If I Ruled My World with Stef the Alter Nerd
177 thoughts on “If I Ruled My World with Stef the Alter Nerd”
Vent Your Spleen! (Please see the Rules in Formal Info)
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Dear Dani, more thoughts on the majority contagion:
When I mean majority I mean 50% and up, where the burdening and heightened sensitivity would cause problems or become noticeable. And I think the presence of another school would sort of smooth the burdening out. Durability of intensity would be either taken away or the ’taking in’ of the intensity – prolonged.
For instance Niffty (Hello there💓if you’re reading) is a 71% majority contagion empath and she confirmed what HG described and even more; she struck me by referring to having or meeting up with a Creature in her dreams. This was my exact reference when I just arrived on the blog and assigned a Creature being something what a contagion empath also has and I wrote about it giving a parallel of Anakin Skywaker being a contagion empath having a Creature; I know better now re Anakin and of the difference between what HG meant by Creature and what I and Niffty probably referring to and Niffty gave a description and has a very interesting awareness about it in dreams and it’s open to what it could be. My knowledge on dreams and dream practices conveys me of different possibilities…(I can’t expand and speculate on here).
Niffty, being also a Magnet and excellent with words, gives an accurate account of what it is for a majority contagion (71%):
— “As to bleeding empathy. I have the opposite problem and I am curious as to whether other people here do as well. I experience empathy primarily as too much getting in whether I want it or not. It’s unnerving. Especially in busy environments like a job where you’re interacting with coworkers/acquaintances and the public. It’s like constantly pinging off everyone within a certain radius to maintain an emotional read and track upset, angry or vaguely problematic people while relaxing reconossaince on the blithely unaware ones. Even good days are exhausting. I need a dim, private place and zero interaction with people for an hour two after a crowded workday and avoid crowds socially. If there was a way to turn the radar on and off I would. It seems to be always on.”
— “Maybe that’s why many of us prefer one-on-one or small group interactions. Larger collections of people present a problem. You know how when the dentist’s drill hits a tooth and every bone in your body vibrates like an electrified cartoon right on out through any and all your hair. That’s a boisterous environment. Similar to high frequencies. In the extreme my hearing involuntarily muffls and my eyes, never good, blur or close while I’m ‘listening.’ Incongruous given it seems like paying more attention while about to pass out on the spot. Knew it wasn’t really a classic panic attack but good luck explaining that to clinicians without promting more frantic note taking.”
— “Its difficult not to match ‘the vibe.’ Try to stick to small groups if I can’t work alone. Have to quickly jettison regularly abusive people or substance abusers. Too destabilizing.” — “I’m default to sponge on autopilot. Had to train myself to push back. In my 20s a very good friend suggested imagining a deep purple forcefield/bubble to keep from ‘taking on’ people or warning them off. Works for me pretty well. Just have to be paying attention to turn it on. Its never automatic.”
— “Only half joking about Contagion. Wouldn’t want to get rid of it, but would like to dial it back to 50% or lower. It causes a lot of interference and white noise.”
* * *
Contagious (?%) and Niffty (71%) — both have Geyser — and share the trait of openness and fearlessness in being authentic. They are transparent but there is the difference where Niffty will not let people take advantage of her and set a clear boundary, where Contagious, in my opinion, struggles because of Martyt+Carrier combined where her empathic traits become corrupted. Niffty has a Carrier as well but she sets boundaries:
Niffty wote:
— “One of the difficulties of being transparently empathic is that people presume you’re naive, dim or lacking self worth. The perfect pushover. I’ve been called Amish, a Luddite and the like. My favorite was ‘I’m just trying to help you expand your horizons.’ Replied I’m perfectly capable of establishing my own horizons, thank-you. I got tired of repeating myself. I’m open in the sense that I don’t mind being vulnerable, have no shame around shortcomings or mistakes. Just have to pick and choose when its an appropriate person to open up with, need to be sure its reciprocal. Once its clear someone is not going to accept my answers or polite deflection and are trying to push me in another direction, then they’re a candidate for stories.”
— “Yes I’m open. More like direct. Not interested in opening up much in person for a good while and repelled by premature probing. Have no problem with lying to people who insist on getting too intrusive. Actually think we might be very good at lying because we can modify content based on how its received. In other words, we can tell when we’re not believed. We have a pretty good read on who they think we are and can fill that role so they back off none the wiser.”
* * *
Under the Contagion related videos – majority contagions would comment and you know they are a majority when they kinda write “it’s a curse not a blessing”.
What all with a contagion element seem to have in common, either majority or not, is a vivid dream-life no matter what age.
…
There was another comment of Niffty I can’t find now. It was about the differentiation difficulty — Is it mine or is it someone else’s???
It’s crucial !
I often took the mental and emotional states of others as my own and regular acting-school practice would worsen it because the boundary of feelings / emotions and the boundary to impulsivity would be erased in order to function fast on “action” and it bleeds into your daily functioning, which sucks, as you can become ruthless in your emotion upon an impulse. It’s advantageous for the profession on one hand but not ultimately for your own and others well-being. You’ve probably heard of cases where actors struggle to get out of their character and begin to function and live a life which is not their own but that of their character and cannot split back to their own identity. I assume a majority contagion element perhaps plays a part in it. Where for instance Leo DeCaprio is known for giving an extreme dramatic performance and on “cut” switches to laughter and fun on the set. Shapeshifter of the finest.
My analysis and thoughts so far…
Dani, TS and others who are interested in this subject:
Auras i.e. seeing of energy is an area of substantial interest and I shared elsewhere what led to this interest and won’t repeat it here, but unless one can’t verify the “seeing of energy” by your own “seeing” it’s unreliable to have someone telling you how auras of other people (and your own) “look” like and where the practicality of it is for you and others. (Or verify it where one can for sure spot a lie or truth. HG skills. Or advanced contagion? skills. Intuition or what you wish to call it.)
There is literature on this subject but for now I like physicists as they’ve overtaken the road on this subject and are ahead of philosophers. In the past the main focus was on the brain but today scientists arrived at the understanding of it stemming from the whole-body-perception and not just from one organ in the skull to assemble perception (which is a habit of thinking for our time modality). As hormones influence and change the brain/behaviour/perception one can’t place the emphasis solely on the brain anymore. In certain strands of shamanism it’s a known fact for centuries but the language for this knowledge is out of use. When this information had to be hidden from the Conquista and from the Inquisition the knowledge became esoteric and got lost in rituals leading for the practicality of it to vanish if you were not given the keys of ’reading’ and with its loss in worst cases the empty copying lead to rituals of very dark nature amongst secret societies (open and hidden cults = occultism), which had nothing to do with the initial purpose of this natural ability as part of a more profound existence of an individual… The civilised man’s dilemma is his loss of the innate and essential connection with its natural surroundings and himself, but optimistically a new generation of fearless scientists combined with an adventurer’s spirit may rediscover it for good…
Let’s be logical; those who can see auras/energy won’t run around telling about it. They may tell it to someone they absolutely trust but again what for? If you can’t verify the “seeing” by yourself, why give that information out and run the risk of being labeled? I mean what are you expecting to receive as a reaction from a modern human? There is no use in telling someone – I can see/hear/taste/smell what you can’t – unless one wants to pet their own ego to be looked upon as special or manipulate the gullible. To share it in order to get it off your chest? Not sure the necessity of it exists, but who knows? In search of answers? Probable.
Sure, one can press for instance a rural shaman on what they see and you’ll get an interpretation from their syntax i.e. they’ll give a description known to them but not to you and they will certainly not use a better scientific term and thus sound out of their mind. Shamans using modern scientific description are absent because they don’t experience the need of explaining what they “see” to the masses. They simply live by what they “see” and gain from this connection purely. And keep in mind that true and pure shamanism is rooted in nature and not in places of worship such as ashrams, palaces, cities and churches where “shamans” or “energy seers” would collect glory and mice for what they see/hear etc. It doesn’t logically compute how this should unite under one roof.
Dani, you mentioned interpretation of what one “sees” when looking upon an individual i.e. aura, i.e. an energetic conglomeration which surrounds/permeates every living being (human, animal, plant). Interpretation would mean you can’t clearly see, hence interpretation – very much the risk of wishful thinking. If you can “see energy”, others, who can “see energy” will confirm the “seeing” of the same phenomena, more or less if you speak the same language (syntax). It’s closer to a scientific method and I have a problem with people in general thinking of seeing energy as an esoteric artistic thing, because it’s wishy washy and involves wishful thinking and fantasy. Or in worst cases mind control where you are led to believe to see things. Some of those types (channeller) will tell you how all humanity has the same colour aura because “we evolved to this aura-colour collectively” — BS clearly. And this “humble” spiritual leader has followers who believe it, with no verification whatsoever because they wish to believe it as it was sold to them in an empathic way and they want a particular fantasy this channeler is selling to them and there is the chosen-ones and specialty-factor which validates the followers collective ego…
Where loose interpretation may play a role is for instance in telepathy because one must interpret telepathic signals (mental images) which must first enter and scroll through the catalogue of mental images of the receiver. Interpretation would be rather unreliable at the beginning but a stepping stone which no one can avoid until you reach the direct knowing where you know/see instantly and there is no questioning and you can prove it to yourself and others. Then it becomes valuable and something that you can rely on. The moment where you want others to rely on what you see (but they don’t see and can’t prove) is an overstepping of a boundary and placing yourself above others which is a downfall of its own…
Emotionally/mentally unstable people and physically exhausted people can see things or with the help of substances but it’s never what one aims for, right?! You can’t just place your nerve endings out there and make things happen to you. Thus being physically strong, emotionally stable+rational and seeing beyond the veil of the visible is what one keeps in mind when diving into this unknown area… I hope to remove this subject out of the realms of fantasy and debility. It’s a section of a tough reality rather every human being was experiencing once, I boldly claim. It’s not an evolutionary trait either in my opinion, it’s a natural trait and it’s a declined state of humankind which “evolved” not to possess it anymore, with exceptions and with rising numbers of the exceptions. Maybe its initial decline was out of protection which is not needed anymore, who knows…
Yes, the amygdala and its revival plays a role in it, but it’s one’s whole body-perception in reality as science and shamanic traditions suggest — all organs are ‘perceptors’ and not just the grey mass between one’s ears. It’s my conviction and I emphasise on the connection with nature and wildlife — where the nature is not denatured, it will assist those who seek the connection with it and see nature for what it is — a living being of unimaginable patience which communicates and opens up the mysteries the civilised man crave for but can’t find his entry by violating nature’s and his own being repeatedly by focusing just on the surface and the social mask — dragging it on in artificial environments impoverished by its own restricted and ego-centric processes and doings…
One more thing about perception and consciousness:
Some of you may have come across the popular case of the man who is missing 90% of his brain.
“When a 44-year-old man from France started experiencing weakness in his leg, he went to the hospital. That’s when doctors told him he was missing most of his brain. The man’s skull was full of liquid, with just a thin layer of brain tissue left. The condition is known as hydrocephalus.
Since then, this case has puzzled researchers, including cognitive psychologist Axel Cleeremans.
Cleeremans is a cognitive psychologist at the Université Libre in Brussels. When he learned about the case, which was first described in The Lancet in 2007, he saw a medical miracle — but also a major challenge to theories about consciousness.
Cleeremans spoke with As it Happens guest host Susan Bonner. Here’s part of their conversation:
SUSAN BONNER: It is such a stunning case. I’m wondering, what kind of a larger lesson it offers about our brains?
AXEL CLEEREMANS: One of the lessons is that plasticity is probably more pervasive than we thought it was … It is truly incredible that the brain can continue to function, more or less, within the normal range — with probably many fewer neurons than in a typical brain.
[There’s a] second lesson perhaps, if you’re interested in consciousness — that is the manner in which the biological activity of the brain produces awareness … One idea that I’m defending is the idea that awareness depends on the brain’s ability to learn.
SB: So, does that mean then that there is not one region of the brain responsible for consciousness?
AC: Precisely. These cases are definitely a challenge for any theory of consciousness that depends on very specific neuro-anatomical assumptions.”
* * *
Full audio interview is here: https://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/as-it-happens-thursday-edition-1.3679117/scientists-research-man-missing-90-of-his-brain-who-leads-a-normal-life-1.3679125
* * *
Immediate question which sprang to mind: how many people are unaware about this condition, even though it’s rare? Is it more rare than psychopathy? As what would those people classify as???
It’s incredibly fascinating !!!
* * *
Has anyone watched the documentary “The Most Unknown” ?
Hello Jordy.
The man had fluid in the brain from infancy, which persevered. As the fluid took up increasing space, his brain developed in the space available to it. He wasn’t missing 90% of his brain – he had the parts that he needed to survive and live a reasonable life – these areas were just compressed into a smaller area. His IQ was comparatively low so the restriction during development of his brain may have resulted in prioritising necessary functions over more advanced ones. But he was using his brain for consciousness in the same way that people who don’t have this condition use theirs. Not to say there is not a whole body process going on when we interact with our environment. I see us as operating as systems.
Hydroencephaly is more common in children than adults and its rate in the adult population is 11 per 100,000 people. Severe hydroencephaly, as this man had, would be even rarer. Psychopathy would therefore be more much common. Comparatively, it’d be in the thousands.
An interesting case.
Hello AA,
“That’s when doctors told him he was missing most of his brain.” — doctors words.
90% is missing where there is supposed to be a brain-organ – there is liquid as the scans shows: https://i.cbc.ca/1.3679635.1468531450!/fileImage/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/original_1180/lancet-brain-scans.jpg
The grown man wasn’t aware of this to be the case. Who knows how many people in reality have the same condition which goes unnoticed. “His IQ was comparatively low” — coincides with the majority of the population demonstrating low IQ, observed through the culture of social media, TikTok etc. But it’s of course just speculation. No one has access to the full population of the planet and their health history. This case is rather fascinating re consciousness. And it would be interesting to know what he or people with Hydroencephaly would classify as (empaths, normals, etc.) and if the brain parts which are assigned to empathy or its absence would play a role then.
To get a bit pedantic, Jordy, that’s not a quote from doctor. It’s sensationalist phrasing from a writer.
It’s true he wasn’t aware of his condition. Many people have unusual conditions that don’t become evident until a something goes wrong.
AA, your ET is a bit pedantic with an accusation of a scientist who is giving lectures on this case, calling him sensationalist writer. Are you serious ma’am? Have you at all listened to the interview I posted the link to?!
Axel Cleeremans (a cognitive psychologist at the Université Libre in Brussels):
1:09 — “The CT scan that was carried out at that time revealed that most of the brain matter had been compressed away or disappeared”
1:50 — “…and the CT Scan that reveal that most of his brain is gone”
2:05 — “This is what is so puzzling about such cases. We know the brain volume is severely diminished. 90% of the brain is gone but we do not know in fact how many neurons have disappeared…”
‘AA, your ET is a bit pedantic with an accusation of a scientist who is giving lectures on this case, calling him sensationalist writer.’
I’m using pure logic in my comments here Jordy.
The words ‘That’s when doctors told him he was missing most of his brain’ is by the writers of this article, identified only as CBC. It lacks nuance and explanation. It’s sensationalist writing. Very common but can be misleading in its oversimplification.
‘Are you serious ma’am?’
Is this playful humour?
‘Have you at all listened to the interview I posted the link to?!’
I hadn’t when I posted my first two responses, no. I opened the link, read the article, noted you’d added it verbatim, went to the Lancet article and then some other online articles about the case.
I’ve now listened to the interview.
‘1:09 — “The CT scan that was carried out at that time revealed that most of the brain matter had been compressed away or disappeared”
1:50 — “…and the CT Scan that reveal that most of his brain is gone”
2:05 — “This is what is so puzzling about such cases. We know the brain volume is severely diminished. 90% of the brain is gone but we do not know in fact how many neurons have disappeared…”’
I agree those are quotes from Cleeremans.
In his interview he explains the way the brain has developed alongside the condition in a very practical, nuanced and non-sensationalist way.
“The words ‘That’s when doctors told him he was missing most of his brain’ is by the writers of this article, identified only as CBC. It lacks nuance and explanation. It’s sensationalist writing. Very common but can be misleading in its oversimplification.”
The wording repeats what the doctors told the patient which are the same words Axel Cleeremans used in his interview you now have listened to AND the interview is clear and professional and as nuanced as it can be for a short interview and contains explanations including re hydrocephalus condition and is nowhere misleading or oversimplifying the case! The article depicts the case AND the case itself is a sensation, and the wording reflects it based on the statements of the doctors and the scientist Axel Cleeremans.
Doesn’t look like you’re using pure logic. You’re using grinding teeth defiance, ma’am. (Google: Ma’am: a term of respectful or polite address used for a woman. Ma’am: madam. used without a name as a form of respectful or polite address to a woman.)
You’ve stated that English is your 3rd language, Jordy. You have an excellent command of it but native speakers are going pick up implications in phrasing that you may not. Ma’am cannot come across as respectful in this context, which is a disagreement. Instead it comes across as patronising and dismissive.
In the interview the doctor spoke in a non sensationalist way. I already acknowledged that. My issue is purely with the wording of the article (which you happened to copy directly).
I expect you feel my comments have been critical and you feel frustrated or angry. If I were you I’d probably feel similarly. I wasn’t sure why you posted the story but I think it was within the aura discussion and how we all process thoughts and feelings in ways science doesn’t yet understand and therefore we should be open to people’s varied experiences that go beyond the norm.
AA, well thank you but don’t need English to be my first language to pick up on you coming at me like an unprepared woke teacher, thus calling you ma’am.
That man’s shell could be a miniature aquarium and that’s the whole point and thus apt for CBC to tell it as it is — ’The Emperor’s naked!’ — confirmed by CT scans, doctors and scientists, accurately reflected in the title and the opening sentence and is nowhere misleading, unfortunate or inaccurate.
You know, to hell with auras if people can’t handle the visible…(*<– playful humor)
Hey Jordy:
Well written my friend! I believe people can see auras even if I can’t. Michael Crichton spoke highly of shaman in his book Travels. He was a Harvard educated lawyer and doctor who wrote Jurassic Park among others. He is dead but has a best seller out with James Patterson currently.
Michael Crichton, the renowned author known for his works in science fiction and thrillers, often explored themes related to science, technology, and their impact on society. While he didn’t specifically focus on shamanism in a dedicated work, elements of shamanistic practices and themes can be found in some of his novels.
In “The Andromeda Strain,” for example, Crichton examines humanity’s response to disease and the unknown, which can parallel certain aspects of shamanism, such as healing and the interaction with unseen forces.
Crichton’s portrayal of complex subjects often delves into the tension between traditional knowledge systems (like shamanism) and modern scientific understanding. He held a skeptical view about what he called of “pseudoscience” , so while elements of shamanism may appear in his works even in Travels he relays factually what takes place, he does not dismiss it. Or embrace it.
It’s what is consciousness and perception? And what’s the unconscious? So much is unknown.
I wrote HG about the various scientific parts of the brain that create intuition. Sometimes when I get into too much neuroscience it doesn’t get published. But I believe contagions have a strong intuition originating from certain parts of the brain therefore they make quick judgments which is the same as “ knowing how another is feeling.”
HG is good at reading people, ultra good lol maybe despite his narcissism and his environmental reasons at being a good reader of people, there is a scientific reason.
I was tested to be gifted as a child and I think my intuition had to do with it. I was no rocket scientist – I did advanced math but no genius and not a progeny of any instrument… but I could read grades above me and grasp concepts beyond my years. I had an existential crisis very young. I still recall it. I was standing by a Holly bush when I just was overwhelmed by the thought of the meaning of life. Especially eternity. And what was my purpose in this thing called life?
What do you think of intuition and empaths as opposed to ….we want to heal?
Do you think seeing auras is intuitive?
In the series when contagion met darkness, it hit home hard.
But to me the inner aura described by HG was a self confidence, a desire to do good, an inner trust in the world at large. This place made the contagion “ to lock eyes” so to speak with a very scary person. For me, it was a curiosity. I had never seen anyone like the Mexican mafia lawyer I met. He was gorgeous, chiseled, wore an expensive tailored suit, Armenian, very intelligent and utterly ruthless, unrelenting, cold as an Arctic night and as I wrote, made me feel almost raped by the way he stared at me like I was some plebeian in a royal court and the way he moved around the room during the depositions of my client who was a 80+ year old decorated military man. He was mesmerizing in a very bad way. This man had none of HGs charm, projected warmth or sense of humor. He had no sense of humor as I recall making jokes and him looking at me like I was a bug 🐛 n the room.
I wanted resolution to a case and I fought hard. Almost to exhaustion. But I never thought about healing him. He was like an alien.
But I was curious. He was too. It was weird and I am glad we settled and he moved on. He proved he would do anything for a win. It’s amazing we settled. I mean the dude was calling up my clients employees on vacation and intimidating them! Old women!
So what do you think the aura within that HG talks about in your definition of auras?
Xxxx
“What do you think of intuition and empaths as opposed to ….we want to heal?”
In relation to narcissists I think it’s about certain empaths (not all) wanting to repair what they perceive as lacking a component which makes a human humane towards other humans via empathy, and on an intuitive level it’s the pain of the Creature which causes them to be drawn to the wound they want to cure (but can’t). And as you mentioned in your case, when it comes to psychopaths, it’s the curiosity about basically an alien species which is so different to what an empath is. And then it’s not about a driver connected to healing. You don’t want to heal an alien, you just know it’s something completely different. I agree with you about curiosity. It can’t be avoided practically on both ends.
“Do you think seeing auras is intuitive?”
I think it has to do with intuition, yes. But it can be just a feeling and not necessarily a full blown perception of colors or lights or other known concepts of an aura.
“So what do you think the aura within that HG talks about in your definition of auras?”
Within my definition it would be a highly attentive perception of lots of details HG picks up and probably could be compared to intuition as it occurs at a similar pace, rapid assembling details revealing the person of interest. (The choosing of the word aura however reveals to me an interest HG has in what is usually unseen and unknown to the human eye.)
So let’s give an example, a little abused boy ( abuse is many things) can never separate from his caregiver, is never allowed to be him, he decides to become someone else who needs no one, God. His story is I am perfect. I am talented. I am athletic. I am handsome. I am smart. I am amazing. I need no one as I am all I need. This is his story of who he is but inside he is a void, no one, nothing, broken. He grows up fighting for his life to make his story true. Sticking to it. At some point it becomes “ true.” Age 9? But that’s not reality. He might not be handsome, smart or athletic and no one is perfect or God like. So what does he do. He confronts reality or even perceived challenges to his reality with tools to defend the story. It’s a fight for his life. Denial, manipulation, blame shifting. See? None of this deals with logic, fact or reality. That’s why normals and empaths don’t get it. We live in reality. Not a made up story that makes our personality. We have a real one made up of memories and growth and support and love and nurture. We aren’t clinging to a rigid story of ourselves. We are ourselves. And many of us need to learn more about how to honor, live and accept ourselves. It’s a luxury to appreciiate ourselves, warts and all. That’s different than having a fake story about how perfect we are…. We can handle change conflict and grow. At some point, I think an unaware narc loses his knowledge that he created this fiction of me. An aware narc knows. He just says fuck it, it works for me. If you have money and power, the more yes men to that fiction will arrive, others. Works well. Your story succeeds. But every narc has challenges, they are hypersensitive, paranoid, jealous and prone to anger, every narcs story gets challenged. Always. Reality rules. Their paranoia exists. So there will be a devaluation, and the other defense tools such as denial, silent treatment/withdrawal, punishment and coercion to get you to submit to their own story of themselves. As it’s a narrative. Not reality.. Now, what happens when that story is destroyed. What happens when the ruler of Iran is arrested and tried, or P Diddy is exposed and sentenced to life or Jeffrey Epstein is arrested and exposed. Even the some of the most fueled mighty narcs fall…what happens when their narrative hits the hard cold truth of reality. And no one is there to fuel their story? This must happen. Do they kill themselves? Go psychotic? Go into a deep depression? That I don’t know. I asked H.G. What happens when they meet the “ Creature.”??? Any ideas?
