending it will somehow go away by itself.
In my initial comment about John Smyth’s sadistic abuse of boys, the report I mentioned included an impact statement from one of his victims. This impact statement included comments about this particular victim’s relationship with his own mother.
After his mother found out about the horrible beatings inflicted on her son, she couldn’t bring herself to talk about the matter. She shrank away from it. Her son suspected this was because she blamed herself for not protecting her son from the beatings. As a result, the son found he couldn’t raise the matter with her because he felt a great deal of guilt due to his belief that he was complicit in some way in the abuse. He and his mother then adopted a polite and distant relationship with each other for the next 35 years.
At one point while angry, he confronted his mother about it and he said he felt that the way their family never talked about things contributed to his being exploited by John Smyth. His mother could not hear this and the two fell out and stopped communicating altogether. His mother died shortly afterwards and they never spoke again. This fallout of John Smyth affected the son very deeply and he said he would never be able to forgive Smyth for causing it.
nata43tm,
My point in relaying this example from the review into John Smyth is to say that communication is important. It’s not helpful to avoid a subject because it may be ‘depressing’ or ‘negative’ or ‘difficult’.
To me, it is way more depressing and negative to sweep important subjects under the carpet because they are difficult to discuss.
Finally, in relation to all your comments, a positive example in relation to children being our future and how they can change the way we see things…
Yesterday in Australia in a court trial, a man was found guilty of sexually abusing his daughters. The unusual aspect of the case is that one of the daughters, a key witness, has Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID), formerly known as Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD).
In the trial, the daughter was sworn in as a witness multiple times – once as herself, and the other times as her alternative personalities (or alters) – a 13-year-old girl, a five-year-old, and an older woman.
After reading about the case, I delved further into the subject of people with MPD as witnesses in criminal trials. I learned of Jeni Haynes, who suffered horrific abuse at the hands of her father, Richard Haynes.
In 2019, Jeni Haynes was the first person in Australia to testify against her abuser from the perspectives of her MPD ‘alters’. Her case was groundbreaking. Jeni waived her right to anonymity because she wanted her father’s name to be in the public domain. She wanted the world to know about him and what he did. Her reason for waiving her anonymity was to protect what she described as ‘the unknown child’ – a child who could be abused by Richard Haynes in the same way she was abused if he had the chance to re-marry and have access to children.
Jeni Haynes’ case was a turning-point with regard to how MPD or DID is perceived in the wider community. Instead of the ‘disorder’ being seen as ‘the craziest of crazy’, it began to be seen as a remarkable self-defence mechanism in response to extreme trauma in childhood.
Instead of being seen as ‘disordered’ and unreliable, it became an obvious sign that the person had suffered horrific abuse in their early years at the hands of a significant person in their life; a sign that the person’s caregiver is highly likely of being guilty of horrific crimes.
Jeni Haynes is a remarkable woman who endured things that most people can’t even bear to talk about. She lived it. She also survived and lived to write a book about it. She is someone who is instrumental in changing the way people perceive DID or Multiple Personality Disorder.
That would not have happened if she elected not to talk about it. In her book and in a talk that’s available on YouTube, she says it took her 24 years of continuous pursuit in legal and policing channels to change people’s perceptions. She did it, though. I find that amazing and remarkable.
Merry Christmas to you, too, Bubbles! If only I could bottle you up and have you with me all the time.
Dearest Allison,
Your extremely kind warm words just made my heart melt, thank you so much ❤️
I’m quite touched !
I agree many women get left with the duties and $ of the parents. I read years ago, 80% of women ask for child support and many don’t collect anything. Sad.
But I am thrilled to see the younger fathers who have stepped it up and co-parent. My marriage was traditional but today I see men change diapers, push trollers or strollers with small kids inside , cook, etc… some of the men are great moms too! It’s a two 2️⃣ come family today. I see very few stay home for life as homemakers. The men are needed more today too for domestic and financial means.
But let us not forget that many of the younger generation is not marrying or having children. Elon Musk thinks population decrease is the number one threat to the world. (Well, he is personally trying to change that with 12 kids to date. He can well afford them too:)
“What about the father???”
