JK Rowling : School and Cadre
55 thoughts on “JK Rowling : School and Cadre”
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.
It’s unbelievable how ‘glibness and dismissiveness’ and ‘complex issues’ are mentioned within one sentence by someone who hoped to find satisfaction and explanatory validation by finding out that JK would simply turn out to be a narcissist — problem solved.
Complex issues…….How more complex does it need to become in order for you to see how glibness and dismissiveness are part of your own operating system, whilst genuine transgender women and transgender men (who btw. have no problems to be referred to as such) are used as a shield by obscure characters who began to indoctrinate the world on calling apples – onions and onions – potatoes, whilst proceeding with mutilation and sterilisation of unsuspecting children (a) in children’s bodies and often children (b) in adult bodies, who were not allowed to resolve the complex issues forced upon them by a society which seek to erases biological and empathic boundaries in the name of supposed equality.
Do you even realise whose hands you’re playing in whilst stating that Super Empaths “Their views and attitudes need to be admirable and likeable.” — Likeable?? By whom??
Mr. Tudor–
I don’t usually read comments, but the comments on your poll about Rowling were interesting, and they really got me thinking. I think that some were an interesting study in either emotional thinking or needing to assert control or the polarized western world.
1. How much does an individual’s agreement or disagreement with another person’s opinion(s) influence how they view that person in terms of empathy–placing them within your classifications?
2. Are narcissistics, normals, or empaths the quickest to judge someone who disagrees with them or are they all about the same and they judge quickly with different drivers?
I’m enjoying Greta’s analysis as well. I don’t find her likeable, based on her behaviors, whereas I have loved Harry Potter since I was a child–so I’ve begun both of these analyses with different emotional “pre-settings” in a way. And you’ve mentioned how some people who’ve worked with her and complimented her may be predisposed to liking her because they share the same opinions.
Greta’s analysis is quite different, and I’m eager to see whether I’m right there as well–part of my thoughts are directed by what I remember you stating previously. Especially given the additional info about her diagnoses being so public. I find the reversal of her depression and difficulties (as shared by her mother) when she began getting attention for her activism quite fascinating. I can see in her story many similarities to other autistic women’s stories. That being said, I’ve also seen many behaviors inconsistent with those stories. Different parents from different times and places–different results? Or is there more than ASD and OCD? What is her Tudor classification? Looking forward to learning more from you, sir.
Thank you so much for everything! Much appreciated.
I was hoping she’d turn out to be a narcissist and I was a bit frustrated that she wasn’t one. I’ve been so disappointed in her actions and statements over the past few years. She started with what could be somewhat reasonable concerns but as time’s gone by she seems to have been motivated to dig down deeper by reactions she’s received; encouraged from support and provoked from criticism.
But of course this is how Supers can operate. And I accept that she has shown empathy and can show it and even accept that she believes she’s showing empathy now and is standing up for the underdog.
Unfortunately, while women might still have lower status and power in society compared to men, women are not the underdogs when compared to the transgender community. That group, very small minority that they are, vulnerable to abuse and danger, are the underdogs.
Transgenderism and the personal and social decisions that relate to it form a complex issue. Glibness and dismissiveness are not the way to deal with complex issues.
It’s a good reminder for me that Super Empaths are not admirable and likeable just because they are Super. Their views and attitudes need to be admirable and likeable. Lack of empathy, defensiveness, argumentativeness, cruelty and dismissiveness are unpleasant, narcissistic traits. Even if they were in the service of admirable views they would be problematic, unpleasant traits.
I do appreciate the analysis and I don’t question the result because I know and trust the careful and deliberate process behind it. Thankyou HG.
Annaamel,
There are some of us who would disagree with your opinion that those born female are not the underdog regarding the treatment they’ve received by the transgender community. Same for children being the underdog to the trans community also. The empathy JK Rowling has shown has been rightfully placed, in my opinion.
AA,
I’m posting a link to an essay thst JK Rowling wrote. I hope Mr. Tudor allows it. I think you might find it helpful. It was written in 2020.
https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/
Thank you for posting this Leigh. It only makes sense that as an empath, JKR would have empathy for both. I do also, in this case I just see the physiological differences as too great to make for equality.
Hi AV!
Its always nice to see your name pop up!
I’m glad this helped. It helped me when I read it too. I definitely saw JKR’s empathy in that essay.
Thankyou for your comments, AV and Leigh. We have differing opinions, which is okay.
I am interested in is how the Super school presents and wonder what you think. If I remember correctly you both have some Super in your profile, as do I.
I made a comment in my post that Supers can be hard to like if their opinions differ from ours.
If I look at clashes on the blog, Supers are often involved (maybe even always). I suspect it’s aspects of the Super school at work. Those narcissistic traits express themselves.
I admire Super traits but see problems in Super responses as well.
Hi AA,
Yes, I have some super in my makeup.
I do agree that many of the clashes on the blog have been between super empaths. But I also think that sometimes there’s a narc involved. But that’s just my opinion.
For myself, sometimes I can really dig my heals in. Do you remember the conversation about CoDs? There was some differing opinions there. That’s an instance where I felt compelled to protect the underdog and dug my heals in. I felt CoDs were getting a bad rap and I didn’t like that. In my debates though, I tried not to insult or criticize. I think when people insult, criticize and dismiss, thats an indicator.
When I’ve been in involved with other clashes on the blog sometimes its because my pride has been offended. Pride being a narcissistic trait can trigger a negative reaction. I’ve been trying to work on responding vs reacting. In my clash with NA, I did get resolution and I eventually felt heard. If I don’t feel heard or a situation isn’t resolved, thats an indicator to me as well.
I think its important to look at how a person is reacting to the different opinions. We don’t all have to agree but we all should respect each other’s thoughts and opinions.
With JKR, I didn’t think she was saying that transgender people shouldn’t have rights. I thought she was saying, please just don’t infringe on women’s rights in the process of giving right to transgender people. In my opinion, we need a happy medium.
Annaamel,
What I “think” is that you’ll have to do your research without my opinion on the matter, I am not a guinea pig nor does the topic interest me. What I will tell you is that whether or not someone likes me because I have a different opinion than they do is not a problem I concern myself with. If you wish to attribute that to Super, that is up to you.