Hi Truthseeker, (got tired of scrolling.)
“I wouldn’t want to walk down a supermarket aisle for example and be able to feel the emotion of every person I walked past.” — I get confused on how many majority contagions experience this.
“How do I see the empathic traits operating differently to other schools? It’s the going of the extra mile in terms of empathic behaviours I think.” — I thought this was more related to the Martyr cadre…I’ve also thought of codependents as going the extra mile. The difference, as I understand it, is that the willingness to go that extra mile comes from a different place. A codependent (as I understand) goes that far because that’s how they get validation. A super empath goes that far from a position of strength. But I think that contagions and standard empaths will also have representatives that will go that far. (I don’t know how many would go that far for a new friend. I think that is a significant difference.)
“ALL schools of empath are beautiful in their own way. All of them have advantages and disadvantages. CoD empaths are amongst the kindest warmest and most interesting amongst us. They have a lot to deal with though when ensnared.” — Agreed. And HG has said that CoD is one of the strongest in terms of not breaking down. I think when they do break down that it’s harder for them in ways. If catering to the narcissist is the primary way that they get validation (feel good about themself), then that is what they lose when someone helps them escape. I would think that would be a difficult thing to regain for a majority CoD. Please add any thoughts, majority CoDs. I remember in one of the 100K interviews was a majority CoD, and that particular person very much stood out to me.
“The disadvantage of my school for me is that I’m repeatedly disappointed in people. Why? Because they don’t go the extra mile for me as I do for them…” I can understand that, especially given the story that you shared.
“If that was me, and I had committed myself to helping, those lessons would have been set in stone even if I had to sleep two hours less each night in order to stick to my obligation.” — Same here. I wouldn’t be able to just cancel either. I can understand your disappointment in people in general. I think they can do better.
“It frustrates me that certain schools are seen as desirable. It frustrates me also that what we hear most is about supernovas and line drawing when it’s the empathy that’s most important.” — I see the supernova and line drawing as an indicator of the super empath also having empathy for themself. Saying that enough is enough…I think people also want to believe that they gave a good verbal reprimand to the narcissist that caused them so much difficulty. (Reality–not the best choice–it’s just fuel which keeps the narcissist feeling powerful and capable of continuing with their manipulations.)
“I turned the empathy erosion inwards, was mean to myself not to anybody else. Even narcs, I tend to just dismiss and leave. I don’t waste my time point scoring once it’s over but I am very quick to dismiss.” — You said that you weren’t high in anger or argumentativeness, right? I think that might play in to the not wasting time with point scoring as much as the super school.
Contagions are favored by ULA (gurus) and greaters. I know HG has said that…because the other schools don’t really understand how they work, how to get the control and fuel from them as well. Supers are more difficult to control during devaluation for lessers and midrangers.
“Again every upside has a down, nobody wants to be ensnared by a Greater.” — But they’re rarer. So it’s far less likely to occur. And supers can still be ensnared for years with a midranger. Several other bloggers who were supers have said as such.
“Cadre has a lot to do with that too I think.” – Undoubtedly.
“Nobody wants to be ensnared by a greater.” — Not if they know what they’re dealing with. If they don’t…they likely do want to be with the greater–of course, they think they’re getting something else…you see, Truthseeker, empaths are often attracted to charm, charisma, money, and power. Greaters have all those things (most of the time). And a number of my favorite historical figures and fictional characters have been HG confirmed greaters.
I think brain scans of different majority schools of empaths would be very interesting. I wonder what similarities would be seen. I wonder if there would be more neurons or activity in specific areas. It would be just as interesting to have brain scans of lesser, midranger, and greater narcs to compare against each other. HG’s brain scan would be the most marvelous and magnificent of them all. None could compare.
Hi Dani,
Me either with the Contagions. I also don’t see auras, though very occasionally, the only way I can think to describe someone is as ‘a white light’ it’s visualisation though, I don’t see them surrounded by light as I would see my own hand, and it’s very occasional I use that description.
In terms of a position of strength. I don’t know what position it is, just that I do it! I don’t damage myself, or drive myself to exhaustion though, and I’m selective in terms of who I would do that for. Empath friend was just such a good person and so powerless to break the cycle. I looked at him as ‘worthy’ I suppose. I know that sounds bad but it’s true. It’s kind of like, I would be responsible for him whilst he couldn’t be responsible for himself. I would teach him everything I knew so that he would eventually understand and take back responsibility for himself, then I would just step back. If he had not tried, not bothered watching the videos, not read what I sent, not worked on his own ET finding his own way to push out thoughts of the narc etc, that’s when I think I would have backed away. He was doing those things though, he was putting the hours in to better his situation, so there was no way I would just let him slide back into the dynamic before he was able to swim on his own. Maybe that’s the strength bit, I don’t know. I won’t just keep giving and giving if people aren’t trying for themselves. Plus, I admit, I was getting a real kick out of knowing his narc was twisting and turning with her proxy hoovers and her use of old emails and apps. It took a while to get my friend fully locked down No Contact wise.
You’re right, Martyr is also about taking responsibility. It’s often a case of taking responsibility for things they can’t be responsible for. A narc hooked on drugs for example. The Martyr struggles to leave because they feel responsible for the well-being of the narc. I think that would be extra mile in terms of Martyr. I might be wrong though.
CoD and validation yes, they will go the extra mile for the narc even if that means they break down. You’re right, they do lose that validation when they escape so they do definitely have it harder. I would imagine though that the CoD can learn to find validation elsewhere without the narc, but without knowledge it is entirely understandable why they would move from one narc to the next to the next.
I agree the drawing the line thing does show empathy for oneself. Ultimately if it boils down to him or me, I’ll choose me, every time. It doesn’t mean I find that choice easy though or that I won’t first try to fix it. I just seem to reach a point where I turn and it’s kind of out of my hands after that. The decision kind of makes itself and it’s just over.
I’m very low in anger, my argumentativeness is pretty good though! I don’t like losing my temper. Because it’s rare, when I do lose it, I really really lose it and I don’t like that feeling of being out of control, beyond my own ability to reign myself back in. So I feel anger but I prefer to dismiss.
Good point, Greaters are rarer. Online narc dealt some real damage and he was Mid Range.
I can certainly see the appeal of the Greater, I’m certainly not immune to charm and charisma. Power is sexy, money funds the sexy. Haha! Fortunately I don’t know any Greaters and I’m staying on the path!
I think you might see more brain activity around the insula in empaths. I think we’ll start to hear more about that area of the brain. Agree, I’d be very curious to see HG’s brain scan. I think it would be hot.
Xx
Truthseeker…
“Fortunately I don’t know any Greaters and I’m staying on the path!” — We belong to the Ultra. You wouldn’t want to come back and have to explain yourself, would you? I’m sure Mr. Tudor would graciously tell you…”I informed you thusly.”
“Ultimately if it boils down to him or me, I’ll choose me, every time.” — I’m getting better at picking me. I don’t always feel like I’m making the right choice. And I still usually select others and making them happy…even at some emotional and mental cost to myself. But I’m doing so less with toxic relationships. That’s thanks to all the knowledge I have gained from HG.
I think position of strength means…you do it because its right and good…and less out of obligation or looking for validation… But I’m not sure either.
I think All empaths start by wanting to heal and fix, but there might be greater tenacity with the super. Not fully sure. Super duper looking forward to lives on the new channel. And excited for more info to come about empaths.
I would like to hear from a contagion who sees auras. I’d like to hear from more than one. I doubt they all experience seeing the aura/energy/etc the same way. They might interpret what they see similarly, but I don’t know.
Does anger get used up quickly when it does come on? Or does it linger?
Dani,
Haha! “I informed you thusly.” That sounds about right to me.
In terms of anger, I can sustain it until I’ve got everything out that needed saying. It’s one of those where the target just stands and looks at me in shock. It’s fast, seemingly comes out of nowhere and it just doesn’t fit with the person they know me to be. That’s what causes the shock, it’s confusion really.
I don’t sulk, at all. By the time I’ve finished the last word, I’m done, so the anger burns out, it doesn’t linger.
Xx
Dani–
“I would like to hear from a contagion who sees auras. I’d like to hear from more than one.”
I wouldn’t recommend for a person to open up about their extraordinary perception unless they have a thick skin to deal with mockery, labeling, potential envy, denial, rejection, silent headshakes and downplay by those who cannot imagine something else exists outside their own perception and experience. And since when do majority contagion empaths have a thick skin if you understand what I mean. To lure such people out to talk in such detail about themselves is not in their interest and safety in my opinion unless one wants to take responsibility for how it would impact upon them…
Btw I recognised that people are confused by their classification when they for instance confuse it themselves. I won’t name names but the confusion, you mentioned “I get confused on how many majority contagions experience this.” stems from people describing their experiences from different aspects of their schools and cadres in general, assigning it to contagion. Especially cadre. And the classic is the confusion on contagion and coD.
You’re right, Jordy. Sometimes I ask things before thinking them through. It wouldn’t occur to me to mock someone’s experience with auras. I just remember the advice that Thumper the Bunny was asked to recall after making a perfectly valid observation about Bambi…a lesson his father taught him…”If you can’t say something nice, don’t say nothing at all.” I’ve seen a few shows that talked about auras. The main one I remember only showed one person, and was maybe 30 minutes long total. It was probably a decade and a half ago. I think I remember them doing an MRI or something to look at brain activity…and that there was higher than typical activity in certain parts of the brain. (don’t remember exactly which parts)
“And since when do majority contagion empaths have a thick skin if you understand what I mean.”
I don’t understand what you mean. Based on my understanding of the material available about contagions at present…I would say that contagions are quite tough. HG has described them as being sensitive to the feelings of others…some may get overwhelmed or feel the emotions of everyone as they go up and down the aisles of the supermarket. But it’s highly likely that most still have to go and be in that environment. So you might not find lots of them in a noisy night club…you could call that weak (the noise and numbers are overwhelming) or you could call it sensible to avoid what they know is too much for them (and if they are informed about HG’s work…a somatic narcissist nest).
I think that contagions are tougher than you’re giving them credit for. Contagious, for example, was in a narc filled profession and did very well. It depends on their cadres and accompanying schools and how high their narcissistic traits are. I think it takes a very thick skin to be a prosecutor. I don’t think her job is one that most contagions would gravitate to, based on what HG has said of contagions. But I think that most are…”living among us. Average citizens. Average heroes. Quietly and anonymously continuing to make the world a better place.” (Incredibles reference)…Contagious…you would have helped the superheroes quietly relocate, yes…you wouldn’t let them get in trouble or go to jail…for helping a little old lady get the insurance money she needed when she was on a fixed income? Sure some may throw a nasty boss through multiple walls…but that’s because savior empath couldn’t save…and had their emotional empathy reduced by a man who didn’t like helping anyone…he was only really good at word salad…
Jordyguin and Dani,
telling others that you see auras is definitely going to provoke strong reactions. I would be the first to admit to strong scepticism when it comes to ascribing meaning to auras. There have been studies, or at least tests, done with such people, and they saw the aura not only around the person in question, they saw it even when they were only reading that person’s name on a piece of paper, when the person was nowhere near them. I do not doubt that some people see what they call an aura, but I doubt that this aura is directly connected with the object. These test results make it more likely that they are a phenomenon that the brain of the subject produces, maybe similar to tinnitus. People suffering from tinnitus hear sounds, no question, but they are not caused by anything outside that person’s head.
Anna, thank you for sharing. (I addressed the aura in a different reply). With ’hearing sounds’ the suggestion to test it is: if the person who is suffering from hearing noises moves to a different location, for instance goes on vacation and the sound disappears then its origin comes from an outer source connected to the ’sound location’, could be anything from highway to factory engines or whatever tech noises might be produced in the area. If the sound “travels with you” it’s in the head rather.
Dani, I don’t think you would mock, that wasn’t a suggestion. In your case, you would have a disbelief perhaps, connected to questioning things which is a valid reaction and you would be polite, empathic and considerate in your approach.
To put a person in a position of explaining the extraordinary (with no proof factor) is what exposes an already vulnerable person to an even more vulnerable position. It may trigger a person to their core of wanting to prove what they are experiencing and deplete them…
…
Some may get overwhelmed or feel the emotions of everyone as they go up and down the aisles of the supermarket — is mildly put. Wanting to almost throw up — is what a tissue thin skin of a majority contagion can be like. People are a disturbance by everything they exude, they are too much even if they are good. Needing to get away from people, to isolate to get back to your own senses – is the wheel of functioning of a majority contagion. And only nature or/and animal connection seems to provide relief and peace of mind and feelings. All else either dulls down or provokes insufferable sensitivity and an aversion. And there is no difference whether it’s a crowd or one person which irritates…
…
Contagious is the best – the empathy sword wielding warrior. But perhaps an example of a geyser, martyr, carrier and a majority standard with a moderate layer of contagion on top of it.
Wanting to be with people; embracing all people; helping all people; being surrounded by people — is not a majority contagion’s dream, it’s a nightmare, despite the empathy one has for people – where the weight of this school takes the lead. The weight of overwhelm would be distributed among other schools and cadres and turned into more positive experiences with people — is my understanding of this school.
Anna P–
I remember the lady in the program I saw was able to locate the person behind the wall (when the wall was the exact height of the person). Maybe she was directed as part of scripting. I don’t know. Anything is possible.
And even if it is just their perspective and the way their brain works…
People can just listen and learn. Isn’t it interesting how a narcissistic psychopath demonstrates tolerance and acceptance? I consider the behaviour to be a greater marker of decency than the reason why. People can be skeptical and remain polite. It’s a behaviour in societal decline–but I think it is one that people should reclaim. Your and Jordy’s point that many won’t is valid.
There is time when there needs to be pushback because harm is happening and the risk of greater harm is far too high. Is a person seeing an aura that time? My opinion is no, based on my understanding of auras and those who experience them. Not everyone will agree with that.
Now, I would like to offer these observations:
How many people have experienced things that they don’t understand? Some will attribute a random remission of cancer to God. Is it? They believe so. They prayed and asked for healing. Can oncologists tell us why the cancer is gone? No. Why in medical testing is one group put on a placebo? The placebo works for a certain percentage of people. Why? The brain works in strange ways. Maybe there’s a reason it works for some and not others. If someone gets a placebo and their symptoms improve or vanish…It doesn’t have to do directly with the fake pill. What happened? Don’t know. If we understood why some get measurably better without the drug…but just by believing…
Maybe something about contagion brains is different and their observations are accurate–and we just don’t know why yet.
Geocentrism, everything revolves around Earth, was the prevailing theory for a long time. Aristarchus (200s b.c.) developed a heliocentric model that placed all planets in the correct order. His theory didn’t get any steam behind it for 1500+ years until Galileo, Copernicus, Kepler, and Newton (<–a bad apple) said, "makes sense to us…we like this theory…" Now, we know that Earth revolves around the Sun.
We know that the mind of the narcissist processes experiences differently, to say nothing of the quality of information and insight Mr. Tudor is sharing about psychopaths. Why is accepting that, getting out and staying out and watching for the red flags and black flags of the narcissist, easier than accepting someone talking about seeing auras and has been abusive in any way? Why do narcissists get to be accepted (in a "don't eat that apple" the snake is tempting you with way) for their neurological differences but certain empaths are maligned for theirs? A narcissist's thinking will always cause harm eventually…I don't think a contagion empath can have the same thing said of them.
PURELY FICTIONAL EXAMPLE: A contagion empath nurse sees a purple aura surrounding people who are about to die from a condition. It happens every time. Sure she knows that they are ill…but say the aura changes to purple and within a day, they're dead. She's around a lot of death. Stage 4 cancer–well probably on their way out. COVID case in someone with severe COPD…probably dead. Etc. Maybe some could be coincidences. But what if she sees a patient who had Ebola but is better and about to go home. They're in the clear. Oh no, purple aura. A blood vessel pops in their brain in the night, and they can't be saved.
The above is similar to things that I have heard people who might have contagion empathy relate about auras and how media has portrayed it. It may not be the same for everyone…and media often screw it up.
Maybe it's a coincidence. Going to quote a favourite Star Trek DS9 character here…Elim Garak: "I believe in coincidence. Coincidences happen every day. But I don't trust coincidences." Maybe it's not.
That being said…I should keep in mind that narcissists do come here. I believe that I've recognized a couple based on their behaviours. I've also seen people who might be empaths but had a reduction of empathy for some reason in their interactions with others. If I don't like the way they are behaving, I can stay away from that conversation. That's the nice thing about a blog…you can easily go no contact with conversations that make you uncomfortable. And I don't see people hunting each other down to give mean replies.
Overall, the majority of the regulars here are very kind, accepting, and well intentioned. Even when we haven't agreed on a point, the discussions are always good; they give me something to think about. I like to believe the best of people…and I think that a productive conversation would be possible. If you read about it, you might have a better chance to understand. If you ask questions with a kind heart, you do better still at coming to understand it. (At least where the majority of people are concerned.)
Sorry for ranting. I'm very exhausted by narcissistic behaviour and by repeatedly having it highlighted more than there is a discussion about how to solve differences. Every issue has loud groups…that don't want to be reasonable…and are eager to seize opportunity to be unreasonable. Some of the best and most informative discussions I have are with people on narcsite.
Thank you so much for this place to learn, Mr. Tudor.
Hi Jorduguin and all–
I watched “The Contagion Empath Senses Darkness” for the first time today. Apologies for popping into the midst of the talk on auras. I understood from the video that the Contagion sense is more about something felt regarding emotional energies in the surroundings, not a matter of ESP as I understand when people talk of seeing auras. I found it interesting when an aura was mentioned by HG in the video it was as an inner shield for the empath, “an armor forged from her own indomitable spirit” that she generated within herself for protection. It was like an invisible layer she put on to fortify herself in the invisible battle with the unseen malevolent predator in the forest.
Still, I won’t divulge my own detailed results. But I found it to be a really beautiful story, dark and instructive like an ancient fairy tale. What really stuck out for me was his mapping of the Contagion experience, a life of heightened sensing without the eyes. It made me think of that book title, The Demon-Haunted World. Different topic in that book of course, but HG’s description of the forest and the experience of the empath in it made me think of those words.
I found it fascinating that her shield was effective. She could protect herself, but it took knowledge and effort. In my understanding of the story her aura worked like a repellant, an unseen force. And so her resistance was key. She was left spent, but the source of the malevolence moved on. Very interesting also to me that she never saw the bearer of the evil, she only felt his presence. In fact, relying on her eyes might have wasted time for her in such a place.
It was really deep for me that HG described her morbid curiosity, her vulnerabilities and how the dark energy reached for her. A particularly powerful point for me was the detailed description of how–after she was fortified–her empathy reached out, apprehending this malevolence, that emptiness where a soul had once been, seeking to offer light, but that the dark force amplified against that.
I think the setting within the darkness of an old forest says something about the Contagion’s inner sense while walking through this world. Not in a woo woo, New Age-y way, but the gift of the Contagion seems to be navigating without sight, bringing light to dark places. But she must protect herself because the blackness will batter against her, and that wasn’t seen with the eyes and vision couldn’t be relied upon.
Again, my apologies if this is not in line somehow with the aura conversation (and apologies to HG if I’ve muddled the meaning of the story). I realize the conversation may have many strands that I’ve missed. If so, I hope you all will count me as an interested but slightly tipsy party guest.
Hi Dani:
You are too kind. But it is true, I am strong. I always say you don’t know how strong you are until you have to be. I was a prosecutor and now I have my own law firm in construction. I work with construction companies and their owners. Very strong men. And on projects ranging from small to a billion ( bridge). I also don’t feel weakened by taking in someone’s pain. I may cry but it’s actually beautiful. It’s humanity at its finest to connect in a deep level. You are also correct, I choose the ocean and nature for peace BUT who doesn’t? Some may meditate, run ( oh I wish I enjoyed running but I don’t) etc…. Was it Popeye? Who said “ I am what I em?” lol Every living creature has its strengths and weaknesses. That’s just life. We are all putting one foot in front of the other walking planet Earth. As we get older, I think we try less to be someone else and embrace ourselves, warts and all more. Is that acceptance or wisdom? There is no class or cadre or mix that is better, stronger, weaker, or less amongst us empaths. I think certain traits we admire: maybe it’s the magnet? I always think screen siren lol and I have no magnet! But this blog is filled with empaths and it’s our differences even within classes and cadres I love. You know what I love? When I read a question, a response, an experience, that gives me new insight or knowledge and almost always make me feel I have blogger friend that I adore. Some of you are so damn funny too! And then there is HG, one and only. A one off! The Ultra . Xxx
Wow Allison: I agree. The number one video for me, the one that made me jump out of my seat was the Contagion meets darkness series. I had that experience 100% with a Mexican mob lawyer. I wrote in detail about it. If I never experience it again, life will be good. I had to be with this darkness for days of depositions and trial prep. I reported his harassment of my witnesses to the court and got his ire. He obviously put men in my house leaving Mexican beers and cigarettes in my house and a dead rat in my carport. I was lucky he moved on. I have never even dared to look him up. And I worked against pedophiles, gang bangers, murderers and drug dealers. But I met pure evil with him and the feelings and experience were bone chillingly similar to what HG write. I felt HG knew my brain. How could he understand such a stressful terrifying but oddly curious time in my life and even the outcome. The mafia lawyer just moved on. Whew!
But I agree, we contagions ( and Jordy dear, I am majority but I didn’t write percents, I just don’t recall the percent) plus you left out super in my cadre it wasn’t much and I don’t identify with it although I wish I did) but as for a empath sword raising lady, I hear the Immigration song by Led Zeppelin playing…., ladies join me. Hell yeah! Now my middle lesser ( not a greater not a guru lol) took a bite out of my heart at one time so maybe I should allow one of you ahead of me. Don’t worry, I got your backs! Thanks Jordy! It was very kind.
But I totally agree with you Allison. I think contagions are more interested in the auras, dreams, taste of sounds and what others would call hippy dippy at its worst or unscientifically proven experiences at its best. But I believe them. I believe they have had these experiences and just no one out there to really 100% say why.
But I also think you are right… I think the biggest aspect of contagion is intuition. Maybe it’s an emotional intelligence that we understand what others are feeling and sometimes go so far as to mirror or feel it ourselfselves? By the way many bloggers have contagion in them. Some supers with a bit thrown in…
I think all empaths are brain wired differently… I also think our environments are perhaps why the school and cadre but HG hasn’t delved deep into that YET! It will keep us talking once he dies! Xxx to all
Dani and Anna:
Dani: your point about why can we believe a narcissist facade etc… but not believe an empaths experience is so right!