I don’t think anyone forgot the requirements for conception. The topic was more focused on the birth process for mothers, and then I was thinking about all the reasons why I wouldn’t be good as a mother. I didn’t have any intention of excluding fathers or letting them off the hook. But I think the point still stands that even if I did have a child and the father was present in our lives and supportive and all that, it still wouldn’t make me an adequate mother. There would be a child with one parent who fully wanted to be there and one who didn’t.
“But why not a crackdown?”
What do you mean, Contagious?
Hello Allison:
Meaning: if the internet is causing such an explosion of child trafficking, it seems like “ lack of resources” should not be an excuse for such a cause. I know tech heads, ngos, governments and various task forces exist and they are trying and have improved in this regard but sadly the demand is there and growing and the dark web and internet techniques change and have boasted the crimes. But to me, it should be a priority and even in USA penalties range from 5-25 years in prison. Personally I see no excuse for this rampant growth of abuse and torture to the most vulnerable members of society and I think a “crack down” is needed or greater resources expended, greater police, and higher sentencing. Maybe an increase in funds for greater social awareness like Sound of Freedom did- how the entertainment industry sucked the kids in the country of Colombia in the film was eye opening and the corruption. 20,000 to 40,000 Mexican children go missing every year. WTF? Mainly trafficking. Each year. Doesn’t it seem like the government could do better than that? Some sort of major crackdown: ie more resources to the crime and higher penalties ( although I don’t know what mexicos penalties are. )
Also and this is a big question: are the buyers and sellers of children psychopaths, narcs, clearly someone with no empathy especially when some of their abused are babies or toddlers or something else?
I am not knowledgeable enough to know so I said “ crackdown” or more effort to curb this rapid growth.
I see. Thank you for the clarification.
HG:
Was Gary Glitter a psychopath?
Was? He is still alive.
Not so sparkly now, is he. What does that tell us about the health effects of glitter?
Hi HG:
I know he is alive but his parole was denied this year and he is locked up. I said “ was” referring to his crimes…
Hello HG:
Questions:
I just watched the bio of Martha Stewart. Great watch on HG subject. Obvious but interesting. It seems to me she is a Narcissistic psychopath. 1. Right? 2. Greater narc? She was a perfectionist. Hardworking. Came from a home from 6 kids from NJ where there was “ not much affection”. Her father taught her how to garden as they needed the food and her mother made 16 meals a day at school and home. Great cook. Her father beat the children with belts and yardsticks if they made mistakes. He was a salesman who did not make much money and a bigot. He slapped her hard across the face for marrying a rich Jew. She did anyway. Andy. She admits she “didn’t take to being a mother” and it seems her husband and her devoted themselves to their careers. She was a stockbroker in a day Wall Street at first in the 1960s didn’t even have a female bathroom- she made 250,000 a year then… then she quit and they moved and she became a caterer after being noticed by the Westchester elites for her parties for Andy…and he was a top publisher. She remained loyal with one slight discretion, short lived, in an almost 30 year relationship…, he cheated endlessly but he left. She said “ she didn’t satisfy him. “Not her. It seemed to me her monogamous position was more of a control manipulation. You are the loser cheat. I am not. The failure of the relationship still is obviously bothering her. Plus her friend said she “could not control Andy. “ Martha was angry and depressed when he divorced her and is still bitter . When asked about her relationship with others…she said she felt “ no emotions.” “ She dated rich cerebrals not attractive men. She said she only cared about “what are you doing. “ And” was NOT interested in feelings… hers or theirs. “ She liked it when they said “what are you doing. “ It was the DOING that mattered. ( psychopathic goals) She is obviously amazing at DIY at the home, gardening and cooking. She has always done it herself or directing others closely ( known to be a total bitch) and her knowledge and attention to detail may be unparalleled in her chosen field. Why a billionaire after 50! !!! She always from day one wants her name as the brand. Books, magazines, Kmart deal. She