Annaamel,
After considering your question a little more, I want to add that Supers are not the only empaths with narcissistic traits, all have them, and specifically CoD’s in my life can show them strongly and with less provocation than I would ever. Standards and Contagions will also but I think less often and possibly less strongly. I am in fact a Standard first, though Super is a very close second.
The difference between where the empath will show narc traits and where a narc will is the motive behind it, which can be difficult to determine. This is why taking a look at the broader picture of what is known of a person is important.
I also would not say that the majority of clashes on the blog involve Supers, per what I wrote above. I think quite often they involve one or more narcissists though.
I don’t really understand why the super school is being blamed for bad behavior here…How many times has Mr. Tudor said that empaths are not saints, that the majority of people who behave badly online are normals (being 50% of the population, having no emotional empathy for those outside their circle, and the ability to easily be nasty without having to see the consequences that social media offers)? Contagions, standards, codependents, hybrids, normals, and narcissistic people are just as capable of behaving badly as narcissists (and apparently super empaths {sarcasm alert}). Is there something wrong with having a strong opinion and sharing or defending it? Is there something wrong with wanting to silence/cancel/attack/etc someone just because they disagree?
I’ve seen arguments here. I’ve seen people I suspect are narcissists, not many. I’ve seen those who’ve confirmed they are empaths (and were not refuted by the Ultra–and I’ve seen one who was told–you are not x empath by Mr. Tudor, and they argued back with him). I’ve seen people (regardless of classification) who may have misinterpreted what was said or the way in which it was meant…and reacted poorly in a moment of hurt. Perhaps some had a bad day–and when they checked their email for responses to their comments–something they read just hit them in the way to cause a blow-up. Some habitually behave badly with each other, but with other commenters, there’s rarely a problem.
Some people are like oil and water…others are like gasoline and a lit match. I don’t know that every situation where two people fail to get along—it means that one is a narcissist. Sometimes…they’re both narcissists. Sometimes neither is.
I remember Truthseeker saying in a conversation that we shared that she gets tired of people emphasizing the higher narcissistic traits of the super empath. It’s just as important to remember that they have very high empathy and the way the empathy works as well, being more difficult to get negative fuel from. And the critical difference (as I understand) is that the super empath draws that line–this far, no further. Are there super empaths who are lower in argumentativeness? With stories I remember her sharing–she wasn’t arguing. She said her piece and that was it. To me, that is a very different action than the internet arguments that Rowling gets into. It’s that line that makes the super empath to me, not necessarily the higher narcissistic traits.
Very well said, Dani.
Dani,
I always understood this phrase of drawing a line to mean that the person would tolerate bad behaviour up to a certain point, and once this line is crossed, the person would start to fight back for what they believe in, which is exactly what JK Rowling is doing.
Hi Anna Plyance–
I think that the saviour cadre being high is just as responsible (if not more) than the super school. If a super empath without her level of saviour was in her place–but instead had martyr…I don’t think this situation would look the same.
It’s interesting how Gervais and Bale (also super empaths, with a little contagion and a little codependent) and also with saviour traits…aren’t involved in (what looks like to me–as someone who sees just the headlines and has almost zero interest in social media platforms owned by a man starting his own political party) this spat. However, the issue of foster children for Bale and Animal rights for Gervais–they don’t have the same environment that currently entrenches the women’s rights vs trans-rights debate.
So I wonder how much of Rowling’s behavior is driven by the high empathy and how much is the result of the toxicity of X–formerly Tw**ter (I liked Mr. Tudor’s nickname for that platform)–and the current environment that surrounds this particular issue.
What do specific narcissistic traits do when they high-jack empathic cadres, if such a thing happens?
For me: I view drawing that line in the sand as just having the conviction to state my point without standing there arguing with someone. (Though, Rowling has many people, and I don’t know if she has lengthy exchanges with the majority…so it may be that she does something similar.)
FINAL NOTE: I find it fascinating how Mr. Tudor has described how the saviour cadre functions within each school. It’s a superlative article, well worth checking out for any who haven’t.
These are just my now thoughts. All thoughts subject to change.
Hi Dani,
I agree with what AV said below. I’ve enjoyed your comments and our conversations over the years as well. Your comments are often thought provoking.
From my own experience, sometimes the super isn’t just about drawing a line in the sand, sometimes its digging my heals in as well. JKR’s goal is to protect woman’s rights. I think you’re on to something with your suggestion about the savior cadre being at play as well. I would gather that her Super Savior has come to the fore and that’s causing her to really dig her heals in.
I think Gervais and Bale aren’t as concerned with women’s rights and so they don’t get involved. At least that’s how I see it.
Hi Leigh!
Thank you for your kind words. I’m glad that you enjoy my questions.
I can understand digging your heals in…For me, I arrive at “This conversation is going nowhere.” more quickly than others perhaps, and I disengage from it. I guess my method when dealing with narcs (and most people I deal with aren’t) is to block the fuel pipe as much as necessary.
Gervais and Bale are involved in different charities with different climates.
For me, Rowling has the school, cadres, and particular trait mixture and is in the environment that drives the behaviors. (Your comment about the geyser (missing from Rowling) and the anger really stands out.) I don’t think it’s right to just point at the super empaths and say…”Dementor! Dementor!” every time one of them behaves badly in our opinion. We have our lens that we look at situations through. My observation is that we tend to blame one school rather than taking observing the whole.
The patronus charm protects the mind, and Mr. Tudor has been teaching me how to cast it. I’m getting better at it. I’ve got a lot more to practice before I master it.
(Love topically using these references…thank you, sir, for the opportunity to do so in the perfect context!)
Hi Dani,
I had to look up “patronus charm” since I was unfamiliar with that terminology. I haven’t seen any of the Harry Potter movies or read any of the books. Crazy, right?!? I also haven’t heard Mr. Tudor use that phrase before. Thank you for enlightening me. After reading about it, I love the meaning of it!
I agree. We should look at things in the whole. Its not just our schools and cadres that will affect our behaviors. Our traits will affect them too. JKR might have a strong justice trait that’s driving her as well.
Hi Dani.