If someone sees auras, I believe them. If someone tastes colors, I believe them. Don’t get me started on dreams. Michael Crichton, a Harvard educated medical doctor and physician who wrote Jurassic Park wrote a book called Travels where he explored out of the ordinary experiences. He went around the world doing so. It’s fascinating as he believed in astral travel, dreams, some psychics ( very rare he said most are cons) and others, I don’t recall auras. So people (some) do have unexplained experiences. It’s true;)
As for the blog, can you imagine how boring it would all be if we agreed? If we didn’t question each others opinions and I dare say HG? Bring it on! It’s great to have someone say “ I think you missed the point” “ I don’t agree with you, here’s why” “ Have you considered this”
What’s not cool is to make someone else feel small. It’s hard enough to share vulnerable experiences. Many times I thought, I just can’t look. Why did I share that, it’s so personal… what an idiot I am! Sorry friend Los, many of times I felt that but then I get a respectful response and learn. I think it’s very important to remember that by being open and vulnerable about painful experiences or even our quest to understand the topic is sensitive. Very very very very very sensitive. And the more that join us, the more safe we make them feel, the more outlooks we receive and that betters us all. I obviously enjoy you, HG and this blog. Thanksxxx
HI Jordy-
I think majority is a large range of percentages. I think there are a range of experiences that accompany majority…HG said for contagions who can take the pain of others away that it was ?90%? and higher. That was in response to a question from someone on a contagion empath thread from last year. Well, a majority could be 51% and up to 99%. No one is 100% one school according to HG.
Leila Jane said she is a majority contagion. She goes out and sings in public. She participated in a televised singing contest. I don’t know what her percentage is. I think we can guess that she has more and higher narcissistic than other contagions.
If those with any percentage of super empathy alter regarding the number of behaviours that trigger the super response and it rises with percentage…why would the sensitivity of contagion empaths not also vary?
I tend to look at people as being able to find ways to adapt and deal with things…you become ill going down an aisle with too many emotions from too many people. I think contagions figure out (likely on their own) how to solve this….it doesn’t seem terribly complicated. Go shopping when it’s less crowded. Don’t go down aisles with lots of people. You can come back to that aisle.
In the wonderful video, “The Contagion Empath senses Darkness” posted by HG yesterday to his new channel, HG indicates that there is a way for contagions to armour and shield themselves. I think that contagions will have varying levels of resistance (that come from the contagion school) to the Darkness. Think of it like Gandalf facing down the balrog…he senses the beast…and a white light is present from his staff…that’s in many ways how I see that story playing out. The bright light as the demon brings down the sword…the narcissist shall not pass!…Damn that whip!…FLY, you fools!…then the hobbits and humans go all crybaby about the situation…Gandalf is a kickass wizard…you don’t gotta worry ’bout him. A Gandalf the White rises…and rides Shadowfax, the most beautiful horse, and saves Helm’s Deep at sunrise! (Jordy…now, I want to watch Lord of the Rings… the movies)
I operate with the belief that most contagions know what is best for them. They’ve likely dealt with people criticizing their sensitivity–innocently or cruelly. If they’ve dealt with it in person…from family and friends (narc or other classification)…it’s a different level. Again, your point is taken…I can’t control everyone who might respond, and those most likely to respond might be more vulnerable to being upset by trying to explain the unprovable…but I think just knowing that there is someone who wants to listen and understand can be a lifeline to someone who may feel quite alone. Majority Contagions are the rarest.
Allison, Dani, Contagious —
Allison, do pop in please! It’s absolutely connected to the aura talk and you have a perfect way to calm down my brain cells✨
…
Contagious my dear, you gotta search for those results. You posted them about a year or two ago from an email directly when you found it and it was something different and not a majority contagion as your leading school. It was the majority standart school which had the highest percentage and contagion was significant in addition to it. Either you posted the wrong results back then and you recall now correctly of being a majority contagion as your leading school or you recall a different outcome.
The majority standart school would explain to me how you could survive in that narc infested profession and environment of criminals, plus being married to one (the mob connected one). Otherwise I can’t explain how you would survive there as a majority contagion?
A majority contagion per HG’s video, as I understand it, is someone whose nerve endings are exposed to the outside impact 24/7 in a good and bad way and it’s tiresome and draining. I get that there would be a buffer, an armour of sorts, yet still..? Maybe your armour is just exceptionally strong. Or your armour is made out of the standard majority as a stronger base of your empathic make up, which can deal more effectively with dense narc environments… and the contagion element would be responsible for the good part — the dreaming part and all the love you share and give to others, helping and healing.
…
Dani, there is force in what you wrote about purple aura and death… I know about it from a shamanic perspective where shamans ’see the death around’ the person throughout the day on its occurrence. The person can appear absolutely fit and there wouldn’t be any signs that they’re at the end of their journey but the shamans see it coming on that day…
Coincidence was put to the test by physicists; they interviewed people who unreasonably canceled their travel plans to a destination of a later catastrophy or didn’t board a plane which would crash; wanting to know what motivated their actions. And they concluded that coincidence can’t be proved.
Yes, I agree with you and that’s the point I missed to formulate in my initial reply; the sensitivity would vary and buffer put in place… or not. We may not know when we interact.
!!!Oh yes I pictured Gandalf too! Yet Gandalf vs Necromancer, when I listen to the Contagion senses Darkness!
Dani, isn’t Leila Jane, also a CoD? A strong one?
Dani,
I agree that we need to push back against harm. And just as you say, there will be different opinions on what constitutes harm.
If you mean that HG demonstrates tolerance and acceptance in the sense of allowing different opinions, I agree completely. Of course, the word “demonstrates” comes with its own baggage there. But what he teaches us on a daily basis is, Go to the evidence. He will not tolerate and accept a claim without evidence to support it, which is one of the great things about him.
If somebody tells us they see something that might be called an aura, that may or may not be the truth. Unless that person shows us a brain scan or some other proof, we have no way of verifying it one way or the other. If I see a person on tv who claims to see auras, I will be inclined to make certain assumptions about their personality and traits just on the basis of the fact that they are willing to expose themselves to a wider audience to such a degree, compared to what we read and hear from as well as about empaths here. But I can choose to accept that a person who has proven to be truthful and trustworthy in general will indeed have seen something.
Where it gets dicey is the link between the object this person is looking at and the images this person sees. If somebody claims the aura or image is caused by the object (as opposed to images their own brain creates without any connection to the object similar to other ways our brains can fool us, such as with tinnitus), then I will only accept that as truth if I see evidence that supports it.
Let’s take your fictional example of the nurse.
The first question I would ask is, Did the nurse see the purple aura the first time she saw somebody who was about to die, when she had no medical training? Or did she only start to see them some time after she had trained and begun working with terminally ill patients? If it is the second option, I would assume that she might have learned, through experience, to perceive certain cues, consciously and subconsciously, that a patient is close to death. I have heard nurses tell of certain visual changes to a dying person’s face, for example.
My next question would be, has the nurse seen the aura where the patient has subsequently recovered? For a conclusive answer, the nurse would have to have made a record of every single instance of the aura. Otherwise, we might run into the problem of confirmation bias. Does the nurse only remember the aura in those instances where the patient did die because those were the only times it happened or did she maybe experience the aura in other cases but for some reason does not recollect those times?
For perfect causality you would even have to expect the nurse to see the aura every single time she sees someone close to death.
In all of these cases, I do not necessarily need to question that the nurse has indeed seen something. But it’s a big step from simply seeing something, which in effect is their brain generating an image, to making a causal connection to somebody else as the source of the image. I would want proof of any causal link.
Our brains and the power of belief can be very strange indeed. The placebo effect is interesting, because it has been shown to work even if the patients know they are getting a placebo (open-label placebos). So it works not only if the patients believe they are getting the “proper” medication, but also when they have been explicitly told that they are taking a placebo. And then there is the nocebo effect….
Allison💓 don’t mind my aura-talk, you summoned it up very beautifully, thank you! I understood her sensing as not a matter of ESP either but a heightened attunes towards the entity which for me is purely the entity of the Ultra and not a representative of ’the kind’ although ’the kind’ for me has somewhere a DNA-plan engraved when LOCE hits the stage and the plan activates: destroy / absorb light, conquer and divide. The malevolence or the dark force can’t go about it otherwise but erect a wall, a wave which must crush down on the little boat and yet the material and the construction would not fracture no matter how beastly the storm. The boat may go under but would resurrect to the surface – claiming what it was made for – a vessel of exploration and discovery of unknown worlds and adventures of the physical world or / and otherwise.
An epic vision, story! Hopefully with a further plot continuation by our Dungeon Master.
Dani, do you know Leila Jane personally? Is she your friend?
Jordyguin—
Regarding Leila Jayne and her schools. No she’s not strong codependent. 63% contagion and roughly even split of cod and super for the remaining 37%. I would guess at 18.5%…that’s insignificant or just barely into significant. This is found between 18 and 19.5 minutes into “The Ultra in Conversation with Leila Jayne.”
Allison, I liked your interpretation. I think it rather aligns with the way I see it as Gandalf vs. the balrog…he knew the danger that they would face before seeing it.
What were your initial thoughts/feelings after you got your results? If you don’t mind sharing that. Agree, disagree, curiosity?
Hi Contagious
Do you think the cadres have preferences from Empaths too?
I think there might be. I think all the cadres are good. I think the problem with any of them mainly comes in when dealing with narcs. There are problems from any of them. And good things from each. Being aware of behavior can help an empath alter it. They can change to help themselves.
Jordy,
No.
Hi, Jordy–
““To my understanding we’re vulnerable because we respond so favorably to being imitated.” — Allison, could you please expand on this and how it would connect to blind belief… of different classifications (normals, empaths etc.) ?”
Thanks for the question. Writing helps me think. Allow me to stay in my lane by first acknowledging we have the expert, and I’m only speaking from my limited view. However, I truly value the fact he provides an environment for us to explore ideas with each other as empaths, so I’ll answer.
My understanding is that because we have emotional empathy (empaths, normals) we connect and assume other people connect through feeling. We assume that’s how things work, that all people care for others on some level. We use affect–emotions experienced and expressed–to gauge what’s going on within other people, and we use what we know best: ourselves. But we can be fooled by a good enough imitation, especially if it mirrors back to us our own internal experience. One of my colleagues is doing work in the area of how this functions in terms of the development of the therapeutic relationship.
I think mirror neurons play a strong role in this. A shared expression means to us we’re on the same page emotionally, which we value and tend to take as genuine. We feel understood and we respond positively. We believe the other person is sharing in an authentic experience with us, whether the emotion is pleasant or not. The videos on the narcissist’s smile are ones I’ve found very instructive as well as the psychopathy one on grief.
Where blind belief comes in, I think, is the habit of not giving interactions or claims further logical consideration. For example, early on in my relationship with the priest who gave me trouble there were several times when something didn’t sit right with me when he smiled. I mean, I would consciously think, “He seems to be faking.” But my ET kicked in and I didn’t want to doubt him. That wouldn’t be nice of me. Judge not, and all that. When I got that icky feeling in the pit of my stomach all those times it was my desire to believe in him, to believe in the church, to believe he shared a type of closeness with me which caused me to ignore my logic every time. Instead of saying, “Ah–perhaps there’s something going on here. I’ll stay neutral and gather the evidence”, I allowed my feelings of guilt for being a Doubting Thomas take over. He was smiling, wasn’t he?
Normals, with their smaller circle of emotional empathy, can also believe blindly. They’re not immune to exhibiting a lack of critical thinking. I think they might be more likely to become vulnerable to deceit once they’ve admitted someone into that empathy circle. An effective manipulator who can mirror them, or who has successfully mirrored someone already in their circle could have a way in.
Again, all of this is with the caveat that I’m your friendly neighborhood empath and fellow student. I appreciate the opportunity to consider this more closely with you. Thank you for engaging.
Allison–
If you don’t mind answering…
How did you feel upon first viewing your EDC results?
Hi Dani,
In answer to your question about anger, I might have a comment in moderation or I might have answered twice on the same thread and the first one disappeared!
I can sustain the anger until I’ve got everything out, said what needed saying and the whole lot has gone. Once I’ve finished the last sentence, it’s over. No residual anger left at all. So in the way you put it, it burns out fast but it’s intense enough for people to do their shocked face. 😲
Xx
Hi Dani:
Interesting question. HG hasn’t gone into narc preferences. I see a somatic preferring magnet or geyser as magnet attracts people and it seems many show business performers are in the category and somantics like to be seen so it would be a good acquisition of traits and geysers are more emotionally explicit so I see a somatic liking that sort of attention and extroverts whereas cerebrals I see as introverts. All cadres would like the Cod. This leaves martyr and carrier. Hmmm. I think the Elite or Cerebral would prefer a martyr as they seem to have well developed ideals or ideas they pursue which requires thinking, more a cerebral trait. Now a carrier? Hmmmm. I lean to somatic or elite. It just seems like a somatic would require more effort in various ways and be more of a burden. Just wild guesses lol what do you think?
Btw: I love your questions. It really makes you think about what you learned and apply it. I needed to remember all of he classes and cadres of both narcs and empaths.
Oh victim? Definitely co-d, I would think. To need and to be needed. Sounds close to Hamlet! I would love to hear from others especially HG! I imagine all N cadres would have instances where they would prefer any cadre or a specific one. I just did generalization of a sort.
Hi TS and Contagious,
HG goes into great detail about which type of narcs goes for which type of empaths, in his book, SITTING TARGET. You’ll get your answers in that book, Contagious. Xx
Hi, Dani–
After I got my EDC results I felt similarly to how I felt after an abdominal surgery I had years ago, also from an excellent practitioner putting in a good job with precision–a bit sore, euphoric, and well on my way to health. I only wish I could have gotten gory photos like I did from my physician.
Thank you. Gory photos…sounds like me recovering from wisdom tooth extraction…where are my teeth? I want um. How dare they try to keep my parts? I also tried to tell people to escape… According to my mother. I have only a vague memory of that. Empaths…being helpful you know.
Hi Dani:
Again I will say that’s it’s an ultimate luxury to accept yourself and we are all unique and beautiful in our own ways. Your analysis honors this. …. I have a question, it’s bugged me…gurus use contagions I read but why would we fall for a guru? There’s a lady I love who does interviews with H.G. “ Tea with …” she is bright, efficacious and dynamic. I can’t recall her name. They have so much CHEMISTRY, I thought they must have connected. HG says no. Anyway she spoke of falling in love with a guru. I get they were into the same ideals at the time but she described him as so controlling. Gurus are controlling. Right? I have been described by my exes as “ uncontrollable” and I am a free spirit sort with a plethora of loved ones I would never abandon for no man or guru. I get the greaters. I have loved rich successful men – In college he called the governor of Puerto Rico “ uncle” and in law school my greatest love is a nationally recognized trial attorney whose best friend helps run the Pentagon, neither were narcs. My first husband was a very rich business man and VERY funny. He was oddly a family man. He was diagnosed with ASPD. My second husband almost divorced is an artist, a renaissance man, and British who is a middle lesser. So I get being attracted to the intelligence and charm and know how of rich men…. I think most women do …but gurus? Yuck. Most of the gurus I read about are whack jobs. This one puzzles me ….
Contagious,
What if you met a man who loved Jesus as much as you and said he was also a Contagion empath who felt the world around him, sex with him was amazing and he introduced you to others who also deeply loved Jesus and nature and art and animals.. would that have any appeal?
Annameel: please oh please give him my contact info! I would love to meet such a man. I have trouble meeting such men unless in my fantasies lol! Now I have met two 2️⃣ n my life, two of my great loves! But one didn’t want children and the other… I was just too young but both loved sports! Not a problem;)
Contagious: I’ll give you his contact details. They are 1800GURU.
You wouldn’t be susceptible to all gurus because the snake oil they sell may not be what really moves you. But if one gave you exactly what you wanted, you might be more vulnerable.
Hey Annameel:
I see your point. But Gurus seem to require control. And this requires that you give your all to the guru. Jesus, animals, nature and GOOD sex ( which I need) require giving back. Right now I have 7 dogs in my house. It’s a lot of giving. But the rewards are great. Puppies are the definition of happiness. Art is more abstract. I am told by most of my partners I am uncontrollable nor do I try to control them. This is not 100%~ I am certain there is a modicum of control going both ways…. But live and let be. Free spirit I am. Most gurus I have read about always engage in restrictions. Restrict those around you, I would never give up a loved one. Restrictions on diet. Oh I wish but again terrible. Accept their choice ideals without question. Nope. A lawyer. And devote yourself to them only. I see organized religion as different than a cult. I am sure there are those who disagree….
BUT
Organized religion typically has a formal structure, established doctrines, and a hierarchy of leadership. Examples include Christianity, Islam, Judaism, and Buddhism. Whereas a cult is often one guru or small. Leadership is usually more centralized and autocratic. Also organized religion has widely accepted beliefs and practices that are often shared and recognized by large groups of people. They often have sacred texts, rituals, and ethical guidelines. With cults: many have unorthodox beliefs and practices that deviate significantly from mainstream religions. And although I am privately religious. I am a true believer. These beliefs are usually centered around the leader’s teachings.
Organized religion usually offers a sense of community and belonging, allowing for open membership and participation. They often have outreach programs and engage with the wider society.
Whereas a cult encourages isolation from outside influences, creating a closed community. Members may be pressured to sever connections with family and friends who are not part of the group.
And organized religion has a long history and stability, with established traditions that have persisted over centuries. While cults often are relatively new and often lacks longevity, with many cults dissolving or changing leadership over time.
Organized religion encourages interpretation and discussion of beliefs, allowing for diverse perspectives within a faith. Most cults demand absolute loyalty to the leader and discourages questioning of authority or doctrine.
I get gurus can be charming too … but I don’t see myself calling 1800GURU for the reasons set forth above;)
I mean, could you?
Hiya, Contagious–
“Whereas a cult is often one guru or small.”
This is an interesting thread to me. As the saying goes, I belong to a religion; you’re in a cult!
Thank you for this conversation. I’ve always found the discussion of the distinction fascinating. I thought about it again when I watched the video on psychopaths and what HG terms “affinity fraud”. I find it very useful and I’m using that on my understanding of the supposed distinction. The guru, the life coach, the corporate leader, the president–any of those who wish to create an environment of undue influence must begin by sending the message that he or she is in tune with the group, that they share affinity. I think when we say cult/religion or guru/leader what we’re really talking about is whether or not a type of cheating or affinity fraud are operating. It’s creating a type of living lie where, because motivations are concealed, there can be no true consent among the followers.
I can’t think of a religion from the list that didn’t also meet the listed indications for a cult during its founding, and which doesn’t contain sects today which could be considered cultic.
In the case of affinity fraud the formal category we select for the group (religion/cult in this instance) seems to matter less than the way the interloper can mask and appear to be on board with the beliefs and goals of the group, all the while twisting and reshaping it to his own purposes. The religion/cult distinction is so interesting to me because it can be easily manipulated by language so it’s ripe for manipulation. To me, size doesn’t matter, nor the other features of organized religion mentioned in the determination of whether a group is a cult. It’s a question of whether you have “true believers” under the influence and control of someone with hidden motives wearing a mask. What is believed, the depth of history of the group, the structure, how widespread the beliefs are, or the organizational complexity appear not to matter as much as whether the group has one or more people engaging in affinity fraud influencing it.
I find it fascinating that most of us don’t believe we could be taken in by a guru (by whatever name), and that it’s difficult to recognize if we’re in a cult (however it’s labelled). It comes down to whether you can roam as you wish in the system and change your mind. Can you question the existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster without punishment? Can you demand proof that you consider sufficient without being burned at the stake? If you must believe wholeheartedly and without question in the Flying Spaghetti Monster you risk control by the man who quotes Pastafarianism chapter and verse as well as you do. And FSM help you if he can sort that cunny.
To my understanding we’re vulnerable because we respond so favorably to being imitated.
‘To my understanding we’re vulnerable because we respond so favorably to being imitated.’
Surely a damning indictment.
Hello Allison:
I agree, size is not definitive for religion v cult. Organized Religion is more widespread, longer lasting historically and more mainstream. I agree that the motive matters, if you are a leader in a religion or cult and your main purpose is to manipulate your followers for personal gain or affinity fraud that MATTERS.
Whilst ( lol adopting HG vocab) I see a distinction between cults and major religions, I agree it can be nuanced … I agree… and often depends on various factors including beliefs, practices, community structure, and societal perceptions. But I do see a difference especially the isolation from others, dangerous practices and control used and the sheer number of leaders, major religions have a board or group of worldwide boards versus one person or select few, less risk of affinity fraud impacts….
1. Cults are often characterized by extreme beliefs, a charismatic leader, and a focus on the group over individual needs. They may employ manipulative or coercive techniques to maintain control over members.
Whereas Major Religions have an established belief systems with widespread followings, a structured doctrine, and often a long historical background. They are generally recognized and accepted within society because their practices fall within most societies norms. More law abiding.
2. The leaders of cults usually are centered around a single leader or a small group of leaders who wield significant power and influence, often demanding absolute loyalty and obedience.
Whereas organized religion have a more distributed leadership structure, many many many peopl with recognized clergy or governing bodies that provide guidance and interpretation of beliefs. I think it’s harder to get all the leaders to wear masks and get into affinity fraud.
3. Cults often promote unorthodox beliefs that deviate significantly from commonly accepted norms, often portraying outsiders as enemies or threats.
Whereas Religions have established doctrines, sacred texts, and a set of beliefs recognized by their followers, often integrating with cultural and ethical norms of society. Again, they integrate more, follow more society norms and laws.
4. Cults normally operate in isolation from mainstream society, creating an insular community that discourages outside relationships and contact. Whereas major religions encourage engagement with the broader society and often have institutions (like schools, charities, and places of worship) that promote community interaction. I see isolation from others as a big difference.
5. Many cults include intense rituals, public displays of loyalty, and other activities that reinforce group cohesion, sometimes to the detriment of individual well-being.
Whereas religion major are often diverse and can include rituals, worship, and community service, aiming for the spiritual and moral development of individuals.
6. Cults that I have read about such as WACO are viewed negatively, as they used control, manipulation, secrecy, and dangerous behaviors. Where major religion TODAY are likely to be accepted or respected by broader societies, although they can also face criticism or opposition and there can be corruption within like the Catholic priest scandal, the practices do not normally endanger members.
7. Cults tend to be rigid in their beliefs and resistant to change, relying on the authority of their leaders. Whereas major religion often adapt to cultural shifts, evolving doctrines and practices that maintain relevance in changing social contexts.
HG series with Doug really delved into Doug’s negative experiences with Scientology. Doug called it a cult. He spoke of self destruction, isolation of loved ones. Yet I read Lisa Marie’s latest book and it was clear it helped her with drug use and alcoholism. The IRS recognizes Scientology as a religion for tax purposes.
I appreciate your well thought out and detailed response. You show cased the nuances and your historical context is true. In AD 111, Pliny the Elder wrote of followers of Jesus chanting to him as “ God” as a “ cult.” I haven’t read as much about other major religions but you certainly are right, they were rebels at the time growing in size to permeate the world. And you are right, horrific abuses by some or corruption within existed and exists. Witch hunts, the crusades, etc… the message of love, turn your cheek, forgiveness tossed to the side. The meek shall inherit the world tossed aside by tv evangelists out to make money etc… you are right yet again.