even bought her name out of deals for Martha Inc. 4. was this planned or instinctive? She was disliked by most who worked with her. She said they ( banks) didn’t want a woman in their club. She was called the opposite of laid back, slept 4 hours a day. She created ideals others could not reach. Men hated her success. She went public. Her brand soared. Watching this movie, she is flat. No emotions no matter what. First female billionaire. Martha wants her, her world. Not the boys club. Show the man … female power. Still in her apron … walks away with the chips. Then… she gets arrested. Imclone ‘s owner was Waxwell and he was a friend. She told a friend to sell. Insider trading. Martha still doesn’t get what she did wrong. (Millions lost money not her friend she aided. ) She said “even her lawyers said she did nothing wrong. “ Poor Martha. She feels she was “ innocent “despite jail” (. Btw is there anyone in prison who admits innocence?) She went to jail for lying to the FBI. 150 days. She could have pled guilty and avoided jail. She would not. She said she “ doesn’t cry.” Her best friend sank her as she said she told the truth at trial. Martha gave her “that stare.” And Martha later called her friend “ damaged.” She called the prosecutors “ idiots who went after the billionaire trophy”. Her business tanked. She lost her board seats. But after jail… fascinating…strip searched, bad food, punished with isolation but she was never harmed by in mates. She said prison does “nothing to reform. “But she said prison gave her time off of work and to contemplate and she wished you could have helped those their would find better life. ““(…. as she lead them to believe). She said she was” set free from being imprisoned and could not be destroyed. “ She did a talk show and became an employee again with celebrity guests. She “hated working with people who could not appreciate what she was doing and hated being not in control.” ( Interesting celebrities did not interest her. ) Only her work. She felt her life became “ less exciting.” Then her boyfriend of 15 years married another woman and never spoke to her again. Martha said “ what a stupid thing to do.”( I actually love her position. ) Her company lost over a billion. She said “ let’s get on with the future.” She’s in her late 60s. She said “ if you are through changing you are through.” So … Snoop! She met him at the Justin Bieber roast. Martha got high sitting sat next to Snoop. Martha was witty and funny and stole the show. Snoop wanted to do a show with her after meeting her and she saw the potential ( Now think 🤔 f this, she did a show with TOP celebrities that bored her s but doing a show with Snoop as an Co- OWNER was all good) . ! Voila! Btw: my son met snoop last week. Yup taught a class at USC loved by all. Snoop loves his weed. Martha in her 70s is popular as a 70s grandma, in sports illustrated swimsuits. Social media hit! As Stone Roses sang, she carries on, she is a waterfall. She may not be a good mother, a good partner, or even a good friend but she is a titan who carries on and puts perfection in this world in her own way. You may not love Martha but you appreciate and follow her. And ask yourself why Snoop?
5. Is she a narcissistic psychopath HG?
6. A female Ultra?
??? Got my mind on my money and my money on my mind. Another tudorscope candidate?
Dear Contagious,
He’s a paedophile, what else do we need to know ? Haha
Throw away the prison key and let him rot. Should never be released, cos we’ve all seen how that plays out time and time again. 🤦🏽♀️
Dear Contagious,
That’s why I asked the question ?
She raises many a red flag to me !
Very unemotional ! I noticed how she spoke to her staff … very demeaning!
Personally, I’m not a fan!
Great summary Contagious… congrats 🥳
Finally, the subject of sexual abuse of children is about as depressing as it gets and the worst crime of any of in my book. So there is a need to continue to watch nonstop Christmas warm hearted movies, and pray for a better world! Holidays can be tough … I always miss my loved ones who are no longer here like me father and my former best friend a lot…. but I honestly wish every blogger here a happy holidays and I know we are here for each other if it’s rough! Warm holiday wishes everyone! X
Warm holiday wishes to you too, Contagious!
Dearest Contagious,
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you and our fabulous Mr Tudor and all our lovelies.
May you all be safe, stay healthy and continue to learn, grow and be strong for yourself ! Without you, no one else benefits. You are all worth it.
Xx
What do you think of physics driving the way to God? Hegel?