As I understand it, part of what gives someone a Super classification is their propensity to rise up when they detect a problem and answers which reflect high empathy are not enough to push someone into the Super school. The detector needs to pick up that the person won’t avoid confrontation. The degree to which or how often they are willing to rise up affects their Super percentage.
Supers definitely don’t need to respond aggressively or mean spiritedly. There are lots of Supers on the blog who don’t get mean when challenged and TS is a good example.
I believe the 10 narcissistic traits the TD identifies are argumentativeness, defiance, resentment, vanity, showcasing, selfishness, pride, anger, envy/jealousy and infidelity. Even though Supers will be higher in these traits than Standard empaths, they don’t need to be high in all the traits. My guess is that some of these traits push people towards more defensive or aggressive responses.
Cadres may also play a role as they reflect response style as well as priorities. TS has a good chunk of magnet, I think, which reflects a desire to maintain social relationships and show respect for others.
Hi AA,
For myself, I have a significant portion of Geyser and a strong anger trait. That combination can make me a bit volatile. I’m getting better at controlling my mouth but sometimes its still difficult. Sometimes pride is involved too. If someone’s pride is offended, that can cause a negative reaction as well.
Hi Dani,
Your comment has given me some ideas.
It occurred to me that JK Rowling is a talented writer and uses words and stories extensively in her work which has made her very successful in her career as a writer. In HG’s Tudorscope analysis, I recall him saying that JKR enjoyed creating stories and writing them down from a very young age.
This tells me that her innate and natural way to communicate is to use words and to verbalise her thoughts. She connects with others through talking and writing; by conveying her views and opinions through words, essays and stories.
On the outside, it can appear that she is argumentative; that she can’t let things go; and that she keeps the conflict going.
Perhaps, to JKR on the inside, she is trying to connect and communicate. To her, words, thoughts and ideas are her ‘go to’ method of connecting with others.
If you add honesty and integrity to the mix, then you can see that JKR – in her mind and motivations – is not arguing in order to create conflict or friction, or to piss people off.
Instead, she is exercising her innate trait of using words to communicate along with her innate trait of being honest.
It’s actually admirable when you think about it like this.
JKR doesn’t ignore her trollers. She doesn’t ghost or stonewall them. She doesn’t dismiss them. She doesn’t treat them like they don’t exist and have no meaning to her.
She actually confronts them and communicates with them. And, she does it consistently and honestly.
Having said that …
I would like to qualify my thoughts here. I want to stress that I’m not saying that it is less admirable or ‘wrong’ in some way to *not* communicate or verbalise thoughts and opinions.
Those who would rather stand back from an argument or ignore someone because they wish to ‘draw a line’ and stop the discussion have their own innate ways of communicating and their own innate ways to be true to themselves.
For example, those who do not engage with trolls the way JKR does may think that the consequences are better or safer or more ‘honest’ or ‘correct’ if they simply ignore the trolls.
It’s about the perspective. There is no ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ way. There are different ways because of different perspectives.
When it comes to empaths, the schools of super or contagion or co-d can each be demonstrated in different ways. They do not always ‘present’ in the same way even though the underlying action generally shows a similar motivation.
There is detail and nuance involved in the empathic traits. If you talk to ten super empaths for example, you will probably receive ten different ways that ‘drawing a line in the sand’ is actually demonstrated. These differences are based on personality differences that make us all individually unique.
Hi Dani,
My understanding, if I remember right, is that super empaths are harder for narcs to break, and impossible for some narcs to even control. But in the case of those narcs who can control and even break them, they offer a better challenge.
Supers are very high in empathic traits, they also have high narcissistic traits, and will have most or all of both. The difference being that the empathic traits are like a bright spotlight, the narc ones, even in supers, are more like a candle, maybe a 5-quick candle in a super, but still not their strongest, not their first go to.
Once they’ve drawn the line, and that is earlier and more decisively than other empaths, they will likely follow through. A different type of empath might have enough and decide to make some change but will be more easily won back by the narc where a super is more likely to go through with the change, once that line has been drawn.
I wrote another reply which has not been posted yet, so this may be redundant, but CoDs can also have high narc traits, though different from supers, not usually most or all of them, same as their empathic traits. Again, it is a spotlight to a candle but as a result, CoDs can be very temperamental. They are as much, or more, likely to respond strongly, even attacking, if “triggered” than a super and will often do it in a more emotional and defensive manner. Unlike a super, they are the least likely to escape a narc without outside help yet they can be very assertive, even aggressive, when feeling pushed. Obviously, due to their makeup, many narcs want them too, like supers, and they are easier to control so sought after.
Another difference, if I remember right, is that a super is more likely to draw the line between themselves and the narc, due to the narc’s bad behavior, whereas the CoD will be just as likely to use their narc traits against others as they will toward the narc. The super seems to be better able to pinpoint the source of the problem. Any category of empath can state a differing opinion on a blog
Really, blaming any category of person for “bad behavior” because we simply have differing opinions says a lot more about the one doing the blaming than the one who stated their differing opinion.
Thank you for your thoughtful additions to the blog over the years Dani, you have added much, with your questions and comments. I have appreciated it.
AV says, “Really, blaming any category of person for “bad behavior” because we simply have differing opinions says a lot more about the one doing the blaming than the one who stated their differing opinion.” – That’s it in a nutshell!
Hello Anna Plyance, annaamel, and WiserNow,
I put in a response. It’s either in moderation or it didn’t make it. I just didn’t want you to think that I was ignoring you. I very much appreciated your responses.
Dani
Hi Dani (replying here so you will find it),
thank you very much for your insightful comment!
Your assumption about a different outcome if she had martyr elements seems to me to be a reasonable one.
I agree with Leigh that Bale and Gervais are likely not as involved in the trans issue because women’s rights are not their personal rights, they are not affected directly. I have yet to see a female-born athlete forcing her way into men’s sports and taking medals from men, for example, so men are far less affected by the whole debate, it is largely one-directional.