But, I still see a difference IN GENERAL. The USA Supreme Court has a definition for porn. Jacob Ellis v Ohio … Porn v art can have similar nuances. Mapplethorpe is art. Hustler is porn. Etc… It is subjective, isn’t it?
One Justice Stewart historically and famously said “ I know it when I see it.” lol
The courts approach it with an “objective test, “ applying facts to social norms to develop a standard definition.
So I guess I follow a more societal normative standard between the two. So I feel comfortable calling WACO or Manson as cults and their leaders as gurus.
And that’s why I can’t see myself wanting a guru. It’s that perspective based on history and watching programs on famous “ cults.” They tend to be unorthodox, isolating and controlling and restrictive and outside mainstream norms. Plus, major religions are run by many, many, many. They seem to allow more for free will and expression with its members and TODAY the organization not some corrupt members normally does not encourage dangerous practices to an individual or make it part of their doctrine.
Does that make sense?
Anyway, this is my best attempt to show a difference and why I can’t see myself anyway falling for a guru/narc.
Greaters like contagions. So we must like them. And I get that… they aren’t described as unfit, poor, outside social norms, unintelligent losers. The opposite. Take Elon v Manson or any of the leaders of the cults you named. It’s a no brainer if I had to choose.
The thing about hypotheticals is historical or real figures are better for me to grasp as hypotheticals can go on forever.
Thank you for your response. The questions you raise are very valid! And I hope I explained how I personally look at it. X
Allison, precisely, thank you for your comment! Organised religions started off as cults and developed into a large pyramidal structure, where at the top of the pyramid sits the deity giving the orders down to -> priests -> clergy -> higher casts -> infantry -> commonors — all looking up to their deity – as it orders its guidance in the places of worship, temples, churches – shaping the collective minds of individuals on how to follow rules, in fact rules of perception of morality, if needed through mental, emotional and physical violence and inhumane cruelty: Inquisition or holy wars are the example.
In reality it is a cult of intermediaries of deities whose real faces are those of the priests who infiltrated people’s minds and organised the order of follow and obey.
Of course with time the techniques were honed — see HG’s video about The Most Powerful and Effective Manipulative Technique – of cults, organised religion or any type of ruling organisation.
Through my observation: people don’t need to be religious anymore or follow cults, they can be atheist, but they still follow a setup of a mindset of the collective where they are not in control or responsible, but someone else’s belief system or structure of obedience shapes their behaviour, expectations and society. Erosion of empathy included.
I wondered that participants of the If I Ruled My World would not prohibit religion. They’d all allow it, which is an indicator of obedience and tolerance of an unseen deity-collective-structure-principle of a questionable origin never truly examined and simply accepted just because it’s there and has been there for some time. To my mind, it simply is a mind-print of obedience of a totalitarian culture of belief systems and nothing more.
I agree that to allow peaceful people to have their faith in the good — to hold on to and to unite under the principles of good — is a right thing, but why in a combination with a religion or cult which have the opposite reputation?!
I think new age spirituality often tries to replace the old religion because of its reputation but the belief system is the same. It’s a pyramidal structure with a deity on top which knows better and the responsibility is placed on someone else. And it’s the followers who fall on their knees and want this dynamic to prevail…
* * *
“To my understanding we’re vulnerable because we respond so favorably to being imitated.” — Allison, could you please expand on this and how it would connect to blind belief… of different classifications (normals, empaths etc.) ?
Contagious, hi love! I wanted to ask you something about religion. I understand your faith in God as believing in the force of good and the force of love and I’m on the same page with you about this aspect. I like Jesus but I’m suspicious about the religion which made him into something he never intended to be, in my opinion.
Also an interesting fact is that Jesus avoided places of worship and gave his lectures not inside temples. There is even the instance where he expelled the so-called merchants and consumers from the temple, accusing them of turning it into “a den of thieves” and “a house of trade”… In some countries there is still church tax until this day while in other countries it is based on free donation. Originally known as “paying for forgiveness of the sins” or “paying for the entrance to heaven”.
And maybe it was this little trade operation, in its infancy, which Jesus had spotted and rebelled against and thus became a thorn in the backside of an upcoming cult which dealt with him via crucifixion, and made him into the guru leader post mortem as Jesus had a good moral code, the cult saw a use for…
This aside, my actual question is simple and it’s about the Lord’s Prayer which is the most common doctrine taught around the world to be chanted and repeated every day. The complete prayer is illogical in my view but especially these sentences:
1. “Forgive us our sins as we forgive those who sin against us.”
How logical is it to teach a child to repeat these lines every day as soon as the child begins to speak? How has the child sinned???
2. “Lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil.”
Why should He lead us into temptation to begin with??? So we then must ask Him each day not to do it.
Oh dear Jordy:
Here we go. I don’t know if HG will allow this because it is about religion and you call him a guru. Yup. I would follow and do so there you go a contagion who follows a guru. You asked in the Lords Prayer not written by Jesus but supposed to be by him it is merely to ansk God for guidance in life and you say why would the children be asked about temptation. Jesus was amazing with children. Look overall. Infantcide and abandonment were high during that time. Children were inferiors who weren’t educated and demanded to obey. Jesus was right. Children were more than that…
Jesus had a special regard for children, often teaching important lessons through their lives and innocence. In the Gospels, there are a few key moments that illustrate this relationship:
1.Welcoming Children: In passages like Mark 10:13-16, Jesus welcomed children and emphasized the importance of receiving the kingdom of God like a child, highlighting purity, humility, and trust. Even his disciples said no but Jesus said bring the children to me!
2. Teaching Lessons: Children often served as examples in his teachings. Jesus pointed out that the faith of children is essential and that one must have a childlike spirit to enter heaven.
3. Compassion and Care: Jesus demonstrated compassion towards children, healing those who were ill and valuing their worth in society during a time when children were often marginalized.
Overall, Jesus’s approach to children reflected his inclusive message of love and dignity for all, reinforcing that everyone, regardless of age, has a significant place in God’s kingdom.
He was the Prince of Peace. And in my mind, an ideal we can’t achieve but should look at as a goal. What cult do you know that lives, respects, teaches and values children? Many abuse them. There is corruption in organized religion but it isn’t based on the teachings of Christ. I don’t expect others here or anywhere to follow my own personal beliefs. My brother is an atheist. My friends are Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist etc….. I respect them as most of my loved ones think as I do despite what creed they hold. Good peeps. I see them all in the Light. They are all loving people ! One of the kindest of them all is a Muslim. I find it interesting that most major religions were developed within a thousand years of themselves. 3500 years which is nothing if you think of eternity. Did “ Gods show up then?” Was it evolution of mankind? Or? I don’t know but while I find most of the Bible disappointing in its historical stoical nature, I always felt Christs voice, true and kind and LOVE. Although I am unable to be so good. He forgive the people who tortured him and killed him and ask God to forgive then ( whoa… could I?) , he forgave a murderer and thief. He told a prostitute and adulteress, just don’t sin anymore, He found the poor, the downtrodden the meek of the Earth to be the inheritors of heaven, he said to turn your check to enemies, He said to bring the children to me at a time children were nothing, invulnerable and if you believe… He did this for us. So sorry, I see nothing about this man or to me the son of God who was anything but the pure empath, the Prince of Peace or lord of love. Are there others? Are there atheists? Yes… no doubt. Other religious leadersI… yes. It’s written to see. But I haven’t met them and the cult leaders I know about today… Waco, etc… don’t come close. Xxx
Hi–
Her name is Sam, and she’s delightful as well as their interaction. HG’s “The Guru Narcissist” series is great. In that group of videos you’ll see that they use all the tools that all narcissists use to get to the Prime Aims, and guru hood, like other fields HG has mentioned can be especially attractive to narcs (although they’re everywhere).
I like your honesty about your puzzlement! What–you’re not made to quiver by flowing robes, TED talks, and Californian spirituality? If I may, from the outside, some people couldn’t figure out the attraction I had for certain narcissists. They saw “whack job” where I saw “charismatic” owing to my ET. And in terms of the religious or life coach or other arenas where broken people come in numbers seeking some sort of salvation, gurus can appear very attractive. I know I have to be careful as an empath because, even though I’m not a religious person, I can still get manipulated because the various traits of my empathy can cause me to trick myself into a type of guru worship.
Hi Allison:
I guess my follow up would be, what did this guru do that made you want to leave him? Was he a hypocrite? And the biggest question, would you be vulnerable to one today? Do you see a difference in him as a narcissist/ guru and any other narcissist? I mean I fell in love and married a middle lesser after all. He was not a guru but was at the time an international business man in architecture, an artist, a poet in the Roald Dahl museum, BBC commentator a published writer, a musician, a romantic. Great in the sack. At the beginning for a long time, made my life better. Intelligent. Same beliefs. We talked for hours and went to museums and classical concerts. He loved dogs. He was good to my children. All remains true. All of it. But he was abusive. The golden period ended. Silent treatments. He quit his job, no longer worked. Etc… HG nails it. While my long term relationships involve exes are empaths maybe normals mostly 98% (2 are not) , and they remain my friends. My soon to be ex husband is a ML. I may be puzzled by guru narcs but I am living proof that I am or have been vulnerable to narcs. It may be a step up to have fallen for a guru, at least a hardworking charismatic leader of something lol.
My best!
Hi, Contagious–
I use guru with the connotation we have for it, and not in its basic meaning of a teacher. So, to me, anyone can be a guru if they get into you, manipulate you, and you put down your logic. But I do have a religious example.
I was a super devoted follower of my religion. But I thought I needed to be taken care of. Unfortunately, this made me ripe to be taken in and controlled. My last priest truly enjoyed the trappings of his position–the robes, the praise, his own singing, the authority of 2000 years of tradition. I really let him into my head, and he brought me into his inner circle. I spent lots of time in his house with his family, and we bonded over Byzantine chant and iconography. We fasted together over 180 days a year. I changed my mode of dress. I never missed vespers, matins, and liturgy. I was in the choir and I was a chanter and reader. I was devout. But it turned out the real secret to the priest’s power was the confessional.
He had a certain charisma when it came to the married women in the church; the most devoted of us were a very special group to him. We all opened our darkest secrets to him several times a week. He had a prodigious memory for my sins and at times I felt he was too interested in them.
Now, I’m a girl with some sins that might be considered rather unusual. Very oddly specific things, I’m afraid. One night I was talking with the parish secretary who had become my closest friend in the church. I was feeling concerned about some things our priest was doing, and she came at me with something I had said in the confessional that I’d never told anyone, not even my husband. She used it as an example of my weakness and that I needed to accept the fatherly control of the reverend over everything–my mind, my willfulness, everything. This alarmed me. The following Sunday, the priest descended on me in a rage because she had informed him about that conversation. It all sounds so middle school now, but I took this breach of confidentiality seriously. I was being discussed and I didn’t like it. Of the sacraments of Eastern Orthodoxy, confession is a major one. This breach broke the spell for me. When my concerns were ignored by the bishop I decided to leave.
I’ve taken the fact that I have an addiction to narcissists to heart, so that’s why I still see myself as potentially vulnerable. Even though I’m no longer religious, that doesn’t mean I can’t be taken advantage of in other ways and find other gurus, especially when it comes to the area of sex. Sexually, erotically, I’m still a worshipper. Letting the sheets cool down these past few months has been of great assistance, however. I tend to be drawn to manipulative people, and people who want to jump into bed right away often are. I should get comfortable with lulls in the conversation and take them as a cue to actually think about what I’m getting into.
I see my willingness to get straight to it as making me a target for potential ensnarement by this most reliable means at the narcissist’s disposal. If you don’t take the time to get to know someone and what they’re about you tend to kiss a lot of frogs. With women I’ll take care in terms of intimate relationships in future, which is tricky because things tend to move quickly as a norm among us. But, I need to take my time. Women are very important to me, and I want to share the potential for intimacy with some good, normal ones. I do know I’m much stronger, but I don’t want to lose focus so vigilance is key. I’ll always be an addict. It would be best for me to keep that in mind to protect myself against myself.
Hey Allison:
Awesome reply. That’s our difference. I just follow the popular definition of cult and its leader as guru. You take the term guru to apply as “ teacher.” And within your definition, you are right. A member of organized religion engaged in inappropriate ways to you! I agree with you, his breach was disgusting. Yes, I have made mistakes such as with my first husband of rushing in too fast. My second, however, the ML, I took my time but still got burned. Long golden period. In my past, I got lucky, rushed into all romantic relations and loved two noble moral empathetic wonderful men! I was too young and ambitious for the first and the second didn’t want kids. There were a couple of others ( a serial monogamist, I just don’t date! I enter a long term relationship) and both were wonderful too but one was not ready to marry and my bio clock ticked and the other I spent 9 years with but we were primarily both focused on the kids and neighbors so it was a great friendship with benefits type of relationship. I agree with you. Taking time is better and with HG’s education, we can only hope to do better the next time around. I am in a divorce now and not ready. Enjoying being single for now. I have never really joined a dating site but I did meet someone once on LinkedIn. I have no idea what the future holds but I don’t see marrying again. Just a life companion would be nice someday. What’s odd is I have had two mishaps, a ASPD and it was a 7 year stable relationship but because his deception was not known. And a 12 year relationship I am leaving with a very long separation because I waited until he would walk away financially. He did. Whew. But all my others GOOD. Was I just lucky? All I can say in hindsight is I regret none of them. But I prefer men with empathy! Fingers crossed for you and me!
Hi, Contagious,
I don’t see the appeal of gurus either. But I grew up and attended several churches… And the person in charge usually made me highly uncomfortable. There just seemed to be something wrong with them. (Found out several were misusing money. Others were having affairs or steadily replacing leaders with their cronies. And I don’t know what all else.) Their behavior in no way reflects the majority of religious people. The Catholic priest abuse scandals were another layer, and there are more. I think more religious people are good than bad. I’ve been to religious events that were run by people I found shady. I’ve also seen the horrid man…I mean great preacher Kenneth Copeland…Mr. Tudor’s videos about him are superlative…he gives me the creeps… there’s Osteen… and Meyer…and too many others to name. I’ve heard people defend them…but they appear to be holy narcissists to me. More concerned with the prime aims than a holy life.
I think many gurus have a style of targeting people. There are just some people who are more vulnerable, particularly those in a new city or just out on their own. Jonestown, Waco, TX, NXIUM, John of God, etc. I would argue even certain weight loss and/or exercise programs and pyramid schemes function in similar ways. They prey on people. People want to be part of groups. Fear of losing a group can also be a powerful tool for manipulation and control.
I don’t know why they go for contagions or why contagions would gravitate to them. I hope there will be more talk of what draws particular classifications together as HG does the empath deep dives. I am also excited to learn more about the formation of different cadres.
Hi Dani: good analysis especially the ideas of groups. I have had really good religious mentors in life. I have belonged to both Catholic and Protestant ones but I agree the Catholic priest scandal was heart breaking! I agree that I would love HG to do more of the origins of empaths and their relations. I agree, no gurus for me;)
Thank you Rebecca! I will buy it. I have many but I may have missed that one!
You’re welcome Contagious! I found the book so informative and interesting to read! HG really has it all down to the littlest detail and explains it all so well. It made me realize why LMRSomatic Narcs are the ones that go for me the most….according to my EDC and SITTING TARGET explained, in detail, why they are attracted to me and it made perfect sense! Xx
HG – what do you think of Sam Vaknin’s views on all things narcissists?
Who’s that?
Hi Lisa: you might like Sam but he called without specifically naming H.G., empaths narcs and even psychopaths. Food for thought.
Him again. Not only can I personally do without the repeated citations of his opinions here in your living room – that is just me, though, he may serve a useful purpose to others – I also have to question his intelligence. I have not watched a single video of his and by the Grace of God I never will, but Youtube insists on shoving his thumbnails in my line of sight. I have serious reservations about the mental faculties of somebody who calls himself Professor yet fails to grasp the concept of the article, and I do not care what his mother tongue is. Even if your first language has no article, it should not be too much to ask of a university graduate to learn it. The repeated occurrence of such a basic, albeit typical mistake reflects very poorly on the speaker. One would think, with the amount of stealing from you this guy seems to engage in, he would be able to cobble together some grammatically sound titles for his videos as well.
Hear hear.
I don’t know…I have a vague memory of marking a video with a thumbnail showing what appeared to be a creeper as “not interested” when it kept popping up and taking the place of proper videos from “HG Tudor: Knowing the Narcissist: Ultra” in my recommended video list. This marking “not interested” for those who rip off Mr. Tudor’s excellent work…it works perfectly to get rid of a range of disturbingly inaccurate content…or what is clearly plagiarized content…and best of all…More Ultra Videos, or Knowing the Narcissist (first channel) videos pop up. And that’s the best gift of all.
Dani,
I found one group using the KNOWING THE NARCISSIST logo and topics. I reported the group and informed HG. Xx
Rebecca–
I’m glad you reported them. They deserve punishment. And using the logo, too? I hate that. It’s not right to do that. I hope YouTube punished them! I hope Mr. Tudor gets his vengeance, sits in a black wing-backed chair dressed in a stunning deep blue suit, smelling of expensive cologne, and staring at an enormous screen as their channel winks out of existence and the screen goes black as he sips Deutz champagne…then a dark chuckle fills the air as moonlight steams into the room, providing a spotlight on his body–but not reaching his face. That’s how I picture it…
Dani,
They ran like little cockroaches and now I have the song in my head….😄😄xx
Win, win for HG! Xx ❤️❤️
Hi, Lisa–
I don’t want to provide any links to show you what I mean (it’s easy enough to look on your own and I don’t want to give That Man any promotion), but I have some thoughts. I’m a PhD student right now so I engage in a lot of CV and article searches on various researchers in order to ascertain the usefulness of sources and ideas as I prepare for my dissertation. That Man is not someone I’d need or would ever use (for anything). However, my skills quickly exposed that not only does he offer hot garbage about narcissism, his educational credentials and journal publications are quite suspect. In short, he runs around calling himself a professor and a doctor leading people to assume he has some sort of high-level training in psychology. He doesn’t. The smoke is that he has some standing in academia commensurate with someone who is a noted public intellectual on psychology or psychiatry. Bull.
Basically, I’m a nerd who spends an unhealthy amount of time in libraries doing research necessitated by my goal of acquiring a new leash for my neck (or a climbing rope depending on how you look at it). I spend my hours with reliable journals (there’s “peer review” and then there’s “peer review”), researchers who have paid their dues, and people around the world who are part of the academic system. Getting schooled in what actual academics smell like. He ain’t it.
For real expertise on narcissism and psychopathy that’s unfettered by the requirements of the university/clinical regimes I go to HG. He’s above and outside of all that, so I’m not saying that a person needs the alphabet soup to have solid teaching and reliable information. Actually, I don’t know what our glorious host does for a living or in his personal life or what letters he has behind his name or not; you’d have to admit he’s more than qualified. HG occupies a singular position as the founder of a truly unique area of inquiry. It’s only that That Man you mention is putting up a front. Any university student trying to do research for her project, delving into the minutia of the stacks, who has too much familiarity with the fragrance of legit researchers (I really need to get outside in the sun) sees right off that his expert-on-narcissism pedigree is a phony front. Something stinks.
Rant over. I need a bath.
Hi Allison:
Thanks for the rant, I suspected as such, as he starts each video stating his creds.” “ The lady does protest too much … me thinks.”Lol I was curious. I have read others but obviously chose H.G. as the leader on the topic and for enjoyment. But what bothered me is Sam spent time attacking H.G. indirectly but obvious. Sam called him a con man and repeatedly said that empaths were self aggrandizing covert narcs and even once said empaths were psychopaths. I replied saying if you never met these empaths then how can you diagnose them? Can’t someone use the term empath for simply having empathy? I also said that many readers read all kinds of blogs and by attacking readers, you will lose readers. Like me. HG doesn’t care about that man. Good!
Hi Contagious.
‘repeatedly said that empaths were self aggrandizing covert narcs and even once said empaths were psychopaths.’
I’ve been reading SV’s book. He does suggest there is narcissism underneath the veneers of some who may appear to be empathic. But it’s a very specific group. He seems to mainly categorise people into those with empathy and those without. In that arrangement some people who may appear empathic may not actually be so.
‘Sam spent time attacking H.G. indirectly but obvious. Sam called him a con man’
I have only watched a few of his videos but I have looked to see if he refers to H.G. and I can’t find anything. Where might I look for this?
‘ I also said that many readers read all kinds of blogs and by attacking readers, you will lose readers. Like me.’
I don’t think he’s too bothered about things like that, Contagious.
AA, it will be impossible to find the video where Vaknin indirectly pointed at HG because it was a year ago and I’ve watched thousands of videos since and my watching history is long.
I’ve watched only a few of his videos as the algorithm pushed them into my feed. I’ve noticed that he was mirroring HG’s content for a while and I accidentally clicked on one video where he was ranting about false experts on narcissism who don’t have a degree in the subject like him and are not valuable. And within a short duration whilst he continued to talk about the actual topic of his video he smirked, mentioning a psychopath with his psycho-fans. There is only one psychopath creating content on narcissism and psychopathy and has devoted fans and supporters. I’m not aware of any other than HG and Vaknin is envious…
As YT continued to suggest his videos I had to explicitly click on “not interested” in the options and the suggestions are gone, thankfully.
The hypocrisy of criticising whilst using my content and terminology is expected of course. Plus, I have the better voice.
Better voice is an understatement, sir. Your mastery of the voice, timbre, clarity, nuances paired with distinct intent and unparalleled ability content — create an experience beyond compare. You make intelligence accessible with style, nobility and wit — just through sound! If the so-called experts can’t cope and are not flexible enough for recognition of your accuracy and ability — they lose out.
* * *
If You Go Into the Woods With HG — I knew you had a garden but that your house was next to the woods — how marvelous! I had ’my woods’ growing up and behind every tree was a magical portal waiting to be entered and adventures to begin! No place in the world can compare to the childhood woods! Adore!
Thank you, Jordyguin.
Annameel:
I agree. I doubt SV cares at all about me;)
Back at you friend! May the force be with you, laser beams up and blaring ! X
All I could think of is N Trump saying “ fake news.” And news today is often opposite in reporting facts of an event. Even our Supreme Court sees a different interpretation of Roe v Wade. It’s why kids today don’t believe anything the media says. My son will say to me “ who told you that, you need to really research what you read. You nailed it Jordy! Good analysis!
Hi, Contagious–
Calling HG a con man is surely projection on That Man’s part. What a fool.
Hi Jordy and Allison:
Jordy you hit the nail on the head so I don’t need to try to find what Sam said, it was obvious.
The term psychopath, sociopath and empath aren’t in the DSM. But there is professional use of the terms and Sam has specifically said that he thinks “most self aggrandizing so called empaths are covert narcs.” Once he actually said psychopaths and I reported it to HG who said that’s ridiculous.
Sam uses the term psychopath not in the DSM. So what does he mean by “empaths”. He clearly doesn’t use HG’s definition. It starts with empathy. Narcs and psychopaths lack empathy. That’s why I asked him, why can’t the word e-m-p-a-t-h just mean someone who has empathy? Simple question.