When you are promoting the welfare of foster children and animals, it is generally not directly detrimental to the rights or resources of some other group, so there is no clearly recognisable opposing side like in the trans-rights fight. Allocating resources to animals or foster children obviously means that you do not give these resources to some other cause, but there is no direct link. Whereas giving additional rights to self-identified trans women, such as which bathrooms to use, automatically means infringing upon the rights of women and creating potential danger to women where there was none before. In many respects it is a zero-sum game, whereas improving the lives of foster children is a win-win situation with no obvious loser. This is why the trans issue has become so toxic, it is no longer about equal rights for two groups, it is about giving additional rights to one group at the expense of the other. As is so often the case, the group whose hard-won rights are threatened are women. And as we know from HG, many of those clamouring for those additional rights are narcissists who have hijacked the issue for their own purposes. And naturally, they want special treatment. Rowling uses her fame and fortune to give a voice to those who would otherwise not be heard for all the screaming of the narc activists and to show those people up for what they are. I think she sees it as necessary to keep on doing what she does, otherwise the silent majority will continue to be ignored in favour of the screaming fringes. Remaining silent in the face of what you see as evil is never a good strategy.
Hi AA,
I previously responded to this comment but for some reason it seems to be lost. I’m going to try and remember what I originally wrote.
Yes, you are correct. I have super in my makeup. For me, the super helps me dig my heels in too. I can be like a dog with a bone if I feel strongly about something. It can help drive me forward too. I think that’s what’s happening with JKR. She feels strongly about protecting women’s rights and she’s digging her heels in. That doesn’t mean she doesn’t want transgender people to have rights. She just doesn’t want their rights to infringe on womens rights.
As for controversy between bloggers, in my opinion, its not always between two empaths. Sometimes there’s a narc involved too.
For me, one way I can tell if Im dealing with a narc or not is do I feel like the controversy has been resolved? My situation with NA is a perfect example. It felt resolved and put to a rest. That was a time where I dug my heals in and it turned out I was the one wrong and misunderstood her.
Empaths can be mean too. I’ve been told on numerous occasions that I’m mean. I don’t look at meanness, necessarily. I think meanness is subjective. What one person thinks is mean, another person might now.
I try to see if they’re willing to have an open mind about the subject matter. If not, then why? Is it there super empathy driving them because they have strong convictions? Or Is it because you’re dealing with a narc and you’ve challenged them by questioning them? I’m not sure how to explain it but I think theres a distinct difference.
annaamel,
“Transgenderism and the personal and social decisions that relate to it form a complex issue. Glibness and dismissiveness are not the way to deal with complex issues.”
Your comment reminded me of an incident that happened to me years ago.
It was many years ago, way before the current public discussions surrounding ‘transgenderism’ and ‘trans-women’ and ‘non-binary’ genders, etc.
Back in those days, there were very, very low numbers of men who dressed as women and it was rare to see them in normal, everyday situations amongst the general public. The language surrounding them back then was also different. It was more basic and matter-of-fact. The words used in respectful conversation to describe such men were ‘transvestite’ and ‘cross-dresser’.
The incident I experienced involved seeing a cross-dressing man in a ladies room, so it is very much related to the current discussions that revolve around the sharing of public toilets.
At the time, I was much younger and worked in a large department store in the city. The store had a number of floors and it was popular and busy throughout the day with a lot of customers and foot traffic.
The store had a number of public toilets located on different levels. At that time, it did not have separate staff toilets (that I knew of anyway) and therefore, staff would visit the same toilets used by the public. While working, I would try to use the ladies rooms on quieter floors where there was less traffic and therefore less customers using them.
On one particular day, while in the ladies toilets in a quiet department, I was washing my hands at a basin when a cross-dressing man walked out of a cubicle behind me and began washing his hands at a basin a few feet away from me. We were the only two people in the ladies room.
I looked at him in the mirror and it was glaringly obvious that he was a man dressed as a woman. I think I must have stared and looked startled because he looked at me and smiled and said hello in a friendly way.
It was unnerving to say the least. I remember the moment very well. I wasn’t expecting a man to walk out of a cubicle and it took a second or two to realise exactly what was happening. At first I was calm and didn’t want to stare too much and then after a second my calmness turned into a state of thinking, “I have to get out of here.” It felt weird, unsafe and threatening, even though I didn’t feel outright fear.
I finished washing my hands without being too abrupt and then made my way out of the ladies room at a generally normal pace.
Afterwards, I told another staff member about what happened. She flippantly said words to the effect of, “oh yeah, that’s Kevin. He comes in every now and then. He’s quite friendly.” (I can’t remember his actual name; I’m just using Kevin as an example.)
The incident came and went and I didn’t think much more about it. It was a very rare incident and I didn’t mention it to anyone else because it didn’t seem important.
I think at the time I was young and it was such a rarity to see a cross-dressing man that it was more of a curiosity than an immediate threat. If it happened now, I would definitely feel the danger of it more keenly.
When I think back on this experience, I can see that there is a distinct line between the conceptual and intellectual ways that ‘transgenderism’ is discussed as a ‘complex issue’ and the very real and immediate way it is experienced in everyday situations.
I think it is still a rarity in most places to see a ‘trans-woman’ in real-life. Also, I think it can pose a very real threat to women depending on the situation. When it comes to public toilets, I think biological males should use male toilets.
Hello again annaamel,
After writing this comment, I have thought about this memory and also about the current public discourse surrounding transgenderism.
Please know that I do appreciate what you have said here, even though it raises some questions for me.
Regarding my memory of the experience of seeing a cross-dressing man in a ladies room, it was so long ago that I can’t actually remember if the staff member I talked to about it gave the cross-dressing man a male or female name.
In my comment here, I said ‘Kevin’ as an example in telling of my experience. I can’t actually remember if it was a male or female name she used. The staff member could equally have said words to the effect of, “oh yeah, that’s Barbara. She comes in every now and then. She’s quite friendly.”
Thinking about it logically, if the cross-dressing man was dressed as a woman complete with makeup, high heels and all the mannerisms of a woman, it’s more likely that ‘he’ would have introduced himself to people as ‘Barbara’ rather than as ‘Kevin’.
The thing that occurs to me about this though is that I remember very clearly the feelings I had when I was in the ladies room in that situation. The feelings of surprise, discomfort, vague threat, feeling unsafe, and being startled have stayed with me throughout the years. The name of him/her and the politically correct ‘gender’ to describe him/her did not stay within my memory as important or memorable details. In addition, these ‘peripheral’ aspects have not remained the same over time in a social sense either.