Everyone has the right to follow who they want or right not too. I choose to follow HG on the topic. I am not criticizing anyone who follows or likes Sam.
Dani–
I thought about what you wrote here:
“I like rules. Rules should be enforced. Rules sometimes need to be changed. And sometimes rules being broken can be understood. That doesn’t mean it should be rewarded. Too many people are being hurt by the growing number disregarding the rules. When people don’t follow rules or selectively enforce them…it’s more difficult for everyone.”
It brings me back to; for narcissists and psychopaths — fuel is the rule and control and power over others. For normals; rules which benefit their ego and their small empathy circle will find favour with them, other rules don’t apply. For narcissistic even less.
Empaths will follow rules even if they can’t clearly see behind those rules and if those rules are good for them and others or the environment. Not because empaths are dumb but because they can be lied to, manipulated by their empathy and guilt etc.
Empaths are self responsible and caring and they don’t need rules to figure out the minimum humane behaviour. It’s in their design. And yet those with absent empathy or erased empathy create rules for empaths to follow which are not benefiting the empath but all the others who are not self responsible, humane, logical.
I find rules irrational, deceptive and delusional, for instance in the economy, education, health system, military. They are not based on empathy and logic, but on control, exploitation and twisted logic of indifference.
I actually would love to read more about your (and other readers) thoughts on rules and what kind of rules there should be regarding the circumstance of having people who will fly under the radar of rules and break them in every way possible and pull down others with them who will follow their twisted rules.
Hello Jordy, as an attorney… we regularly challenge laws and rules. Interpreting them to the facts of a case and going up, down, over, under, sideways creating a position for our clients…it’s the job;)
Thank you, Contagious! Yes, this is what I meant, black is the new white and lies are the new truth, in an Upside Down where mirrors rule…
I know you’re the light on the frontline of the battlefield, not just in your profession but also privately! And you never lose your good side. May the force be with you, my love!!! Hugs!
Back at you! You are the same! Xxx
Contagious, thank you dear! I wish, but no. I admire the Carrier for their action mode, for the tangible change they can provide by going in and raiding the space and taking care of business… I almost don’t have that aspect. A woman in a grocery store ordered me recently to help her put a heavy crate with bottles into her shopping cart even though I’m quite slim visibly nor a Popeye; my internal response – Do I look like a carrier? Ask a strong man to help. – On the outside: “Back problems, I’m sorry.” And funny enough she turned around and asked a strong man who was very pleased to help her… I mean I would arrange, for a man in this case, to help her if I’d see that she struggled to ask one, but that’s it…
My mom shows a strong Carrier tendency sometimes. You remind me of her a lot, by physical appearance and by characteristics and life experiences (bright light shines wherever you enter the room and always positive and optimistic no matter what). I’m sometimes compelled to want to change my mom for her to stop carrying too much, but I realise that just as I would not want someone to make me carry stuff and try to change me, I shouldn’t want to change her… I just don’t want her to carry for the wrong people / ideas, since I learned more about the futility of it… Anyways, don’t kill your back ladies, ask a gentleman for their help, they don’t bite… aahm….bite them back if they do..?.. meh….bad advice…You know what I mean. Mwa!
Jordyguin,
If you don’t mind saying, what schools and/or cadres do you think you have?
As I recall, you hadn’t taken the EDC. Unless that’s changed, and I missed it?
Dani– I think; standard, savior, a bit of contagion (the sensitivity can become problematic but it is limited) a bit of geyser.
* * *
I thought about Trevor. I think he is an empath (super) but my estimation went around the corner. I can’t read men well, so I’d compare Doug (super), Andrew Gold (normal), Neil, Grumpy Sapper and how HG was with them. HG comes across differently with empaths, there is a greater chemistry, enjoyment and fun in general.
Hey Jordy:
Well I love you mom. Society expects so much of moms, doesn’t it? I mean what don’t we do with the house and children? Yet it’s a two income world and we do that too! And look at you! Your mom must be proud! And hell yeah, get that big ol strong man to help! They love it! ( so do I). My son is 24, and he tells me woman glare at him if he opens a door for them. Like it’s some insult! Why? I don’t get it. As a single mother, anything anyone does however small is so APPEECIATED! What’s wrong with these young girls? Feminism is equal opportunity, it does not exclude men providing common acts of kindness!!! Ugh!!!!
I agree that when HG is with an empath…it is more engaging. And the rumbly in his tumbly gets satisfied…
I think Trevor and Mr. Tudor are particularly engaging together. And Sam…but in a different way…and we know she’s A super magnet. I think Trevor might be my favorite when interacting with HG. He comes off as gentler toward Jenn. Have you listened to her interviews with him? they’re super good…and HG hinted at things…and the mystery of it! I want to know… Cataglyphis…
I agree, Contagious. I enjoy common acts of courtesy from people. I think there can be some context to it. But generally, I don’t see the condescending in it from most men that I hear women complaining about. He’s holding the door because you’re five steps behind him not because you’re a delicate flower who can’t do anything.
Dani, AA was guessing, I want to guess as well; I think you must have a significant amount of contagion and also a magnet cadre. People in real life must be drawn to you and perceive you as a confessional substitute…
***
I will search and listen to Jenn’s interview with HG, thank you!! Hints and mystery?! Yee-haw!
***
Trevor is a military man and I hope there will be more conversations with him!!! I want to understand this type of man, whether they are empaths or normals. But only in a conversation with HG because it’s his partaking in an exchange that makes the conversation most interesting! So, yes, more please!
Jordy,
One interview on Jenny’s channel:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0lEn5L4goZs
Jordy,
Second Jenn conducted interview of HG:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=l6NKNX2-wBc
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. It helps to learn the perspective of others who know HG’s work. Hoping for more soon about empaths. It’s interesting.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FG7L-scTBKU
I can neither confirm nor deny what schools and cadres are present within…
Dani, Jen’s questions were great! What caught my interest was of course “Inception” being a film HG enjoys watching!
Have you watched this film? What do you think of it?
***
Jenny — disappointed in the recent Q&A with HG, when mentioning that she was a comedian on stage and then failed to go along with a -spicy poontang- opportunity.
Instead of putting a breathy voice on and delivering her best sexy performance of this original term, she switched to “f*ck this, f*ck you” and reached her limits.
In comedy: you don’t reject, you play along and pile up adding on and on. You don’t interrupt the flow and make it all about yourself.
I applauded HG when he “me-me-me-me”-ed Jenny because it’s exactly what she did — she monopolised the time for a “big girl who acts like a little girl” – act, whilst praising herself for being able to make HG blush with her dirty tongue ability but then leaked miserably, wrapping up the Q&A bitterly.
HG on the contrary dealt with the situation most captivatingly.
What do you think it was on Jen’s part?
Emotional thinking? Narcissistic traits?
What was she trying to convince herself of, convince HG or her audience of?
Do you think she was aware of what went on with her?
Hi Jordyguin,
Have you watched this film? I haven’t seen Inception.
I was fascinated that HG’s interest in Antarctica for a visit. Antarctica is just a fascinating choice.
***
“disappointed in the recent Q&A with HG, when mentioning that she was a comedian on stage and then failed to go along with a -spicy poontang- opportunity.” — Fair enough. I went and had a relisten, paying attention to your observations. I generally am so captivated by whatever HG is saying and trying to think of follow-up questions that I don’t often notice the behaviours of others being off. My listening and relistening…it’s always about what HG is saying…and how HG sparkles differently with different people. It’s a fascinating
“HG on the contrary dealt with the situation most captivatingly.” — I have witnessed precious few instances where HG has not been utterly captivating.
“What was she trying to convince herself of, convince HG or her audience of?” Not sure.
“Do you think she was aware of what went on with her?” I don’t know. That’s an interesting question.
Jordyguin–
I didn’t realize that Jenn had posted a two part interview with HG that I hadn’t yet heard. I listened yesterday. That was the one you were referencing. There were some good moments and good questions. There were some moments I didn’t care for…and I agree with you…there was “big girl acting like a little girl” for a period of time.
If Jenn decides she wants to…it would be interesting to hear what her EDC results and response to her results are in the form of a conversation with HG. I have ideas based on the interviews and the other videos of hers that I’ve watched. I’d like to know how accurate those views are…with the limited amount of observation that I have…no in person and such.
So many feels from hearing some of what HG said and the timber and emotion…he sounded kind of like the Ultra supervillain (<–That's a compliment. It was amazing!)…no words…too much. So much.
I wish HG would tell us when there are interviews with him on other channels that won't appear on his channel. I hate to miss anything that HG has participated in.
I am also intrigued by this image of HG painted as Napoleon…and I love that. I want to see this painting too…
Hey Jordy, you and so many others here are so damn good at guessing classes and cadres. I don’t. And I get almost all not all of his narcissist, psychopath readings wrong. If a brutal killing, I think ok psychopath. Yet, I get a good reading in what they feel. It’s different. Lucy Letby to me is a person who feels overall empty, it’s a problem for her. She tries and tries and tries but deep inside she falls out short. She doesn’t feel attractive or lovable. She fakes it with friends. She wants friends but she feels no connection. They just validate her projection of herself. Her narrative. But they don’t fill the empty that consumes her. The empty consumes her. She is not a greater narc. She feels her parents expectations and she hates it while wanting to please them. Pleasing them makes her feel good. That somewhat fills her for awhile like no one else can. hence …when she saw those babies, and her control over them, she felt awakened. That was feeling. Awakened. . It filled her up in some way. She was in a unique position. She was special. They were HERS. And after killing them, she glowed inside and wanted to share as she knew it would fascinate others,not to share of course that she killed them but to get an audience to tell, and I think she felt a one upmanship at knowing they don’t know I killed them ha ha ha. I know something they don’t. Ha ha ha. I think she felt nothing about the babies. Nothing at all. But I see her as a sad, empty petulant little girl who has no idea who she is. I guess people’s home, relations, outlook, emotions and political view etc…. Take Trevor. He is moral, honest, humble, giving and he has integrity. If in a relationship, he is fair and rational and loving but I bet he watches sports a lot, and he doesn’t like to be challenged. I feel he sees himself as the ultimate decision maker. If a dad, involved but teaches rules. He is rule oriented ( unlike me, a rebel). In the military he was well liked, but some found him to be a prick because of his rule following. Others loved his loyalty. They were bros. That’s why others disliked his. Bros v bros. Clans. He sleeps on the right side of the bed. He has a nice middle class home which he upkeeps well. He is proud of his country and don’t say boo to a goose against it. He will stick up to his standards but if questioned by authority such as a judge he will submit. He respects authority. He laughs easily, is loved by many. His weakness like mine is his pride. He can be stubborn. He is defensive and quick to anger if the right subject. . I could go on…if I go deeper… I feel he is troubled. It’s a whirlwind in his stomach not his head. His head is clear. He sees clear but there is something deep within him that churns. He feels this restlessness inside and tries to overcome it with hard work and good decisions. But it gnaws at him. This is outside war conflict. That’s different and that affected his head. It’s his essence. He has always had a restlessness unsettling feeling inside. He doesn’t show it. But it’s there. It’s below the surface. It effects his digestive system. I am not an idiot psychicl nor trying to pretend to be. But that’s how I read people. I am stuck here at this level despite years of HGs work. Not so able to put it into classes and cadres. But this is how I do it with everyone. I could be completely wrong. I don’t know. Maybe some of you are better at applying these facts to HGS definitions. But I had one IPSS narc in my life and ASPD. Now the ASPD was a stable family man. (Skip the divorce part where he was scary), but a decent father. Crazy right? The LMN , I wanted to believe. I knew it wasn’t right but I forged ahead on words not acts. My best friend met him and said, I like him but he isn’t normal. She is a normal. And she was right. My ET got in the way even with her advice. Plus I think he has other co-morbidities beyond narcissism. He was placed under government care last year. He is paranoid, thinks he is mind controlled and delusional. It’s sad actually. HG seems to know a lot about other psychiatric disorders. I don’t.
Contagious awee thank you re mom love, she’d love you as well!!! You could be twins…
***
Your reading of people must be coming from your contagion side, the way you describe it, it’s how HG described it in the relevant video. Constantly attuned to the emotional states of others…
***
You’re too kind but 99,9% of my guesses are not accurate at all, same goes for my analytical estimations, sigh. Actually you’ve nailed it with ’a blind squirrel finds a nut eventually as well’, hehe.
Feelings and emotions bury my intuition and instincts most of the time… As to rationality, I try to understand if I would even qualify for having it…
Hugs!
Jordy: dear, I hate to say it but you are wrong. Wrong wrong. I see so much intuition here by you it’s blinding. I was joking about the squirrels! I think the kind helpful empaths here at one time or another followed their hearts and got ensnared. Didn’t know better. But the rest of the time, we follow our hearts and help people and let’s hope make a better world. Sorry but nothing beats kindness in my book. Cold hard logic is not always kind. What works we want to keep ve in without kindness? How many die because they feel line, no kindness? Do we want the only people left on earth to be those without compassion? To love be only among my sharks? Please. Swords up and Jordy, you have intuition in spades girl! X
Contagious: thank you, love! I agree nothing beats kindness and compassion and yes, cold hard logic can’t always be kind but it would be needed to demask emotional thinking and thus assist kindness and compassion to persist, by protecting the kind individual from unnecessary involvements where kindness would be diminished and compassion’s purpose clouded.
It doesn’t mean the replacement of compassion and kindness by cold hard logic. It only means to not get involved where compassion and kindness would be misdirected and abused causing more harm than good.
Human beings can be mistakenly compassionate whilst led in tandem with emotional thinking as the flag of compassion is swung by many manipulators and used as pressure points on people who possess empathy.
* * *
Regarding the voice of intuition or foresight — it is a very quiet voice and it may only appear once and most likely don’t repeat itself. It flickers up like a single flame and goes out.
The voice of emotional thinking is more of a constant burning fire and I only discover later on of the accuracy of the single flame of intuition.
The differentiation of the voices is what it’s all about to achieve.
Dear Jordy:
Interesting what you said about intuition. I agree about ET. I know for a fact you are kind. Duh, obvious. But intuition? My guess you have it? Auras? Perception? I know I do but I overrode it with my ex. Perhaps it was the best sex ever. ???? My best friend said it when she met my soon to be ex husband. She said “ there’s something about him that is not normal.” I knew it . I knew it. Guilty. I ignored it thinking at the time 12 years ago, I could fix it with my love. Guess what? I did for a time and in some ways it worked. He worked, he drove, he quit drinking. I got him a guitar and guitar lessons. His mother told him he couldn’t drive, he couldn’t play guitar. ANYTHING including me was a threat if it meant independence from her. She won. Not that I could have but he is completely broken. Reality became even a challenge. But I think intuition is strong and our ETblocks it like my example. I usually pick empaths but I married an ASPD and a narc so best I stick with a companion lol
Also Jirdyguin: Elon Musk wrote about the ambrosial hour between 3-5 am. He said it was when the realms were thinnest and we were most creative and could see auras better.:
I’m pleased you enjoyed the documentary, Contagious!
“Ambrosial hour between 3-5 am” — I’ve heard of it too but by another name. How cool, Elon mentioning it, interesting!
My dreaming-pal and I asked ChatGPT all sorts about dreaming and its knowledge is still very basic…wikipedia level…I guess there is not that much information put online for ChatGPT to find.
We’ll see what the future holds! There is much unknown to be discovered! Much love to you, dear! ✨💓
TS, that’s so interesting!! I viewed Blare through a different lens. But your lens makes sense too if she were/is a narcissist by your assessment.
This is how I saw her.
Appearance — Well groomed in her own identity and style and showing respect – attending an audience at the virtual palace of the Ultra – in her best.
Premier O Toole — In accordance with the exercise of taking on the responsibility of a nation as its leader or architect.
Gasser — Grandmother’s maiden name; paying tribute to someone dear to her who survived(?) WW2 and in accordance with her weapon of choice – sleeping gas.
Duality — In accordance with her personality and diagnosis (she shared in her first conversation).
Neuschwanstein — Here I don’t get the connection because this castle was built by a dreamer King who spent all his money on fairy tales, castles, art and not on wars, conflicts or military (his military hated him for it.)
National anthem, flag, candy, dogs, easter, christianity — All personal preferences just as others chose their personal preferences for these categories.
Flirting and mirroring — If it was there, I didn’t see it. I saw a relaxed and pleased female (a longstand follower/client if I understood correctly from the first conversation) who authentically conversed with HG. And HG offering and helping where she’d struggle for the right word or meaning. Her agreeing on where HG summarized so they could move on.
HG for defence — She wants the best for her nation, why not. (But HG is a King of his own world, so she didn’t think till the end.)
Chancellor herself “I don’t trust anyone else.” — Because she’s been through experiences which turned her into hard candy.
Bugs Bunny and Co — Childlike; it helps her to turn off the ’world’ (worries) as she touched upon. Understandably, cartoons are a light distraction and help with mood regulation.
Liechtenstein — The Royal Family has a very good relationship with their people. A very interesting country, she just didn’t expand on it further but placed the focus on money. She sees money as the solution to all problems, which is valid, money can solve a lot.
What followed after I understood it was her personal political views, beliefs and conclusions based on her understanding and knowledge, fueled by her personality traits and emotionality, I suspect a savior and geyser as cadre (if an empath). Her passion is wrapped into the cultural influence, which cultivated narcissistic tendencies being viewed as okay or even honorable. The culture is filled with violence, fear, fight and conflict, which reflect in her motto “Live by the sword and die by the sword” and “Eye for an eye” and so on. In her first conversation with HG, Blare mentioned that she would even switch to support TOW against Harry when they divorce, because Blare is even more offended by his behavior: free speech assassination. So she is driven by wanting to bring justice to the world (through aggressive means by fighting for it..?). This whole part is indeed twisted and extreme. But if she is surrounded by these tendencies all the time through media, culture, religion and real events it would reflect in her output.
I didn’t run her through a narcissistic or normal assessment however, I don’t know why I opted for an empath right away. Despite the extreme stuff… Gotta try a different lens…
Hey Jordy,
Thank you for sharing your thoughts on it too. Yes, it is interesting.
I think the first point we should bear in mind is that as HG has often told us, to establish narcissism we need to observe repeated behaviours over an extended period of time.
Clearly we aren’t viewing any of the interviewees in the real world or over an extended period. We do need to learn though. We do need to assess and evaluate so that we become used to going to the evidence and in terms of evaluation I do think this series provides an opportunity for us to do that.
What I have noticed, when going through the exercise myself and also reading the ideas of other people here on the blog, is that one of the toughest things to do is to remove personal bias. So, as an example, I happen to agree with Blair’s statement about what she would do with child molesters, murderers etc. at least, I agree with the sentiment, need for vengeance etc. This common ground, this agreement, an idea that I sympathise with or relate to, has the potential to influence my view and cloud my judgement. I find it very hard to remain objective in terms of classification because I’m suddenly biased. Essentially I ‘want’ the interviewee to be one thing or the other.
So for me, I listen to the policies etc but I try very hard to remove my own agreement or disagreement as really, the ‘me’ part is irrelevant. All that my own feelings will do is bias my opinion one way or the other.
I agree, several interviewees place their own personal likes or dislikes on their flag for example. A narcissist can perform the same action as a non narcissist as we know, but the reasons for the action are different. So the only way really to get round this I think, is by taking the indicators for narcissism as a whole, throughout the entirety of the interview and establishing whether there are enough to conclude that the person is a narcissist. Once that conclusion is established, we can then look at every action through the lense of narcissism and narcissism only. So the personal aspects of Blair’s flag might represent the various aspects of her narcissism whereas the personal aspects on let’s say, Stephanie Sidney’s flag, represent something different. I agree though, both represent a personal element they just have different relevance.
One of us sees one thing, another of us might see another, but in many ways, it’s the process that’s important, the going to the evidence. In my view it’s the process that is most important for us to practice, because ultimately, when we can assess behaviours over an extended period of time and in a real life scenario, it’s the process that will provide the certainty needed to keep ourselves safe.
You made me laugh when you spoke about Avid Gardener, we are entirely in sync with that one and for the similar reasons!
Funnily enough, I found it hard to relate to Stephanie Sidley. She is a far far nicer person than me! Even that is bias though. But, the funny part about that is that whilst listening to that interview, my dog was snoring peacefully at the side of me. He is a rescue dog. I rescued him from a kill shelter in Nashville. He was dumped at night in a pen outside the shelter. People dump dogs at night so they don’t need to bother with paperwork. He had two weeks left before he would be euthanised. He’s scruffy and he’s a mutt. He also pulled his paw last weekend. I spent the whole weekend carrying him upstairs and downstairs, inside and outside, on and off the couch. He’s a heavy boy, around the weight and size of a big Alsatian. So on the one hand I would say Stephanie wasn’t anything like me, I couldn’t identify, but on the other…!
I found your thoughts really interesting, thank you for responding Jordy.
Xx
Hi Truthseeker:
I agree Stephanie is a lovely human and I would add “ very Californian.” BUT don’t you think the world would eat her up? I don’t think empathy and strength and power are mutually exclusive. Think of the strong empaths like Harriet Tubman ( HG confirmed), and others who I could list but keeping my comment brief. There are powerful empaths… but that’s what I was thinking. What a great human Steph is… but oh boy, this crazy world … could she handle it?
Hi Contagious,
I know what you are driving at. Nice people seem to get taken advantage of in this world. I suppose it depends on friends family and support network as well as avoiding narcissists. Even a narcissistic romantic partner would likely do damage. It sounds as if that family unit is close and extended so with luck she will take guidance and advice and live a trouble free life.
Thank you, he’s an old boy now. Has been with me through the best of times and worst of times. I appreciate every day I have left with him beside me. I won’t deal well with the loss of him.
Xx
Oh and congrats on the rescue! They are little angels!
My English bulldog Scouser was 13.5 which is long for the breed when we had to say goodbye. He had dementia and great trouble walking but he could eat! lol. He would bark at the walls and the vet told me “ you don’t want to be too early but you don’t want to be too late. They have such short little lives and they give in immeasurable joy! I have puppies now. Inspector Clouseau just got fixed. My home is filled with 7 doggies and I love it BUT not keeping the puppies. 3 of the 4 sold cheaply to neighbors! Keep my vets advice in mind. It’s soooooo hard! Xxxx
Thank you Contagious, I will.
You cracked me up with “Inspector Clouseau just got fixed”. Cone of shame!
Xx
TS,
Nancy’s video was my first exposure to the Sidley twins, although I’d seen them mentioned. My first impression while watching that video was that Stephanie might be a narcissist. Then, after I listened to her answers i felt as if she had more overall empathy than her sister. But I’d be unsurprised if I found out her empathy was in the normal range.
Nice is subjective term, I guess. But on balance, based on the evidence I’ve seen, I consider you the nicer person.
Hi Annamel,
I’m hopeless with compliments but I appreciate yours so thank you.
I have straight hair. I often look at women with naturally curly hair and think how lovely it would be to have those natural curls. I’m not envious, I just think how lovely curly hair is. Something I don’t have.
I think I’m a bit similar with empaths. I see an element I don’t have in my own make up maybe, think how lovely it is etc.
I don’t have any Geyser, not a single drop. It might be the Geyser element that translates to me as ‘nicer’. I can see that empathy, whereas I don’t really see my own. Yet on paper, I also can’t deny the similarities like my rescue dog and Stephanie’s own comments about rescues. I should perhaps not say nicer, but instead just say, ‘different’.
It’s funny, I wondered about Nancy too. I think had Nancy been more separate in the line up I would see her more clearly, but I did wonder if Nancy was a normal. I think it’s because to me, she seemed calmer, quieter and less demonstrative than Stephanie. If they had been further apart I would have found it easier I think. Back to back threw me a little.
Xx
Hi TS,
I appreciate your further thoughts. It’s interesting – I don’t see geyser as having any bearing on niceness. If I felt any empathic school or cadre had a bearing on it I’d see it as magnet. I see many posts from you where you take an interest in others and show care and support. And you are never mean.
TS,
I thought the Sidleys were both empaths. Mr. Tudor even remarked of Nancy in the first interview…”Oh so empathic” after Nancy in This/That chose cats specifically so cats wouldn’t be “left out.” I think they are different types of empath. I find Nancy to be higher in narcissistic traits than Stephanie. I watched some of the early videos of theirs. Based on recollections they shared, it seemed that Nancy was not fooled by TOW but Stephanie was at first. That made me think Nancy might be higher in ?Super? while Stephanie might be ?Standard?…I don’t know though. Their cadres would also be different. (And if they are both empaths–it would be interesting to know their results because roughly equivalent upbringings and almost 100% identical genetics [random genetic mutations likely exist]) What caused the differences in school/cadre, assuming both are empaths or even if one is an empath and one is a normal? Though normal is also possible.
It’s interesting that you said that you find those with geyser to be nicer than you (who have no geyser). I generally feel suspicious of people who are more emotionally effervescent in person around me. I find many people who register to me as too expressive to be insincere and needy. I expect a level of bubbly from YouTubers. Even Mr. Tudor has moments of higher expressiveness (that don’t feel put on as a show). Some do feel like it’s all part of the performance. I am curious about the context behind what was driving that level of fuel expenditure…was he well fueled prior/was there something about the person in general he was talking to (if it was an interview/conversation) that brought this type of response out?
Hi Annamel,
Actually yes, Magnet would likely have a bearing on the niceness quotient! I always think of Magnet as being more funny than anything else because I associate the school with Alexis here on the blog. Alexis is a funny gal! I see what you are driving at there though.
I think I like the honesty of emotion, the heart on your sleeve approach that the Geysers have naturally. That might be what translates to me as ‘nice’. Or, ‘the gentle soul’ element. My dad is a gentle soul, I’d love to see his empathic breakdown. He’d never take the test though, it would be a mixture of embarrassment and self deprecation if I suggested him taking the EDC. I should really apply myself to working out his schools and cadres myself. He definitely has a large slice of Contagion but I’d have to set my own attachment aside almost, to objectively arrive at the other aspects.
Xx
Hi Dani,
Listening to the twins back to back did throw me a bit as they are definitely different. I also thought about the fact they are twins, so genetically very similar plus similar environment and experiences. I then realised that that aspect could easily be blown out of the water if I thought about HG’s family so I decided I should concentrate and look at both individuals separately!
In terms of effervescence (great word) it’s possible that your wariness of that might be due in part to an association of effervescence with Mid Range sugar. One would influence your view of the other. I was influenced against Super Empaths due to a proliferation of narcs in the comments section claiming they were Super Empaths and could take down Greaters and how their narcy traits were dark powers for good etc etc. it turned me off Super Empaths for ages. I still have to fight down that negative view and remind myself where that came from and what the reality of that school actually is. Maybe you have something similar going on, or maybe your personal preference is simply for people slightly calmer! I do love the idea of Geyser and enjoy seeing it on the blog, but I’m also removed on the blog. In real life, if I’m honest, my friends are calmer. Lots of things feed in to perception I think and self perception more so than anything else. Empaths are often their own worst critics.
In terms of HG’s effervescence in certain interviews, difficult to say, though I think it would be fair to state that mirroring will play a part in that, subconscious and conscious.
Xx
‘I always think of Magnet as being more funny than anything else because I associate the school with Alexis here on the blog. Alexis is a funny gal!’
I agree she can be funny. But I don’t think that’s why she’s a magnet. She’s very strong at recognising how to approach conversations and other people. She’s got great social skills, people skills. She identifies, either consciously or unconsciously, what would make people happy or relaxed, then applies that when interacting.
‘I think I like the honesty of emotion, the heart on your sleeve approach that the Geysers have naturally.’
I might interpret this cadre a bit differently to you as well. I don’t see Geysers as being more honest- just as more demonstrative of emotions. While I’d be be more likely to say ‘I feel happy’ rather than jump up and down with glee (I can do this but the situation’d have to be amazingly wonderful) I don’t know if that makes me less honest, just different in the way I express it. I value authenticity a lot. If I think an emotion is genuine I don’t mind its expression (although someone constantly expressing it might wear me out). But if I get a feeling it’s a bit superficial, I struggle to see the positives in it.
‘That might be what translates to me as ‘nice’. Or, ‘the gentle soul’ element.’
I also associate gentleness with niceness. Your dad sounds nice. You have that gentle approach as well, I think.
I like geyser/magnet manifestation a lot and it has to do with the authenticity and honesty of emotion. Which is not to say that less colourful manifestations of emotions are not authentic or honest… Superficiality can hide behind a wild expressed mask of emotionality just as superiority complexes behind the mask of calm or nice…
In drama school it was like a surgery of emotions when for instance the exercise was to bundle all geyser emotions just into the expression of the eyes, because the camera captures the eyes instead of big gestures… Also small and gentle gestures had to contain lots of emotions in them for the camera and all had to go into the eyes and apply minimalism of gestures or words….
On stage there are no “eyes” for the audience to connect with, so the whole body and voice must express and deliver emotion till the last row in a theatre…. Captivate the audience with the whole presence…. and it’s fascinating that some high functioning narcissists are so good at it…
Also why I love the Ultra so much; because he reveals about needing true emotions in every manifestation there is, but he is also weary of the vulnerability the emotions present….
Hi Annamel,
I agree with what you stated about Alexis and her approach to conversations. I certainly wasn’t meaning to sell her short there, more to state that her humour is what stands out to me most. She has cracked me up time after time since I arrived on the blog. Alexis was also one of the empaths I spoke to first ( out of those who still remain) and that sticks in my mind too.
The honesty of emotion aspect of Geyser empaths for me is that they show the emotion. I am more guarded I think, that’s not to say I don’t feel it or that I’m not honest with it, more that I’m less demonstrative. I find that side to Geyser’s refreshing I think, honest in that they reveal to the world what they are feeling. I suppose when I do jump up and down with excitement, someone would now that I’m particularly elated so there is an upside to being less demonstrative. In fuel terms though I should be a less attractive appliance!
If you like me, you’d absolutely love my dad haha! Funnily enough, empath friend is very similar in feel to my dad. He took the EDC, his strongest traits were healer fixer and by quite a way. He was far higher in love devotee too. That might also feed in to the interpreted ‘niceness’ aspect, for me at least.
Xx
Hi TS!
I would agree that in terms of families, it’s quite variable…but Mr. Tudor’s family is not the same case. None of them are identical twins. But yes, there is still so much room for variation in what can occur.
“I was influenced against Super Empaths due to a proliferation of narcs in the comments section claiming they were Super Empaths and could take down Greaters and how their narcy traits were dark powers for good etc etc. it turned me off Super Empaths for ages.” — I thought you were ?majority?very significant? super…did you disagree with or dislike that initial classification then? I would enjoy watching one of the midrange “super empaths” in conversation with Mr. Tudor…I think it would go something like…
This: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/-kFxEajJ5kI
Mr. Tudor is played by the Ram
The Midranger is played by the goose.
And a Super Empath is played by Charlotte…she really gets even with a rat at the end of this scene, too!
or This: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PpC4a6jCxSA
Mr. Tudor is played by the fancy fellow in stripes…
The midranger is played by the follow with all the coils…
“Maybe you have something similar going on, or maybe your personal preference is simply for people slightly calmer!” — I think a variety of things are possible. I would be curious to talk to someone with a lot of geyser…and see what they are like on the blog or in person. I think they are likely quite different from midrangers who claim to care–which I would agree is likely what I’ve more commonly dealt with.
“In terms of HG’s effervescence in certain interviews, difficult to say, though I think it would be fair to state that mirroring will play a part in that, subconscious and conscious.” — I think that’s true…I’ve also seen rare cases where Mr. Tudor comes off as the more animated person. I’m curious about those.
Dani–
I tend to think that most young children are geysers (until they are forbidden to express their emotions openly because “good girls and good boys are quite and then mommy/daddy will love them”, and then I watched a documentary on Japanese children who are calm and don’t cry at all and there are courses to make them cry because it as an important element for immune system development, so they say…
Hi Dani,
I absolutely love Jungle Book! I had to watch it over and over when my son was little. It also takes me back to the kitchen table when I was a kid myself. I’m sat next to my dad colouring in a huge jungle book scene that he had drawn for me on roll out poster paper. I can see the picture still and us both sat there side by side, colouring in haha! The guy in the stripes is very HG and Kaa is an excellent depiction of Midrange I agree!
You’ll laugh now. When I watched the Sidley twins I didn’t notice they were identical! Shows where my attention focuses and where it doesn’t!
Yes, Super is in my school make up. I have other schools in there too though. When I got the EDC back I disliked that one school, was fine with everything else. I saw myself more as a Contagion empath.
Xx
Hi Truthseeker,
“The guy in the stripes is very HG and Kaa is an excellent depiction of Midrange I agree!” — Especially when he’s got a knot in his tail…What do you think King Louis is? And side note…I’d love to hear Mr. Tudor sing Shere Khan’s line from the vulture’s song at the end, “That’s what friends are for.” I also think that who Shere Khan becomes in the series “Tale Spin” is much more like Mr. Tudor. (He runs a successful business and is just magnificent…cold, calculating, brilliant…sketchy, and he never gets caught in the sketchiness and he’s unflappable.)
“You’ll laugh now. When I watched the Sidley twins I didn’t notice they were identical! Shows where my attention focuses and where it doesn’t!” — It’s all good. The conversation content is where the learning occurs.
What do you think made you want to identify more with the contagion aspect at that time?
Hi Dani,
Haha, I’m not sure about king Louis. Upper Lesser Type A maybe?
I still feel more aligned with my Contagion element even now. I think it’s because I feel that I rely on it and I would be devastated to lose it. I would give up my lead school before my Contagion element.
I do accept now that the EDC is correct but I still feel disappointed by how my lead school is perceived and seen as somehow ‘desirable’. People seem to discuss it more in terms of the narcissistic traits and overlook the fact that if anything is ‘desirable’ about that school it’s actually the operation of the empathic traits, rather than the narcissistic.
Xx
Truthseeker6157,
“Haha, I’m not sure about king Louis. Upper Lesser Type A maybe?” — I could agree there. He is physically aggressive towards one monkey who threatens his control repeatedly. My favorite character in the movie is Winifred…she’s got some empathy going on…”Now just a minute, you pompous old windbag.”
“I still feel more aligned with my Contagion element even now. I think it’s because I feel that I rely on it and I would be devastated to lose it. I would give up my lead school before my Contagion element.” — Would you want to be more contagion? My observations is that people view the contagion in one of two ways…
“They’re magical. They’re unicorns…” Wholly wonderful or “They’re unstable. They’re off in lala land…” Wholly scornful.
I don’t think either of those is particularly helpful in understand contagion empath/empathy. I’ve seen people who are very grateful not to have that element and people who say they do (and HG then says they’re not a contagion empath).
“People seem to discuss it more in terms of the narcissistic traits and overlook the fact that if anything is ‘desirable’ about that school it’s actually the operation of the empathic traits, rather than the narcissistic.” — How do you view the operation of empathic traits as differing in the super school from standard, contagion, and codependent? I understand it…supers are quicker to stand up for themself or others. I see no reason why that standing up is necessarily a corruption of narcissistic traits as opposed to the brightness of an empathic trait. Assuming the super empath isn’t in an abusive situation…I think a brightly shining empathic trait is more likely the reason for the behavior–with a narc trait giving it a little pep…maybe…I don’t know. I understand why people who have been abused want to believe that they are able to stand up to the abuser or want to see the strength. I do think there’s an over-emphasis on the narcissistic traits.
My observations are that people respond most energetically to super and contagion. They are the two rarest schools (in terms of a majority finding). I find it interesting how you don’t respond positively to the super…when I see less condemnation for them than contagion or codependent. Do you find the higher interest in the narcissistic traits of the super empath to be a criticism of the super school? What draws me most to the super school is my perception that they have the highest self-esteem and confidence of all the empaths. I know there is more to it than that. I feel like they have an easier time saying no than other schools…which doesn’t make it easy. It doesn’t mean that they aren’t affected by emotional thinking just as much as others…
Query…
Do you think that contagions and super empaths more problematic to more schools of narcissists in general than codependents and standards?
The following sums up the Super Empath for me:
Kindness is the go-to, but Fuck off is the wingman.
Hi Dani,
Would I want to be more Contagion? I don’t think so no. Not now that I understand what full Contagions have to deal with. I wouldn’t want to walk down a supermarket aisle for example and be able to feel the emotion of every person I walked past. I can’t do that. I find crowds ‘noisy’ emotionally. It feels like an emotional ‘pressing in’ but I can’t separate out the emotions of people in a crowd, it’s just a glut of pressure. For me I have to lock on to the person I talk to and then after a while they ‘come online’ and I can feel them as they talk. Once someone has come online I can feel them more easily in future interactions. It’s that part I would miss. I would feel like I was flying blind if that was taken away from me.
How do I see the empathic traits operating differently to other schools? It’s the going of the extra mile in terms of empathic behaviours I think. I’m recoiling from answering this but to give a single example. My empath friend who was ensnared. He was actually a fairly new friend at the time. He started telling me about his ensnarement and I recognised the signs. I invested a lot of time explaining what he had to do and why. So he escaped but he had escaped before and been hoovered back in several times. One of the kindest people I have ever met, big strong guy, utterly broken, utterly on his knees, a sitting duck for when she hoovered which she did, several times, often by proxy.
The extra mile came in where I made myself entirely available to him. Day or night, if the phone pinged I answered. Hours and hours spent trawling HG’s videos to answer his questions, make him understand, build his defences. Hours together deleting reels of photos whilst he told me where they were taken and what had happened during, before and after, me explaining what it all meant. Watching him battle crippling ET teaching him how to control it. Hours of listening to him upset and battling. Heartbreaking. Far more vulnerable than me.
It took a full year of daily contact before I felt he could withstand a hoover if it came, before he started to look consistently better. Maybe others would do that for a new friend too, I don’t know but that’s what going the extra mile means to me. I’d do it for anyone that came to me in the same position as he did. I’ve done it before although less knowledgeably and I’ve no doubt I’ll do it again. Why? Well, the empathic traits of heal and fix, compassion etc but those empathic traits work in conjunction with my narcissistic traits. So, defiance for example. There was no way she was winning and getting him back, drawing him back into that shit storm that was the narcissistic dynamic. He deserved better and I was only too happy to deal her some real damage. I dedicated the time for him, the pain he was going through was horrific to me but I also wanted to beat her at the same time. I took pleasure in her being wounded, pleasure when her hoovers bounced off his wall of No Contact and she started trying proxy hoovers. The empathic traits work in conjunction with the higher narcissistic traits not necessarily separate from. It’s the empathic traits though that are most important the majority of the time and it’s the empathic traits, the going the extra mile that is most important in terms of other people. So when you mention the narc traits giving a little pep, yes, kind of, at least for me.
I agree that people respond more energetically to the Super and Contagion school. CoD gets a type of condemnation I agree there also. Again, this is what makes me dislike my own school. ALL schools of empath are beautiful in their own way. All of them have advantages and disadvantages. CoD empaths are amongst the kindest warmest and most interesting amongst us. They have a lot to deal with though when ensnared. Otherwise, I think they are beautiful.
The disadvantage of my school for me is that I’m repeatedly disappointed in people. Why? Because they don’t go the extra mile for me as I do for them. Going back to empath friend. I met his mum. She thanked me for everything I did and continue to do for her son. (He and I still discuss parts of his ensnarement, I still forward videos to keep his ET in check and reinforce his defences.) My son was struggling with his English GCSE in school. She is an ex English teacher. She wanted to repay me for helping her son by helping mine. They had three lessons before her husband fell and hurt is hip. She cancelled the lessons. I understand that, I understand why. She never picked the lessons back up though. If that was me, and I had committed myself to helping, those lessons would have been set in stone even if I had to sleep two hours less each night in order to stick to my obligation. She didn’t do that. I was disappointed. I absolutely understand it, but I was still disappointed because it didn’t measure up to what I would have done if the tables were reversed. So that’s a downside of going the extra mile. People, in general, disappoint me. Every school has a downside or downsides. It frustrates me that certain schools are seen as desirable. It frustrates me also that what we hear most is about supernovas and line drawing when it’s the empathy that’s most important. I do get it. I understand why people want to show they stood up for themselves. You don’t need to be of that school to demonstrate that though. You just need access to the right information, which is here, in plentiful supply.
In terms of self esteem and confidence. I’m confident on some things, not confident on others. My self esteem wasn’t damaged by my ensnarements so yes, probably, it isn’t high, it just didn’t erode. My empathy didn’t erode either during ensnarement. The aftermath of the worst ensnarement just made me deathly sad, it didn’t erode my empathy. That might be just a me thing rather than a school thing. I turned the empathy erosion inwards, was mean to myself not to anybody else. Even narcs, I tend to just dismiss and leave. I don’t waste my time point scoring once it’s over but I am very quick to dismiss.
In terms of being problematic to more schools of narcissists. Apparently the Lessers avoid that school as they find it harder to control. Midrangers can struggle once devaluation starts. Greaters can see it as more of a challenge so might actually seek us out. Again every upside has a down, nobody wants to be ensnared by a Greater. We might ship out sooner but we often don’t come away unscathed even from a Midranger. Cadre has a lot to do with that too I think.
I’m not intending to criticise here, just, highlight a different side to that school that is often overlooked.
Xx
Haha NA,
Could you not have said that earlier and saved me all that typing?!
Xx
NarcAngel,
Now…When I think of super empath, I will connect them to Bucky the Squirrel…
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=J0aTygRmubo
And
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1MNllfr6wVY
So cute and sweet…till the narc starts it.
Hey TS and Annamel, ah thanks for the compliments. They really made me smile. I love all the different cadres of empaths, each has such different and valuable traits no wonder the narcs saw a green light!
I noticed a comment re SEs saying they could take greaters down. I don’t think that’s true, at least not in my case. Whilst I will respond by punishing it’s never in an attacking way and only ever defensive. I’m quick to flick my hair to the left, the right and not give off fuel. Unless I want to of course. I think we empaths don’t have the capacity to think in the same way as an N. I’ve definitely learned a lot from HG in terms of working out what someone else’s motive may be but I have to think about it based on what I’ve learned. Before I was hair flicking and clueless.
I hope you guys are all keeping well. It’s so lovely to see people’s comments popping up more regularly.
Hi Alexis,
Well if I had known you were going to read it I’d never have said it.
(Haha!)
You’re welcome, lovely to see you. Xx
Annaamel–
What made you think that Stephanie was a narcissist at first? I didn’t pick up on anything from either twin that made me think narcissist.
Hi Dani. I’ll answer your question but I first want to ask you one.
You say this: ‘Even Mr. Tudor has moments of higher expressiveness … I am curious about the context behind what was driving that level of fuel expenditure…was he well fueled prior/was there something about the person in general he was talking… that brought this type of response out?’
Do you see emoting (of any kind) as him spending the fuel he’s taken in?
I think I saw Stephanie as a bit narcissistic during Nancy’s video based on her body language, which if recall included some preening gestures and looking at herself on the screen. Apart from thinking about people’s words and perspectives, I do look at body language. I look at what their eyes and hands are doing, their posture, their facial expressions. I don’t tend to consider demeanour (like you, I’m a bit distrustful of surface level affects and find them unreliable and possibly insincere). But things they do that they may not realise they are doing – I probably home in on that.
Hi annaamel,
Do I see HG emoting as him expending fuel? Yes. To an extent. Mr. Tudor has said that a narc can burn through all their fuel in the midst of heated fury. That’s a lot of emoting.
I don’t know if this is accurate, and if I’m wrong, I hope that Mr. Tudor corrects me. I tend to think of fuel expenditure by narcissists along the same lines as fuel intake. It takes more fuel to have an in-person verbal altercation with the IPPS (BUT more fuel is coming in than going out). There is an article on narcsite about Mr. Tudor antagonized Hannah. He is almost completely calm until the end when he shouts in her face and Hannah is so upset that she screams herself to the point of losing her voice.
It takes less fuel to respond to an obnoxious person leaving obsessive and inappropriate comments (as supporters of some have done) than an altercation with the IPPS. He also is not taking much in from them. It takes zero fuel to ignore them; it’s just negative fuel intake. Yes, there are the sugar videos…but those are bringing him more fuel from the positive comments of loyal followers than what he expends. Mr. Tudor has said that he is giving TOW fuel by making the videos about her, but the return, fuel from comments, acquiring followers, correcting misinformation about narcissism, furthering his legacy, etc, more than compensates him. All fuel is welcome from what I understand. “Love me, hate me, never ignore me.”
Hi Dani.
All these concepts of fuel, power and energy can get confusing.
As I see it, in their narcissistic ‘resource management’ system fuel only goes in. (They can give fuel to others but it has no impact on their system if they do so). Once they take it in it becomes an internal feeling of power. This feeling of power is an internal resource they can use or spend. Energy is also a personal resource they have – physical and mental – and they can spend that too. But fuel (the metaphor for emotional responses of others) isn’t a resource they can spend because it’s a resource others have and give and doesn’t exist in that form anymore once they absorb it.
My understanding is that it’s power that is used during heated fury as the narcissist diverts some of it into the fury. They make that temporary sacrifice because the fury helps them to rebuild their power reserves that may have been damaged.
Facade, to me, including expressiveness and any emoting that goes along with that, would be energy driven. The narcissist uses their energy to secure fuel, and so would allocate it to behaviours and actions which would earn them fuel (along with the prime aims) such as manipulation, establishing rapport, seducing, etc. This would involve managing and curating the facade.
What do you think?
If you do not mind me jumping in, from what I understand it is power that gets expended, fuel is taken in. Fuel is converted into power with the help of the ignited fury, the power expenditure is what depletes the fuel and the fury. The fury replenishes itself over time, fuel has to be gathered from external sources (see “Fury”, How Does Criticism Affect Us, p.49).
annaamel and Anna P.
The Fuel Crisis indicates to me that there is a fuel tank. The levels of fuel within that tank vary and the narcissist knows that they need to fill up the tank. The way they experience depleting fuel reserves is different. Some schools of narcissist have an easier time of replenishing fuel than others.
I think of there as being fuel reserves. Mr. Tudor has said he can go several days without interacting with people. Even lower echelon narcs don’t have to be with someone every second. But there is a drive to get fuel…it is one of the prime aims.