When I think about your comment regarding JK Rowling and your disappointment in her actions and statements, it makes me see that people react to red flags, or potential threat, or abuse in ways that are not always admirable in the eyes of other people.
I’m not sure if you have read the essay that Leigh posted here. If you have, you’ll see that JKR was treated horribly on social media by so-called ‘trans activists’. She was called all sorts of things, threatened and trolled over a long period of time. I think that sort of abusive treatment would make most people react in ways they would not normally react if not for the abuse.
In her essay, JKR explained that she stopped using social media for a while due to the detrimental effect that trolling and abuse was having on her. After a period of time, she went back to social media for reasons that were totally unrelated to transgender matters. Even so, she continued to be bombarded with a barrage of abuse from the trans activists who resumed their trolling.
Going back to my experience from years ago, I now see that pronouns; or the correct name; or gender-based laws; or signs on public toilets; or what your friends think; or whether you’re famous; or whether you’re on social media; etc – none of this makes a whole lot of difference to your immediate emotional response when you’re in a situation that is abusive or dangerous.
I can also imagine that genuine ‘trans-women’ (note here the word ‘genuine’) feel the same way and also feel the emotional reaction when facing a potential threat or immediate danger.
“Their views and attitudes need to be admirable and likeable.”
Really? Admirable and likeable to whom and in what situations? Who is the arbiter that decides what is admirable and likeable? Are these admirable and likeable traits supposed to stay at the same level regardless of other factors?
I think that ’empathy’ can make it possible to see why certain behaviours and traits are activated in response to a specific situation.
It also makes me think that trying to be admirable and likeable at the same level all of the time is actually the creation of a facade.
annaamel,
Your comment raised a few questions for me and made me remember something from years ago.
Please know that I do appreciate your comment and your views even though we may disagree on certain things.
Hi WN.
Disagreement on this topic is understandable.
I am sorry you felt fear in the bathroom. I’ve also had experiences where I’ve felt deeply uncomfortable and even threatened. All mine involved men who were in regular men’s clothes. They were all in public places, on streets, in trains, on train stations. I was often alone or it was an environment where there were not many other women about. Most were in Australia but one of my stories is from France and another from Spain. It’s all over.
I also have a daughter who dresses in boys’ clothes and has done since she could make a choice, which was from about three years old. She doesn’t wear make up and has short hair. I’d be very unhappy if anyone ever made her feel uncomfortable for her choices or questioned her use of the women’s toilets. Her life has already been made more complicated because of her personal preferences.
While I recognise there are predators in the world, I tend to see them as a separate group to people who want or don’t want to express a particular gender.
I want to make the lives of people like my daughter as stress free and peaceful as possible.
Hi annaamel,
From your comment, I can see that the issues of gender and identity can be very complex, especially if your child is directly affected. This can change the way it impacts someone in a very personal way.
I’m sorry if my comments were insensitive to you or your daughter.
I can understand that you want to make your daughter’s life and the life of those like her as stress free and peaceful as possible – which is not easy or straightforward to do and must feel like a neverending battle at times.
I agree with you that “predators” are a “separate group”. In the general scheme of things, I think most people would be peaceful and tolerant and would not want to cause anyone distress or difficulty.
The issues arise, I think, when it’s not clear who the “predators” are, so then it becomes a case of needing to adopt a self-protective attitude towards everyone ‘just in case’.
When I contemplate it from various angles, it is complex and difficult to solve. There are various ways to contemplate the situation and making any specific decision will necessarily discredit or harm someone in some way.
When I think back to the memory I have from years ago, I didn’t actually feel “fear” as such. It was a mix of curiosity, discomfort and feeling the potential of a threat. It wasn’t outright fear though.
This makes me think that the novelty of the experience – that is, not having experienced something like that before – was startling but also induced curiosity.
Perhaps when there is more discussion and more information that becomes ‘mainstream’, the way people in general think about the subject changes until it becomes less ‘unknown’ and more understood.
Thank you for your comments, annaamel, and best wishes to you and your daughter as well.
Thank you so much for this, sir. I really enjoyed it. I was leaning strongly toward her being a super empath, and I was right about the saviour cadre. I also thought there must be some contagion based on what you shared during her analysis. I thought she was majority saviour with a bit of magnet. I didn’t pick up on the carrier. Maybe because carrier is a much quieter behaviour than saviour.
Something I noticed, at least with how you described her carrier cadre, was that it seemed to me that the carrier was being used extensively for her family–particularly her daughter when she was living in poverty. I don’t recall hearing anything I recognized as carrier extending to the public. It’s the saviour being shown to the public particularly regarding the pro women stance she has taken. And magnet filling in around the edges. (Far lighter on the magnet than the other two.)
For a triple hybrid, is that a way that things commonly break down–with one cadre more private (and the carrier is the cadre that has a “stop button” as opposed to martyr) while another is more the public face? Or is it more likely that her carrier traits when appearing in public have been less publicized (because until the trans-debate she didn’t have much of a public presence)?
Hearing her whole analysis and then the breakdown of schools and cadres…then the graph…it was hugely beneficial.
Thank you so much! Looking forward to the next analysis. Please more empaths.
You are welcome.
Dani, my nerves were frayed throughout the whole JK analysis! I didn’t see her being a normal or narcissist. But because she puts up with the rage of the blind and confused and simply continues to withstand not being hindered by the masses, I thought of perhaps an extremely creative, imaginative and intelligent narcissistic person. And when HG mentioned certain indicators it became clear to me where the contagion aspect stood out…Savior, Magnet and Carrier made sense, but Co-d was a surprise.
Overall the more I like and admire someone the more their stance and perspective is comprehensible to me and I’ll stand by their side anyway. It’s not fools admiration but rather their perspective and actions would align with a moral compass.
There are individuals who I suspect could be narcissists but there is an alignment over the benefit and help they bring to society, where I don’t make a difference if they do it for fuel or because it’s the right thing to do. JK’s classification wouldn’t have changed my feelings and support of her, only the reason why she does what she does would have been clarified.
However, it was a huge inspirational relief! For me JK is a hero and her books seem to write not only history but reality, given how she points at the red flags emerging at the horizon of a far more sinister force which she stands against.