Fuel may get converted to other forms…when converted…more is needed. When arguing with the IPPS, fuel is converted to power which gives the narcissist what they need to continue the fight for control. If the IPPS were to leave, massive wounding would occur. Fuel would also stop going into the narcissist. I would call wounding (in the form of walking away) to be akin to puncturing the tank…and if the person walking away is the IPPS…it’s a bigger hole…which is harder to patch and the tank is harder to fill for a while.
Narcissists function in an economy setting…and more often than not, they’re taking in more fuel than they’re expending. I don’t know how accurate that is…but that is my understanding.
I see. Thanks for responding, Dani.
Hi, Dani–
“Mr. Tudor has said he can go several days without interacting with people.”
I think that’s one of the benefits of his psychopathy? I’ll need to watch the video again, but my understanding is that the psychopathy requires no fuel. Being The Ultra and having an extensive matrix provides significant access to fuel, but it seemed to me his psychopathy was the most helpful in that regard of not needing constant interaction with people. What do you think?
Sorry for taking so long, annaamel. I had to double check things.
Not an issue at all, Dani.
Truth seeker hello:
First I think the ultimate luxury is to appreciate ourselves. We create our own myth…
As to narcs my take on it is at a very early age they develop a narrative of who they are. And it’s fixed and rigid as a defense. They force others through love bombing, manipulation, even violence to stick to their story of themselves, their narrative. And if challenged they have a host of tools to protect this story: denial, blame shifting and even fury. They don’t deal well with reality. If exposed to reality or that their story is not true, they fall apart. That’s why narcs have trouble in the real world unless they have gobs of money or power which helps them keep to their story of who they are… They fight against reality or truth. They can’t deal with it which is why the abuse. They can’t cope with reality they have no skills. So positive affirmation of their story or negative affirmation of their story is good. Only when their narrative is challenged is it bad. This can be a perceived challenge or an actual one. But they need their narrative, their construct as it is life or death. People without this disorder can face reality, riding its highs and lows as they have a core sense of being ( personality) developed from childhood and life , they suffer, they grow, they can cope with life because they have a unified personality not a construct. That’s my take on it.
Hi Contagious, I think your reply was intended for Annaamel and Dani.
I enjoyed reading it though!
Xx
Hi Jordy,
I see Duchess of Narsussex a little differently after the Saturday interview. I’d never heard someone with Bipolar explain it as she did. I still don’t find her empathic, meaning I do not think she has the addiction to narcs. I just don’t. I could be wrong. She just seems to enjoy needling too much. She has mentioned it several times just in the conversations with HG. What are your thoughts?
Dani, I’m in awe reading your thoughts. Great observations and analysis to take into account and your insights are helpful to understand where Stef is coming from…
I was discussing the immigrants-topic with a friend for hours yesterday. I couldn’t find a satisfying solution…
“Allowing unstable people in who are more likely to raise narcissists or people who feel alienated from a society is dangerous.”
1) Yes and no. Speaking from my own experience, when I moved to Germany I was an alien to the mentality, the culture, the language and aware of the historical branding of a whole nation. I hated being in this new country and missed my friends, my home, my everything. It took me years to adapt and fall in love with the German language, the culture, the people. Now I want to protect and preserve this country, its culture and its people. Similar situation with one of my best friends who is from Morocco or people from Turkey who migrated to Germany or were born there (double citizenship) yet still living their culture where they now settled. There are those who will see the value of the native individual, their culture and country and are grateful for it and supportive of it for all the right reasons.
Ideally there would be no miserable conditions or wars which would force people to move and lose their connection to their own land, identity and culture. But since we have this challenge in our world… For instance there can be a document the immigrants must sign and agree with terms upon entering a country. And the law must be changed when they enter without a passport and change their age making themselves younger for the purposes of getting a mild penalty (where they radically misbehave). The sensible people will understand the necessity for it as it would also be in their own interest to be protected from those who would potentially cause harm to the natives and the arrivals. But it’s a question of resources and tracking of misbehavior. Also to take into account — the fire starter and fire extinguisher come from the same source in certain situations, so the solution presented might address the population’s fear and exhaustion with the migration issue (which is valid) rather than empathy.
The focus of Existent is to find the best solution in the interest of its own (good) people which is sensible. A focus on a wider range of people who are united by their emotional empathy beyond the borders regardless of culture, language and historical background, is more absent.
2) Existent went for the execution of pedofiles who haven’t committed an actual crime yet but backed up the pedofilia industry by watching a sexual crime performed on image/video.
A while ago I listened to a medic who devoted his life to the pedofilic dissorder and examined many cases. There will be those who self report to a doctor because they clearly want to get rid of this disorder. They hate themselves for being like this because they know of the wrongness of it. Many of them were victims of pedofilia as children themselves. And then there are also those who only committed a pedofilic crime when they were heavily drunk but never before or after.
Existent’s solution to execute – is playing god where people might need assistance in healing from their childhood abuse and the disorder which sprang from that.
A question of resources and educated people who would care to bother with such cases.
3) Existent’s suicide-help is very much like the transgender-help. A delusional agent of apparent kindness would give a green light for cases where it’s unnecessary, playing god.
A question of resources and educated people who would care to bother with such cases.
4) Marihuana. Why choose a double edged sword when it comes to health.
(Given the fact you were given all power in the world to design a long term solution for the health of your nation.)
5) Gasser would be a nightmare for me personally BUT Gasser went for a sleeping gas without any harm to the innocent and only took the identified criminals out and didn’t go for the execution, not playing god in that regard, but chose a labour camp making the criminals pay off their debt so to speak. I found the element of taking in animals (dogs) interesting. I’m against training animals to become aggressors against humans, it’s a crime in my eyes to turn nature against humans but in this case I found it a better option than nuclear or robots or human-soldiers. A dog can sense bad intentions and protect by attacking/barking at the aggressor if the dog’s instinct remains intact. Even the malformed hybrids still can identify bad intentions so there is some force in that notion. To train a mass of humans (more likely normals) to become aggressors against other humans is an issue. It takes dignity away from both (where there is empathy in the mix). A case for the overall empathy erosion issue…
Hi Jordy!
“Allowing unstable people in who are more likely to raise narcissists or people who feel alienated from a society is dangerous.”
The children of first generation immigrants (those born and who lived to adulthood in another country) are more likely than their parents to commit violent crimes. That, in no way, means that all or the majority of those children will commit violent crimes. That doesn’t mean that the majority of violent crimes in a country are committed by those children. It means that when they face multiple lack of control environments with less likelihood of an intervener. That increases the likelihood that they will become criminals. That being said…I don’t think the majority of illegal immigrants are unstable.
If someone’s first action in coming to a country is breaking its laws…to me it’s not a good look…and I’ve seen more poor people suffering (having their schools and parks taken over) while rich people tell them to stop being racist to arrivals…to say nothing of how insecure borders allow more criminals in. Secure borders and well trained border control agents help stop human trafficking, generally sex trafficking of minors.
“For instance there can be a document the immigrants must sign and agree with terms upon entering a country.” — That’s just a piece of paper. Criminals don’t care about that. If the French authorities have arrested the correct men for the rape and murder of a 12 year old girl who was found in a suitcase, did those men sign a piece of paper saying they would not commit crimes? Did the nine immigrants who raped a drunk 15 year old girl in another European country recently promise the same? And I don’t think that the poor citizens (who will disproportionately be more harmed than the rich) deserve that. I doubt it was the majority of girls entangled with the grooming gangs are from middle class and upper class families. Many prominent busts of these grooming gangs that have been busted were made of first generation children of a different ethnic and racial background from the natives. (I only did a very small cursory look at this…it’s very distressing.) That being said, Most illegal immigrants are not dangerous criminals.
Jordy: Existent went for the execution of ped…
This is a very sensitive issue to me. I’m well read and have listened to lots of information about this for my reasons. I’m not comfortable sharing all my thoughts at this time. It’s been very good for me to read and consider what you’ve said. Thank you for that. I stand by my earlier statement. I feel that in relation to Gasser and Existent…Juries aren’t always right. The ranks of lawyers are full of narcissists/normals/narcissistic people who would concern themselves more with a conviction rate than with justice. I don’t want an innocent person tortured or put to death. The guilty…I don’t know. I respect your reasons for not wanting such an extreme response. Based on my experiences and reading, I have a different take than yours. That doesn’t mean that I think Stef or DoN have the right answer.
“Existent’s solution to execute – is playing god where people might need assistance in healing from their childhood abuse.”
Tudorite Rule One: Narcissists don’t heal from their narcissism.
(If someone habitually abuses, particularly those they have authority over–like a child, they are more likely to be a narcissist. It’s not a guarantee. That being said…a person is five times more likely not to be a narcissist by HG’s figures.)
I think it might be possible to redirect a narcissist who physically hits to giving a silent treatment or possibly withdrawing physically. Through therapy, they switched from physical abuse to emotional torture…not exactly better. Emotional torture might be more likely to drive a victim to suicide. (I think I recall having heard HG give an example like this somewhere along the line. And in a recent video…he said that narcissism can evolve to a limited extent. But there’s no healing.)
“A question of resources and educated people who would care to bother with such cases.” — Neither Gasser nor Existent spoke to helping their criminal population or victims of their criminal population. The prompt is five policies. I would guess the time length for the conversation is set at around an hour. None have exceeded that timeframe yet. I think it would difficult to put everything needed into just five key policies and within the time limit. I’m eager to see if there is an upcoming episode where someone does try to address the criminals and the victims together. Both are looking at the prospect of ruling a country from what they view as biggest problem in their societies…both see, at least one part of that as being, guilty people not being punished…
Jordy: Existent’s suicide-help…
Assisted suicide is not something I’ve heard seriously debated. I don’t really want to listen to that. It doesn’t fill me with hope, given stories I’ve heard of young people with severe depression or autism being allowed to kill themselves. And I don’t want to get started on the other issue mentioned in your comment. It gets me really upset. I agree with your points, and will add only…it’s like “Body Positivity” and the way that it really caused the death of people by encouraging and validating their poor eating choices. How I remember Stef talking about it…it was more about not criminalizing people for supporting loved ones who made that decision…HG fleshed that out so that it seemed clear to me that it would only be in the most severe terminal illness cases that this would be allowed…I think the risk of a narcissist doctor or a psychopath doctor who would “enjoy” killing could easily cause many unnecessary deaths and lie on paperwork.
Regarding marijuana…it does generate revenue. I don’t know that I agree with it being legal for recreational use. Stef would legalize one drug–not all the “fun” ones. But that’s a good point.
I think with the small amount of information that I’ve seen from both of them…it’s difficult to say what they are in terms of HG’s classification…and normal would make the most sense for both. You’ve certainly made a point for Stef being more of a normal. I still find Stef more empathic that DoN.
Between Zog, Existent, Britanifer, and Gasser—my order for being a citizen is Britanifer, Existent, Gasser, Zog…Existent and Gasser — I would be protesting what I disagree with based on what I know of these two, and both allow protest…and I would serve Tudor World in its wars against the Zogina. I will send in secret storm troopers with my trained mynocks to disable her planet cutting weapon. I have full confidence in HG to triumph. ALL PRAISE HG! ALL HAIL HG! I hope I could dress in crimson like those fancy bodyguards of the emperor…
What’s your order, thus far, of countries/planets other than your own where you would live?
Quick would like to add that I haven’t been able to read about the countries spoken of on Narcsite yet. I am planning to!
Dani, I think Zogina’s population won’t last long, they’ll die out under the poor conditions pretty fast. To take out Zogina my henn Roni will do one peck between the eyes and Zog is conquered. ( 🥹awe look at her swear allegiance to Elarine https://2.gravatar.com/userimage/223613304/e9d5dbe3fbb60d08f99420d6164dca3c?size=1200)
My order would be; Britannifer; Existent and Gasser are equal.
Can’t wait to hear about the new entries!
_*_*_*
Regarding Blare (DoN) I think the line between revenge and justice can become blurry for her in general but the initial driver is passionate justice warrior. From her first conversation with HG I saw an almost Supernova side mode on what TOW represents for her.
_*_*_*
Regarding borders. If there would be a detector upon entering keeping apart the five classifications, how would you proceed?
Roni is adorable!
~*~*~*~
The new entries have been so good. I enjoyed Trevor’s a lot. I like listening to him. His policies were quite generous and well intentioned…and he was quite firm that money to help was for specific groups…and I liked that. And I think that he would pick good people to keep track of those who were in need and weed out give-mes. I also like the Sidley Twins. They’re quite engaging and chipper. I had a peruse of their channel. The video with their father talking about the photo manipulation by the Sussex photographer was interesting. I was quite curious to hear what he had to say.
~*~*~*~
“I think the line between revenge and justice can become blurry for her in general but the initial driver is passionate justice warrior. From her first conversation with HG I saw an almost Supernova side mode on what TOW represents for her.”
I don’t see that in her. I see someone who chose a twitter/x/Youtube channel name with the intent to provoke. She repeats that she’s not a nice person. She’s honest and aware of that about herself. I just…I think it takes high narcissistic traits to have the stomach to wade into the sugary swamp of the sussex squad with the name she chose, and she’s proud of the reaction she got from them so far as I could see. Then her saying…”you wouldn’t believe the things they’ve done to me.” — My response to that…”Well I’m sure it’s not nice, but you said you know how much she must hate it [your name]. Because it’s so close to her name…and now you want me to feel sorry for you…” It was the mean-spirited glee some of her statements and the follow-up that felt like a pity-play. Some of it was vague sounding, but it sounded like she might have documented some of it on her channel. I find the Sidleys, Jenn, and Trevor to be more Justice warriors…Blair is well armored on this battlefield…but I don’t think she flies the same banner.
I will watch any video HG makes with her (and most of what HG makes, with few exceptions…there have been a few miniseries or talk about some individuals that upset or disturbed me…so I go to find something else of HG’s.) I really hate to miss anything because HG makes observations in some videos that are wholly unique about the dynamic and sometimes very hard to find within the rest of the library. Flecks of gold and nuggets…it varies. I will watch the videos because I love the safe distance I am at for listening to those conversations. Though I would love the visual of watching HG’s eyes at some point when he’s in a situation where he’s really engaged (dare to dream, I do).
~*~*~*~
Borders
“If there would be a detector upon entering keeping apart the five classifications, how would you proceed?” — HG only has four classifications (though I understand that there were five, but he removed the “empathic” group.) What sort of detector? What do you mean by “keeping apart?”
Dani, (Dabu🥰) that’s a good point you mentioned, I see it. If Blare chose the name and content which would obviously provoke a negative reaction she can’t be surprised (upset/angry) when the squad does act upon that. She did enjoy their reactions and took the blow so to speak with honour and/or pity play because she thinks she did a good job.
Unaware that it did nothing to TOW except providing challenge fuel. In fact TOW content creators are unaware that they feed the shark pool, instead of just ignoring her which would have the most impact on TOW, ! and their (content creators) own lives; redirecting their energy onto activities which really matter for their own productivity and well-being.
What they do instead is plunge into the beige pool they chose to jump in and be bothered that it stinks.
But well the mini-series “Why do people comment about her” explained the motives!
Until people don’t know what HG teaches about, they can’t have the full understanding on how to deal with narcissism (TOW).
They’re getting there eventually.
~
Detection at borders: If the person walks through “airport metal detector” i.e. “classification detector” and comes out as 1. empath 2. normal 3. narcissistic 4. narcissist 5. pure psychopath.
What should be the next step?
Jordy, (Dabu🥰–Typos happen.)
I think that there are people who understand that they are chumming the shark infested waters…it’s a little money for some of them. One thing that does amaze me about TOW…is how she created a hobby for thousands of people. The hobby of these people (as you rightly pointed out) is providing challenge fuel to her. I don’t think this hobby is one that her detractors or her supporters are going to soon give up. The hobby generates too much money in general. As with so much in the world, follow the money. So many answers can be found in the circles of monetary exchanges. (This does not mean that everyone is money motivated who comments about her.)
~
“Detection at borders: If the person walks through “airport metal detector” i.e. “classification detector” and comes out as 1. empath 2. normal 3. narcissistic 4. narcissist 5. pure psychopath.”
Their first step should be going through the process to legally seek asylum in a country rather than boarding the human trafficking train that gets them to a country with the most benefits. There’s economic hardship everywhere. There is not war level violence everywhere. Looking just at war zones. It’s interesting how countries geographically proximate to some current war zones won’t take in refugees from those areas…Why do they have walls preventing “refugees” from coming? Is it possible that they recognize the hard fact that there are too many dangerous people who could get in (based on former experience) and that it could destabilize their nation and harm their people? Is it possible that other parts of the world are ignoring these facts as they grab a chance to virtue signal or try to avoid being being called ****ists?
I’m autistic. I like rules. Rules should be enforced. Rules sometimes need to be changed. And sometimes rules being broken can be understood. That doesn’t mean it should be rewarded. Too many people are being hurt by the growing number disregarding the rules. When people don’t follow rules or selectively enforce them…it’s more difficult for everyone.
Regarding the detector:
People can be drawn into things for all manner of reasons…as HG pointed out in his series about why people make videos about TOW. Let’s assume an empathic man is drawn into a cult whose core belief is that all people in Zedville are possessed by demons. They fully ascribe to this belief, and they are taught that they need to kill the demons…they are an empath…but they are in this cult and a true believer. They go to Zedville and are welcomed in. Passing through the detector reveals empath. This person then carries out an attack against a Zedville block of housing, setting fires and stabbing children in a daycare. Did Zedville need more than just the detectors to keep their people safe?
Moreover, narcissists are not wholly bad. HG is helping people through his YouTube channel(s), blog, books, and all his services. He’s not doing this because he’s a kind man. He’s given money to charities. He’s done many good things, just through the blog. He’s likely done many good things in his professional life. He’s also used people, by his own admissions and tossed them to the scrap heap. He is uniquely able to offer help that very few can…it just means something different to hear it from HG.
If You Ruled Your World–
Would you let HG into your country, knowing who all the people he has been? He says that he operates under different aliases. He’s been trained to disguise himself. It could go very well. It could go very badly. It could be a roller-coaster…
Current thoughts of Dabu Dani…Don’t know that I’ve got everything perfectly stated…might add more later…
Dani,
My conclusions on the border-situation are of this nature:
Either it’s the new arrivals or present natives — the resources of the territory need to be balanced out before even thinking of taking in surplus entries of any kind.
And there is no balance in the country’s current state. The society as it functions at the moment is in great disbalance and the density of humans in one spot (cities) is a design for the narcissist’s purpose of having the control and the hunting ground in close proximity and density of victims in one spot. People are bred for the narcissist’s feeding machinery… It sounds very dark but it’s all in HG’s materials and when it will go down on people I can’t say what it will trigger in them.
The societal form and norm and the ruling system is currently at the point of collapsing and yet fights to remain (can’t hold it in place any longer simply due to the fact of: “that which cannot be controlled” – became too much and is competing for the control amongst each other with help of technologies they didn’t have before.)
***
As for my version in IIRMW — I take inspiration from a wolf pack hierarchy and their handling of territories where everyone is an active element of the pack and its territory carrying responsibility for the whole structure dynamic through their particular strand of responsibility. A minority group which is alien to these dynamics and roles would not fit and only disrupt the balance of the dynamic leading to the downfall of the whole structure. Wolves do not tolerate weak links in their chains and it’s a well known fact which is based on the survival and balance of nature. Furthermore, wolves follow the principles of natural selection and don’t overbreed their territories / wolf packs, which is essential to the balance of each territory, the different wolf packs and the balance of the whole area.
Eventually the most valuable thing my world would be able to provide for minorities is education about structure dynamics and its necessary balanced environment, which minorities or majorities can strive to apply on their own territories.
Dani,
As for what you asked about HG… I’d embrace HG’s individualistic side which is boundless. And I’d reject the collective side which needs to bound and to subsume individuality. It is the cracking point when fuel becomes stale; when the subsumed individual’s identity is erased.
Dani and TS, just wanted to let you know that I replied to your comments, but it’s either in moderation or went into the WP-ether🥹
Thanks for letting me know, Jordy. It happens…comments in the ether…some of my best questions have ended up there, I think…But I like to pretend that HG appreciated them and kept them as video ideas…I’m not delusional…Fine…I may be a little delusional…hope, you know…gotta hold on to hope.
Hey Jordy,
No worries. I’m finding that if I respond to two comments back to back on the same thread, I lose the first and keep the second. I think if I exit the blog then re enter and place the second comment, I keep both. If it keeps happening, might be worth trying that!
Xx
Fascinating discussion. I’m excited to hear about more of YouTuber lands. Existent was so different from Britanifer. Thank you, sir. I think it’s nice to hear different people’s opinions and ideas, what’s important and what they view as most important to society. Different people need to be able to talk to each other, to learn from each other especially when their thoughts and opinions differ.
I also thought it was interesting how you were able to anticipate some of the answers. I think it shows that you do your research about people (not that there was ever any doubt). No one would think you were anything less than well informed after listening to any of your Tudor-scope analyses.
Also, I enjoyed your conversation on RHR Jen’s channel. She put it up today.
Thank you, sir, for all that you do for us. Thank you for your time. Much appreciation!
The follow up questions are really good! Makes one think how much thought is actually gonna go into it…
So far, Stef is a normal in my opinion, visibly (quite relaxed exterior and presentation of it all😎) and based on her answers and logic of course. And Jen is an empath. Giggling, smiling, happy geyser🥰
I agree, Jordy…
I found Stef to be a bit more practical in how she looked at problems around her, whereas Jen didn’t mention there being any sort of problems to solve in Britanifer…
I couldn’t decide if it was super empathy or being a normal for Stef. I don’t know how well she thought through the consequences of the death penalty for some crimes she would allow it to be used for. I understand her level of outrage about those crimes…but considering the potential of innocent person being executed…it concerns me. There are numerous people in the legal profession who put the innocent in jail using unethical (and what in my opinion should be illegal) methods to put them there. It seems like the state could end up executing many people if a prosecutor falls in the narcissistic to narcissist range…You can’t bring the innocent back to life.
Where I also identified Stef as a normal would be due to her emphasis on ’my people/country’ – comes first, which stood out to me as an indicator. And that she was so relaxed upon talking to the Ultra….The Ricky Gervais position and the lasagne parcels recipe, though!🔥
Hi Jordy–
I think that “my people” is indicative of a lot of things. What she mentioned about how pensioners lost their heating assistance…to me that could be super empathy…I think the super empath could take one of two paths…their empathy could be directed toward people in the war-torn country who need help OR their empathy could be directed toward their populace. Say the government had enough money to heat the homes of 1,000,000 people…they can heat the homes of all those people needing help in their country who are citizens, or 20% of the homes in the war-torn country. Let’s assume this war torn country’s government is honourable and uses that money to help only civilians have shelter and eat. I find that incredibly unlikely, but we’ll say that’s the case…what is the best thing to do? Which is the most empathic? Which is the least likely to result in civil unrest in your country (which could plunge you into a civil war and destroy the lives of your citizens)?
I think it would be interesting to hear what Stef’s or Premier O’Toole’s opinions would have been ten or twenty years ago (without de-aging them to be children/college students). I feel like Britanifer would remain largely unchanged.
I would offer that Layla, a contagion empath musician, who was also interviewed by HG…seemed quite calm talking to HG.
What are your thoughts on the classification of Premier O’Toole (Duchess of Narsussex)?
I love how these series that HG is doing with different YouTubers are a chance to apply what he’s been teaching us.
Dani, those are great points you mentioned and that could be super empathy indeed, I agree… I went back to the video and rewatched the policies section. I think this is what made me think – Stef is more likely a normal, by her response.
Let’s say a person who witnessed his or her whole family blew up to pieces, his or her home burned down, turned to dust, having lost every piece of your life and your soul, needing to flee to a foreign country begging for any kind of help, in the face of that Stef’s cold approach to this matter and the prejudice “it’s my people so they are automatically worthier”, make me think: normal.
Half of “her people” could be horrible people who may also be needing a weeding out for the same reasons she only put the emphasis on “not my people” needing one and also if they don’t like being put second, they’re free to leave. She wants to put arrivals at the border through psychological testing, good luck with that when there might be a total empathy loss, an empty stare or anger at god and the world after what a person went through.
…
I found Layla to be nervous, I was just listening though not watching and found it to be in her speech pattern. I’m very curious about her take on IIRMW ! Can’t wait for every new episode!!!
…
Duchess of Narsussex. That’s a tough one! I found her to be both, extreme and lovely. I feel her pain wanting revenge for all the innocent (children and animals) and her enormous protection plan, but how to make her aware that history already has proven “eye for an eye” ideology destroys nations from within and breeds narcissism… Taking over Neuschwanstein because of the generational revenge issue speaks to me as an indicator for strong feelings of wanting justice. I think I’ll put her as an empath.
What have you found??
Hi Jordy–
I think Stef might has a reduction of empathy toward illegal immigrants and maybe legal immigrants. The UK has a great deal of illegal immigration. At the most basic level, these people broke the law and are being rewarded for it. The needs of law abiding citizens are being ignored (or in the case of the pensioners losing their heating assistance…cheered by parliament). She’s still helping millions of people she doesn’t personally know.
I might sound a bit cynical here. Would narcissists prioritizing asylum seekers over the population manipulate in this way? There is a feel good and a look good factor to helping asylum seekers that many people will focus on. Not all illegal immigrants are coming from countries at war. It lets them, the politicians and the people who have less empathy for their impecunious neighbours (normals), tout the goodness of their country (and by extension themselves) in a way that helping the native population (who paid into a system) doesn’t. I’m saying that prioritizing the native population can be more easily be framed as a nation being more selfish than can helping people from war torn countries. What circumstance is cuter for a politician than hugging a group viewed as disadvantaged? What makes you/your country look better to the world? (The Body Language Guy did a nice video talking about the UK riots in broad terms that I watched.)
Sounding cynical again…”a total empathy loss, an empty stare or anger at god and the world after what a person went through.” I understand why empaths want to help these people. I understand why narcs would want to help these people. They might not be the most stable people to allow into a high trust society. Allowing unstable people in who are more likely to raise narcissists or people who feel alienated from a society is dangerous. And statistics back up that previous statement. It, in no way, means that everyone raised in those circumstances will be prone to breaking the law. It’s saying that circumstances for them will be more difficult, and they will likely have possess certain genetic dispositions and LoCEs.
~*~
I didn’t find Layla nervous. I found her sweet and just very pleased to be talking to HG. Perhaps a little overwhelmed. HG can be overwhelming (in a wonderful way) when an empath suddenly acquires his full attention (planned and known [consultation/interview] or not [HG responding to comments/questions]). I’ve heard as such from many empaths here, and my own experience matches it. I occasionally find HG just relating stories to be overwhelming. He is so talented and brilliant in the way he takes readers/listeners on emotional journeys. Especially the first time with specific videos…and even more so when there is something teaching about the interaction between narcs and their victims that’s new–it just convinces me how much more HG knows and has to share with us. Definitely keeps an audience engaged with him.
~*~
I have a completely different take on the Duchess of Narsussex (DoN). I agree that she’s extreme. She put me on edge in her first video with HG. I think she’s narcissistic or on the more narcissistic side of normal. I do think she has empathy at this point. A very little bit, but it’s there. (I’ve only watched her interview about why she started making her channel and IIRMW with HG)
It is the way she chortled about choosing her name, “Duchess of Narsussex” and choosing specifically something close to TOW’s name just to annoy her. “I’m gonna take this bitch down.” Stating that her YouTube channel was partly the result of disgust with American politics. (I haven’t watched any of her other videos.) She mentioned the abuse she’s dealt with online from the sugars…and she’s not bothered by it (or she’s putting on a great show of not being bothered). I feel like the strength comes high narcissistic traits. She’s reiterated in both videos that she’s not a kind person.
Drug use/eating candy/drinking soda excessively reeks of a lack of accountability. I don’t think a national dish has to be healthy. I do think there is a level of encouraged excess that is interesting in light of Gasser being a Christian nation. Many Bible verses warn against the dangers of overindulgence. So this comes off as hypocrisy to me. Recreational drugs are made safely in labs…Good?…but laughing gas is freely available everywhere. Long term recreational users of nitrous oxide are at increased risk of depression, psychosis, memory loss, and more. Large amounts increase the risk of heart attacks. Faulty dispensers are dangerous. To say nothing of what might happen with nitrous is mixed with other drugs. (Alcohol + nitrous = not good)
She’s going to loot countries and embed jewel treasures she’s taken into her desk of power. She says aiding allies and defending herself. But I found the answer about the gas bombs to come off as being more like “World policing.” She’s going to take out the dictators and send them to camps “worse than Buchenwald or a gulag.” She’s not part of any group that might aide toward accountability–or is it more about her having control and revenge? She says “I don’t like x, y, z.” I would agree that not every world organization is a good one. I would agree that they are targets for narcs regardless of the narc’s level of awareness.
To compare DoN to Stef…what’s nastier…killing murderers, rapists, etc. or using the worst of humanity to torture them for decades because “they don’t deserve three squares [meals] per day?” From a non-emotional perspective…what is costing the taxpayer more? Presumably, she would be feeding her sadists three meals per day. Housing and security costs for the scum of the Earth. I don’t know that I approve of either of their policies regarding criminals. I see points from both. The main place they agree on, as far as I saw, is that criminals who have committed heinous atrocities such as rape and abuse can not be “loved to the point that they heal.”
DoN would stop the abusers, like a police officer. Good. She didn’t mention any plan to long-term help the human victims or the abused animals. Similarly with providing medical care and sending the people back to their looted country. What infrastructure will be implemented to prevent another dictator from oppressing these people? Oppressive dictatorship is what they know. (DoN even used the word dictator to refer to herself. But she’s a “good dictator.” Many dictators do believe themselves to be “good,” but are they?) How will they purchase what they need to assist them in rebuilding? How are they going to determine their next system of government…it seems likely that most people won’t be well educated…so who will take the Iron Throne?
“history already has proven “eye for an eye” ideology destroys nations from within and breeds narcissism…” — Agreed. I would add that to me…that feels more like revenge than justice when it gets to a certain point. Moreover, I would add–a sick and twisted sadist being allowed to torture people…the idea that those sadists will harm no one else. Are the sadists and the perpetrators of animal cruelty/child abuse both locked up and not allowed to leave? It sounded like everyone would be locked up there together.
“Taking over Neuschwanstein because of the generational revenge issue speaks to me as an indicator for strong feelings of wanting justice.” — It seemed more personal, more about revenge than justice. The way I see it is that it’s about her. She wasn’t interested in justice for the people wronged there. She was humored by it belonging to her considering what happened there. At what point is justice for the past perpetrating a new injustice? Why are those who were most wronged by it not benefiting the most from the downfall?
DoN would be in charge of finances. Nothing wrong with that. She went to school for international business. She wouldn’t steal from public funds. Good. However, she emphasized that it’s because she doesn’t need to. She has her own money. She’s not motivated by money. It’s not about it being morally wrong or the citizens needing the money more. She didn’t like the way it sounded, what HG was saying. It was an interesting part of the conversation, her working through it.
She won’t be apologetic about her religion. That’s fair. I think that certain religions are expected to be apologetic, whereas others are boldly not when they’ve committed the same wrongs in the past. There’s no forced conversion. She’ll let other religions (except Satanism/Voodoo) be practiced so long as they are not being violent to others. She’s okay with free speech up to a point (a good one or a bad one, depending).
It doesn’t bother her if her ministers don’t get along and fight…and I now have an image of HG as Judge Doom in this scene from “Who Framed Roger Rabbit?”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYk3LvHMPWM She laughed at the image of HG taking on Bugs…and it is funny to imagine HG taking on cartoon characters. However, empathic people want to get along. They would want to assist in those relationships, heal and fix, to my thinking. That don’t look gleeful about handling discord.
She will have the best military, best space program, and no one will want to hurt her government because it’s so awesome. All sounds very narcissistic to me.
Those are my current thoughts…looking forward to hearing more of yours.
@Dani
Empaths can have very strong narcissistic traits.
Blare (DoN) certainly is a kinder person as Stef, but definitely with strong(er) narcissistic traits.
Also, if her ET is high, that would even reduce her logic further and make her thinking and acting dependent on her narcissistic traits.
It makes empaths look like horrible and dysfunctional people.
Dani and Z,
The ways that both Stef and DoN explained their worlds and policy decisions make me see both surface level indicators of their personalities as well as deeper level indicators.
The surface level indicators seem to be incongruous and a little bit ‘out there’.
For instance, when I heard Stef say that her nation’s overall outlook would be based on existentialism – or more specifically on Sartre’s philosophies, I couldn’t grasp her idea of what that actually means.
Similarly, when DoN said her nation’s motto would be ‘Live by the sword and die by the sword’, I thought, wow, it sounds both violent and fatalistic, but what does it actually mean?
If I think about the two IIRMW videos on a deeper level, I start to see how the two women’s views are influenced or shaped by the country they live in – in addition to their own personal backgrounds as well as their personalities. It all meshes together and makes their views more understandable in some ways.
For instance, take DoN’s motto, ‘Live by the sword and die by the sword.’ DoN lives in the US. Like anyone in any country, DoN’s very survival depends on how she navigates and reacts to the society around her in which she must live and in which she also plays a part.
If you think about the US in relation to its gun laws and the number of people who own guns, by any person’s standards, this makes the US a relatively ‘violent’ nation. I’m not saying that Americans themselves are violent people, but rather their society is likely to be more violent because of the prevalence of gun ownership.
If I think of the motto, ‘Live by the sword and die by the sword,’ and then consider that DoN lives in a society that – in general – believes that all citizens should have the right to bear arms, then DoN’s motto starts to make more sense. To me, it is akin to her own level of innate narcissism/empathy reacting to the social conditions in which she lives.
On a deeper level, it’s a case of the individual being shaped by the society in which he/she lives, and also the society being shaped by the individual in turn. It’s a two-way interaction. Each feeds into the other.
Hi Z – zwartbolleke,
I could be wrong. I’m not perfect. Jordy made some very good observations about where she saw empathy in Blare. I think she very much cared for Lilly (the beagle). She repeatedly talked about how innocent people wouldn’t be harmed.
I agree that empaths vary in how high they are in various narcissistic traits. I also think that narcissists and narcissistic people don’t take just bad actions. HG is helping people get out of abusive situations. He gives to charities in his private life. Part of that is legacy and part is facade management.
For me, how I understood Blare’s five main policies–I see a lot of potential for collateral damage, more than I see for Stef’s–that being said, there are things I don’t agree with Stef about lots either. I would be protesting policies I didn’t like in both their worlds. The fact that both stated that was fine with them (so long as it wasn’t a threat to people) to me is a good thing. I think it’s a sign as well that both see the ways that free speech is under attack. In terms of people potentially getting hurt. I think Blare tried to think around some of them…but there were gaping holes. I don’t know how I would address those issues. As I think about how I would rule my world…I don’t know how I would address them. I think that Blare and Stef both tried to take on what they see as serious issues in their countries, knowing that not everyone would agree with their positions. I think that takes some level of bravery (assuming they aren’t psychopaths, and I don’t think either is).
Those are my current thoughts. I may be very wrong. I haven’t watched any of her content. So I haven’t observed enough. I based everything off the two interactions with HG. And when he tried to prod her narcissistic traits…she would say “no.” which is quite interesting. But it still seemed to be more about the optics than the wrongness of the action. I may have misinterpreted those bits. I’m sure he did that on purpose to illustrate points to listeners, and to get information for himself. I don’t really know where all the cutoff points are, and I’m hoping to learn more from HG about figuring that out to keep myself away from trouble.
Hi Jordy, hi Dani,
I was most interested in the interview with the Duchess of Narsussex so I had a go at analysing her in depth. See what you think. Sorry, this going to be lengthy.
The phone / ipad keeps beeping at the start. I’d expect it to be common courtesy to turn it off when recording.
We get to see Blair. Heavily made up, jewellery on, hair adorned, evidence of attendance at the gym. Somatic indicators.
Title: Premier O Toole. Content with the idea that this is “dictator sounding”. Grandiosity. Superiority.
Name of country, Gasser. Negative connotation ignored. Grandmother’s maiden name thus personal traits stamped on the country. Desire to identify as European. Possible association between ‘European’ and portrayal of ‘elegant’ or ‘different’. If so, grandiosity.
The name Gasser “fits my plans”. Vagueness.
Capital City, Nitrous Oxide and Zyclon B. When asked to explain she responds with, “I’ll get to that later.” Promised gain, assertion of control.
“My country has a duality.” By definition, intention to rule a divided nation. Keyword duality, possible reflection of her own black and white thinking.
Throws the iPad off to one side for beeping. Entitled behaviour.
Neuschwanstein castle as seat of power. “Most probably all of the Europeans know” (the history of the castle.) Assumption of what we do and do not know. Superiority, prescriptive. Desire to identify as European. (assumed cachet, elegance)
Selects a power desk and office within the seat of power. Grandiosity.
HG asks if the desk is carved from obsidian. Leading question, invitation to mirror. She answers “Yes”. Mirroring. “It would be inset with jewels taken from insurgents.” Sense of entitlement. Grandiosity.
Laughs and falls in line with HG’s joke about throwing insurgents over the castle wall. Mirroring.
National anthem, Pitbull, “Don’t Stop the Party.” Lack of depth and meaning.
She states,”It talks about getting money, and getting all the world with us.” Money, somatic indicator.
She states the song represents an affinity with other places in the world. This is not borne out in the rest of the interview. Veneer.
She sings when asked to. Showcasing.
National dish, candy and pop. Chooses what she likes, no consideration for what citizens might like.
She states she is “eat to live”. Physique conscious, somatic trait.
When asked what her Minister of Health might think of the National dish she leans in for emphasis and says, “I’ll over ride the Minister of Health.” Assertion of control. “I’m going to be Minister of Health. I don’t need people coming in and telling me about candy and pop.” This would be a threat to control. She asserts control by allocating the position to herself. Sense of entitlement to do as she pleases.
National animal, beagle. She has had beagles. Personal link. Character traits placed on country.
She is flirtatious throughout this section. She leans forward and smiles on the word “mischievous.” Assertion of control through use of sexuality. Somatic indicator.
Second animal, Belgian Mellinoy because they are trained killers. Vindictiveness.
“So the ethos of the country is that we’re sweet on the outside but if you mess with us that’s what you are going to get.” The country as an extension of self and her own personality. Veneer of sweetness. Black and white thinking.
“This is my beagle Lilly.” Country as an extension of self.
With reference to Blair’s taking time to create a flag. HG offers fuel with “Full marks go to you.” Blair reacts positively to positive fuel.
HG offers fuel again “Gold star for you.” Reaction unclear as Blair is drinking, however, she does lean forward into the camera at this point. Subconscious action that suggests interest and attention. Fuel seeking.
HG summarises the flag with, “It’s all shits and giggles until you step out of line then the Belgian Mellinoy chews your face off.” Blair laughs and answers, “Yes.” Black and white thinking. Evidence of narcissistic dynamic.
National day is Easter. Sees herself as proudly Christian therefore the country is proudly Christian. Country as extension of self.
She states she would aid allied countries and defend her own country. Selectively humanitarian when it serves a purpose.
When discussing the invasion of other countries, she states she would put everyone to sleep, get the innocents out and those deemed as not innocent are killed or sent to camps. The arbiter of who lives and who dies. Judge, jury, executioner. Grandiosity, superiority, entitlement, lack of compassion.
Press freedom. When asked if the press could criticise the government, Blair leans in and responds, “Yes, I doubt they would criticise me though.” Flirtation. Assertion of control by use of sexuality.
She concludes that a free press is preferable so long as it doesn’t put the country at risk. Again she is the arbiter of what would be considered as a risk. Grandiosity. Superiority. Entitlement.
Cabinet. HG for Defence Minister. Probable flattery.
“For what I would want to do, I couldn’t have someone with a weak stomach. I’d need to have someone to carry out the harsh brutality on my orders.” Happy for HG to do it but unwilling to get her own hands dirty. Mirroring the person she assumes HG to be.
Vengeful. Judge, jury, executioner thus sense of superiority, grandiosity and entitlement. Indicator of a sadistic streak.
Foreign Secretary. Former naval intelligence officer that worked at Guantanamo Bay. “He thinks like I do.” Extension of self. “He wouldn’t get hoodwinked.” Lack of trust. Paranoia.
Agrees with HG that her Foreign Secretary would be a “Mini me”. Nullification of potential threat to control. Grandiosity. Sees the person as an extension of self.
Chancellor. Herself. “I don’t trust anyone else.” Paranoia.
“I have an international business degree.” Showcasing, sense of superiority.
HG offers a further invitation to mirror with “ The nation’s money is your money.” She does mirror by agreeing but then backtracks and states that she wouldn’t siphon money. Instinctive mirroring then veneer of sweetness and respectability.
Minister of Entertainment. Snoopy and bugs bunny because they are “MY favourite characters.” Places own preference onto the position as with the beagles on the flag, national dish etc.
“Well HG if you want to take on bugs bunny that’s up to you.” Assertion of control through flirtation, use of sexuality, somatic indicator.
Lichtenstein as ally. Because “it’s the richest country in the world by capita…. “ very wealthy and secure.” Reference to money, Somatic indicator. Paranoia.
Main adversary Iran. Blair references global institutions as being the enemy overall. Lack of trust. Non compliance. Individualist.
This refusal to be a member of global organisations is repeated later when she elaborates on her freedom of speech policy and federal income tax. Her country is therefore stand alone. Assertion of control, nullification of potential threats to control. Non compliance, individualist view.
No desire to be part of any humanitarian or global community. No desire to commit to global treaties. Avoidance of accountability.
No federal income tax and a belief in the free market as opposed to any form of corporate responsibility or regulation. Essentially, make money or fold. Lack of moral compass. Lack of accountability.
Gasser is to be surrounded by an impenetrable wall, will have a gator filled moat and gas canisters around the perimeter. Paranoia.
Blair states that Gasser is kind, giving and gentle and unashamed of being a Christian nation. Veneer of sweetness and respectability when placed in context of the brutality of the remainder.
I did have more, but that’s probably enough. In summary there are numerous indicators for narcissism throughout the interview. There is the absence of counsel, a whole country designed around her own character traits, likes and dislikes, which essentially amount to an extension of self.
Repeated attempts to assert control through flattery and use of sexuality. She’s grandiose, superior, money and status oriented and demonstrates a taciturn nature. She is vengeance driven and there is no compassion demonstrated.
She demonstrates black and white thinking with possibly a sadistic streak. You wouldn’t be able to counsel or advise her as she is interested only in her own views and recruiting people who support these views.
She demonstrates a sense of entitlement to incorporate herself into her country to such an extent.
Appearance wise she meets the Somatic criteria plus she is money oriented.
She showcases, she’s non conformist and refuses to align with international treaties or organisations as they represent a threat to control. She demonstrates a lack of accountability and a repeated sense of entitlement. She mirrors and uses flattery repeatedly.
She exhibits a reaction to fuel. Her ideas particularly in the earlier part of the interview, lacked depth or depth of belief ( e.g National Anthem). The ideas were there because they represented her and only her likes, dislikes and beliefs.
She is amusing. She is forthright. She was well prepared and clearly put time and effort into the project, all of which I see as positives.
The strongest indicator for me was that Blair has created an entire country, that is essentially an extension of self. My conclusion therefore is that Blair is a narcissist.
Xx
Fantastic post, TS. All indicators I’ve seen, including your detailed analysis, suggest she’s a narcissist. Her ‘about me’ page is particularly grandiose. In ‘22 her channel was partially titled Politik Artist 504. While she eventually dropped that her bio still contains references. She seems to see herself as some kind of an artistic renegade.
Truthseeker6157–
That was absolutely brilliant. I’m usually multi-tasking, so I don’t see most visual cues. I think I need to watch with my eyes. I said narcissistic based on what I heard of the policies. I definitely noticed the flirtation in her voice (I’ve also seen more than one empath flirting with HG over the internet, and he says it’s quite common). I like observing HG because I find the way his mind works to be one of the most fascinating aspects of his videos–and the interactions with such a variety of people is something new. Watching him in real time. I’m super looking forward to more.
Do you have an opinion on what school of narcissist you think Blair is? You mentioned numerous somatic indicators for cadre (and she’s clearly not a dummy–so elite is possible) But for me…the vagueness that you highlighted makes me wonder if she’s not as knowledgable about things as she prefers people to think (which in no way means she’s not knowledgable or observant–but the vagueness or the “I’ll send you an email about it.” which was said several times in both interviews with HG is interesting).
What is your order of countries from the videos thus far where you would live if you had to live in one of those countries? (In the case of Zog, you are allowed to choose their main enemy planet as well–as all is fictional regarding the Zog universe (for lack of a better way to put it)).
Hi Dani,
Thank you, I’m glad you found it interesting. 🙂 Really good point about “I’ll send you an email about it.” I remember Blair saying that now and in both interviews. For me that’s a superiority thing. A bit, “Me and HG, we’re like that 🤞!”
I’m not great with narcissist schools and cadres but I’d go with Upper Lesser type B Somatic.
I see a veneer of sweetness rather than any facade. That leaves me with Lesser. She’s too put together, organised and educated to be Middle or Lower Lesser.
She has a degree of warmth but not excessively so. She isn’t bouncy, playful or funny enough to be the type A. She’s very unapologetic, in your face, her way or the highway sounding so I have her as a type B.
Cadre is a funny one. She’s interested in politics. She has a university degree. I don’t see interest in film reflected in either interview. Her Minister for Fun was more of a throw away pick.
Her National anthem was a Pitbull song which is essentially meaningless. She doesn’t mention any interest in art or theatre etc. No mention or incorporation of literary characters. Given her country is such an extension of herself I think I would see more cerebral traits if they were there. So I have politics and a smattering of current affairs only for cerebral and on balance far more clear Somatic indicators that were repeated throughout. There was also a suitcase on the bed in interview one and she emphasised she was on her way out. Somatic again.
She might be a Somatic leaning Elite but for me, I’d go Somatic.
I wouldn’t live in any of the countries described so far. Was there a Zog? I imagine that one being filled with utterly disrespectful people who show up late and unprepared to every interview! Grrr.
Xx
Hi Annaamel,
That’s very interesting about Blair’s bio. I haven’t looked at her channel, only the two interviews. The first interview I knew I didn’t warm to her, but that was intuitive more than analytical. I used the second interview as an exercise in going to the evidence. That was the summarised result.
Artistic renegade. I can see that!
Xx