Hi Dani,
Your observations about JK Rowling and HG’s analysis made me think about how the empath cadres manifest.
“Something I noticed, at least with how you described her carrier cadre, was that it seemed to me that the carrier was being used extensively for her family–particularly her daughter when she was living in poverty. I don’t recall hearing anything I recognized as carrier extending to the public.”
It’s interesting to me how the carrier cadre and saviour cadre are interpreted. For instance, to me, JKR’s cadres work together. When she felt the need to ‘rescue’ the orphan boy in a cage that she saw in a photo, it was her saviour trait that spurred her to act and visit the boy in the orphanage to see how she could ‘save’ him.
When she felt the need to organise and fund the Lumos charity that she co-founded in order to change the way children were treated in institutions, the funding, organisation and ongoing promotion of the charity were spurred by her carrier trait. This is how I interpret her carrier trait.
I think you’re right in that the carrier trait works more quietly than the saviour trait. Carrier tends to get things done behind the scenes and it does the longer-term ‘process’ or maintenance work in order to transform a situation in material ways where it sees a need to do so.
It makes me think that there’s a little bit of ‘saviour’ in the carrier trait and there’s a little bit of ‘carrier’ in the saviour trait. The way I see the traits, there is a degree of overlap between them. They are not totally mutually exclusive.
I enjoyed HG’s analysis of JK Rowling as well and I hope there are more empaths that go under the Tudorscope. It really helps to see how the empath cadres play out with different people.
Hi WN!
I agree. I think that some cadres play off and influence each other. I’m hoping that Mr. Tudor will share Ricky Gervais’s schools and cadres. I don’t have as good of a sense of him. I was putting him in the empath category–because his controversies have been solely based around his career as a comedian.
I’m thinking standard empath with maybe a little super or contagion (no one is entirely one school). I didn’t see anything CoD in him. I don’t see anything like Rowling’s armored up and riding into battle on social media in what was described about Gervais. For cadres, I think saviour. All the money he gives to help animals. (I really like that.) Other than that one, I’m a little mystified.
Do you have any thoughts on schools/cadres for Ricky?
Hi Dani,
Have you had a chance to listen to HG’s school and cadre video regarding Ricky Gervais?
I’ve listened to it and Ricky’s schools are Standard, Super (majority), Contagion (minority) and Co-D (minority).
His cadres are Geyser (majority), Saviour (minority) and Magnet (minority).
Before listening to HG’s school and cadre video, it wasn’t clear to me what Ricky’s schools and cadres are. I like him as a comedian and I think he’s funny and charismatic. I’ve watched ‘The Office’, ‘Extras’, his hosting of Awards shows, and other comedy material. I haven’t watched ‘Derek’ or ‘Afterlife’.
Considering HG’s Tudorscope analysis combined with my own thoughts about Ricky, I guessed correctly that Super was a main school. He says some controversial and critical things about other celebrities which tells me he draws a line in relation to things he will not tolerate. I also guessed correctly that Geyser was a main cadre because Ricky has a very expressive way of communicating. He often laughs spontaneously while telling a joke. He also has a spontaneous and expressive acting style.
As for the other schools and cadres, I didn’t guess Co-D because I didn’t think he has that tendency nor does he appear to be attracted to narcissists. I also didn’t see that Ricky has a significant Contagion minority. Perhaps if I had been familiar with Derek and Afterlife, I would have thought differently. I also thought he may have some Carrier traits due to his long-term decision to donate to animal causes.
When I think of Ricky as a comedian, I can see that he is likeable and warm and he draws people to himself easily. Therefore, I can see how Magnet is a cadre. I can also see that he is very observant in the way he creates detailed and distinctive characters in his programs like The Office and Extras which could be related to his Contagion school.
Thanks for the question, Dani. You’ve made me consider in greater detail exactly how I felt about Ricky Gervais and why. By becoming aware of these ‘impressionistic’ kinds of feelings and matching them up with the categories of HG’s schools and cadres, I can better define and understand my own thoughts and opinions.
‘I also didn’t see that Ricky has a significant Contagion minority. Perhaps if I had been familiar with Derek and Afterlife, I would have thought differently’
I think that’s true and I reckon Derek in particular showed deep understanding of and compassion for senior adults who are often dismissed or overlooked by society. I found it kind of groundbreaking and I don’t think it could have come from someone who didn’t have Contagion empathy.
Thank you very much, HG, for this thorough analysis of JK Rouling and your time.
Pleasant to know, I have very similar Empath type as her, just instead of Savior, I’ve got Geyzer.
I suspected from the start she is an Empath, cause I read sometime ago about her abusive relationship with her husband and reminded me of my short 2 years experience with a classic Narcissist, who used physical violence and threats. Plus her books, the way it’s written. I guess Dementors represent Narcissism and Lord Voldemort is a narcissistic psychopath, greater.
I read Harry Potter in original language, and I remember I had to use Google a lot during the first book, the Philosopher’s Stone. Then I get used to/learn her vocabulary and finished next 6 books within couple weeks, it was so addictive, I barely slept, though I watched movies and knew the ending. She used a lot of synonyms/variations for the word “to say”, omg, I didn’t know so many exist. English language is very rich language, and sometimes for 10 English words only 3-4 possible Russian translations, which makes use of translator useless, and only English-English dictionary helps. Like for example, I learned/encounter in your books, HG, probably about 10-15 more synonyms (some strong, some weak match) for the word “humiliate” – degrade, belittle, degrace, scorn, put down, denigrate, indignify, dishonor, defame, demean, debase, devalue and some others I don’t remember. Why to have so many. Maybe in old England, people were masters of various types of humiliation and needed to create additional words. I’m joking, ofc, but I do find it interesting.
And, off topic and related to narcissism: my ex-husband, narcissist, after almost two weeks of completely ignoring me at work while we were occasionally passing each other in the hallways, today, while walking towards me to pass, was looking at me, smirking, and winked at me, without saying anything and passed by. I don’t understand what that means. That he is simply in a good mood now, or he did something again to screw my life, which I don’t know yet about. He knows how to confuse me and makes me angry, and it makes me angry, that he knows that. I hope I would reach a point when I totally don’t care.
Hi Lilu–
Rowling actually said that the dementors were inspired by her experience with depression. Because they suck the joy out of their victims.
Hi Lilu:
I am recently divorced from my ex narc. Truly was my first up close experience with a narc. He lost it, and although I refused to live with him, it was he who filed ( I would have but was worried about $$$). We never spoke and haven’t but throughout our entire relationship including silent treatments he sends me songs to communicate. Always the same: he loves me, he was left, he is in pain. I found it confusing like the wink you describe. I think they do this on purpose as if you are confused, it pains you. So, in part, it’s punishment for setting boundaries or not giving them what they want. They know very well that silence is a verb, a weapon. Second, it enables them to erase responsibility. They give it time, avoid discussing the issues where they are probably at fault. So it is a shield. And when and if they hoover after time- the goal is enough time has past, the incident is forgotten , especially if you don’t react, they act like nothing happened. Don’t be surprised if someday your ex arc walks past and chats to you like he hasn’t been ignoring you for weeks or months. Some might be 100% disengaged and they are to self absorbed with no empathy towards you or how you feel to provide a decent closure or resolution/finality. I learned you give it to yourself and move on with your life. Finally I have learned to trust myself. I know why he does it: manipulation and control. My ex like yours knows being silent but winking, smirking is a game just like sending regular love songs. It’s meant to confuse you.
Hello Contagious 😊
Thank you for your comment.
I wish this blog sends a notification when someone replies, with a link, like in YT. Especially, “Question me” section. I put a comment there, and it’s like putting a message in the bottle and throw to the sea. Then it takes time to navigate through this maze of replies to find it. And moreover, even if I click at the bottom, on someone’s reply in QM section, quite often, it’s not loading for some reason. Or maybe some features doesn’t work for me, and for others do.
Yeah, his behavior still confuses me. For example, yesterday I was picking our son, and previously he would stay in the house and even wouldn’t great me. Just opens the door and let son walks to me. But yesterday, he was nice, and moreover gave me a new child car seat, mine is too small already (our son is 7 years old), replaced it, and returned me some of my stuff I left/forgot when I was moving out from him. I’ve already given up to get them back, and boom, he returned them. At such moments, I doubt that he is narc, but he is MMRA, so I guess it’s just a facade. I have got a closure, I don’t want anything from him, I don’t care, I don’t love him and don’t miss him. I miss a bit how he was at the beginning, but it’s gone and it’s over. I just want him to stop spoiling my life and behave like adults who want to make sure that our son has both parents in life, without a need to choose. And stop smearing me to him and tracking my actions. I’ve changed all passwords and checked my phone for spyware. I’ve accepted the losses, that he robbed me and moved on.
It’s the same with my 1st husband. We divorced like 100 years ago, but he still smears me to our daughter and his relatives. And our daughter is suffering from that, cause she loves me. I sometimes get angry when I hear from her, what he/they are saying and lash out at him via text or voice mails. And he just denied that. He even smears me to 2nd husband, so 2nd husband when we were arguing/fighting would say my 1st husband was absolutely right about me and he should’ve have listened to him. Oh, and once he found out I divorced in April , he texted me and invited me to dinner to discuss our daughter’s future, like we are old friends…
F… them both really.
Hi Lily:
HG could help! HG advice is worth every penny. My advice is to tell your child that his relationship with his father is his alone. His relationship with you is yours and his alone. And your relationship with your ex has nothing to do with him. So daddy might not like mommy but that has nothing to do with daddy loving him and you want him and his father to have the BEST relationship possible. If he “ gets it” then he might write off his father’s comments about you as not related to him in anyway. Children are smart, they know who is who. And if you provide the stability, love, nurture and respect… all it takes is ONE. This is what I did for my children and I am proud of the young adults they have become. Best wishes always!
Mr. Tudor,
I saw almost everything you saw too. The only thing I didn’t see is CoD. I guess I still have been some studying to do.
Thank you, Mr. Tudor!
Hi Leigh:
The only one I missed was magnet! Interesting.
Hi Contagious,
I knew JKR was a magnet because so many people are drawn to her. Even with her controversy with transgender issues, people are still drawn to her.
Meanwhile, I’m loving the analysis on Christian Bale. I think he’s a split between CoD, Super & Contagion. It might be an even split. I think he’s higher in CoD & Contagion then Ricky Gervais.
For his cadres, I see Magnet and Geyser. Since he’s been describe as stoic, there’s either Carrier or some Martyr in the mix too.
I’m really looking forward to this outcome!
Hi Leigh and Contagious,
Christian Bale is an interesting character. I’m enjoying HG’s Tudorscope analysis of him. He’s another person I didn’t know much about outside of his films. I’m looking forward to the outcome too.
With Christian, I think he is a deep thinker and he thinks widely about the thoughts, feelings and actions of other people. To me, he has warmth and kindness. He is also down-to-earth. In interviews, he shows openness and agreeableness, although he is also guarded in relation to the things he says and his private life. This tells me he is somewhat of a people-pleaser; he comes across as easygoing and agreeable, however, I think there is a limit to how much he will tolerate.
I think Christian’s schools include Contagion, Co-D and Super and his cadres include Carrier, Magnet and Martyr. I don’t see Geyser because I think he keeps his emotions to himself mostly. I don’t see him as very outwardly expressive person and he doesn’t wear his heart on his sleeve.
When I watch him in films, I like him as an actor. There is something grounded, warm and reliable about him as a person, regardless of the role he’s playing. Even if he’s playing a psychopath or covered in special effects makeup, I get the impression that the person underneath is trustworthy and caring.
Hi WN,
I saw Geyser because of how Bale acted on The Terminator Salvation set.
It turns out I was wrong about CoD. I thought his CoD would be more significant because he’s had feelings of inadequacy and self doubt. But he’s only 5% CoD.
I agree. I see warmth, reliability and caring in Bale as well. His warmth radiates when he smiles.
Wisernow:
At first, I thought middle Greater Narc as I didn’t know much about him at all except I think he is a brilliant actor and I read about the assault and terminator 2. But as HG went on, and I learned more about his life … it was obvious he was an empath. Just like with Ricky, I missed the Super empath element. I knew Bale was contagion as his acting demonstrates it. It’s why I thought middle greater at first as it was clear he can read people well even psychopaths lol. I also missed geyser as Bale comes off reserved to me. So I learn a lot when HG speaks of his system and what behavior fits it. And it helps me understand psychologically. Like the terminator 2 rant was BAD. He didn’t just refuse to suffer fools he ordered people around, demeaned them and went on and on and on. Since it was a “ one off” and out of character, and he apologized and made amends…the rest of his “ history” was clearly empath. I found it hard however to watch that terminator 2 rant as I have never lost it and acted like that and even Tom Hardy said “ No one messes with Chris, he is tough.” I have a sliver of Super. I also find savior and carrier to overlap and HG has demonstrated with his examples the differences so I appreciate the details. Overall it was a great empath series. It showed the different types and the nuances between them. Interesting that Co-d showed up in Ricky, Christian and JK in different ways and again just a sliver. JK and Bale from some instability in their early childhood and Ricky in his marriage. Interesting to me was the contagian arising from their artistry. Bale in developing his characters and in his ability to live truthfully in the moment or method acting by understanding others and JK in her books and spirituality. Magnet seems to apply to most public figures especially entertainers. I really enjoyed HG’s choices. I would be interested in Mother Theresa, and Jordan Peterson ( to me obvious). I gave HG a list of who I thought were 20 empaths that were famous and got two wrong on the list. Johnny Depp remains the one I was most stumped. And I get empaths correct but I often confuse killers as psychopaths and not narcs. I really thought Letby was a psychopath who played God accumulating babies. I also see it as evil. Evil not in HG’s lexicon or categorical system;)
Hi Leigh,
It’s funny how you mention Christian’s smile. When I see him smile, there’s something about it that makes me focus on it. It’s infectious. Maybe that’s an aspect of both the Geyser and the Magnet cadres working together?
I can see why you thought Christian has Geyser in his cadres. I listened to the audio of The Terminator Salvation incident and Christian sounded like he became very emotional and angry. It sounded like he couldn’t wind back the anger once it erupted. He gave everyone in the production team a piece of his mind and his rant went on for a while.
I can relate to that kind of anger. In the past when I was in situations with my family, I would get that angry. (I don’t react that way anymore, thank goodness.)
It’s not the kind of emotion that just switches off. It feels like your brain and body are inflamed and it’s a struggle to overcome the anger. In those situations, I felt like I was so provoked or backed in a corner that I had no choice but to lash out. When I reached that boiling point of white hot anger, it would take a while to de-escalate from it. The feelings would generally only de-escalate when I was alone and had time to get back to a calm, rational ‘thinking’ state with no-one around me. Then, my feelings would gradually morph over time (in either hours or sometimes days) from anger to resentment to regret to self-disappointment and lastly to thinking about ways to repair the damage.
Christian also lashed out in anger in another incident involving his mother and sister. At that time he even shoved his mother, so there was a physical element as well.
To me, these emotional outbursts are a different kind of emotionality compared to the general way the Geyser cadre shows itself.
The way Christian ‘exploded’ in an angry rant or by shoving his mother were more like uncharacteristic events rather than a regular way of expressing himself.
I think the outbursts show a volatile aspect to Christian. Maybe it’s a form of emotional dysregulation to some extent. When he’s in a situation that either makes him feel disrespected or devalued; or makes him feel he needs to protect himself or someone else, his usual easygoing or generous nature changes and he erupts with uncontrolled anger.
I can see how this volatility may also be an aspect of the Geyser cadre. It could be that when pushed to a certain point, his emotionality or expressiveness gets dialled up and it can go past his usual range of emotions.
Thanks for your reply, Leigh. From the discussions here on the blog, it’s evident that people interpret things in different ways and see things from different angles. I think the way each one of us sees and interprets the empath cadres can be different as well.
Hi WN,
You say, “From the discussions here on the blog, it’s evident that people interpret things in different ways and see things from different angles.” – That’s one of the things I love about this blog. Seeing the different perspectives helps me broaden my own view.
I can relate to that kind of anger too. I have Geyser too and I was awful as a teenager and a young woman. I would erupt all over the place. I’m better at controlling it now but sometimes it still sneaks out. I think as we mature, we realize those reactions don’t help.
Thank you for your reply as well, WN. I enjoy our conversations.
Great analysis Leigh:
I thought Martyr arising from his work. HG said carrier, but he spent months living on cigarettes and whisky to get so skinny and to portray the Machinist. That had to cause great pain and suffering just for an acting role….over a long period of time….and the weight gain. Same. The physical toll and RISKS to his personal health are extreme. Goes beyond a work ethic to me. The man sacrifices himself for a role. He is brilliant as an actor!
Hi Contagious,
I’m learning so much from these analyses! I hope Mr. Tudor continues!
I agree. I thought there was some martyr too. But maybe him risking his health to put on a perfect performance is due to his super element. Maybe thats how he rises to the challenge.
Hi Contagious,
Christian’s obsessive commitment to his acting roles is one reason I thought one of his cadres was Martyr – his drastic weight loss for ‘The Machinist’ being a prime example.
Another reason I thought Martyr was the way HG described the way Christian decided to pursue acting. After his first acting role at the age of nine, he realised acting was lucrative. This made him aware that he could help his family materially if he continued to do it.
The decisive way Christian pursued acting was based on his awareness that he needed to do what would benefit his family. I think this shows that he was willing to self-sacrifice (at a young age) and place others ahead of himself.
As HG says, the Martyr cadre makes an empath minimise their accomplishments even when they accomplish a lot. They shrug off and dismiss their own sacrifices and don’t draw attention to them. In Christian’s case, he’s a well-respected actor and known for his committed portrayals of his characters, yet he has little interest in winning awards or accolades.
In an interview I listened to during the course of HG’s Tudorscope series, Christian said he doesn’t compare himself to other actors because it’s irrelevant to the way he and other actors work and the things each actor brings to their craft. It sounds like Christian would rather not ‘compete’ with other actors out of respect for them.
These are the points that made me think Martyr was one of Christian’s cadres.
One thing about JK, I am a huge fan. I follow her on X. But I don’t get her EVERYDAY interchange on the trans issue. To me, she spoke out, made her point but why do the daily squabble????
Hi Contagious,
She has to be squabbling with someone in order for it to continue. Why does either side need that?