Narcissism or Narcissistic?
485722
Narcissism is a defense mechanism. It helps us to adapt to life, to compete, to regulate our sense of self-worth, and to fend off hurt. It is healthy in certain phases of life (childhood, adolescence) but if it persists, it is pathological.
939066
Main Entry:   selfish \nPart of Speech:   adjective \nDefinition:   egotistic \nSynonyms:   egocentric, egoistic, egoistical, egomaniacal, egotistic, egotistical, greedy*, hog, mean, mercenary, miserly, narcissistic, narrow, narrow-minded, parsimonious, prejudiced, self-centered, self-indulgent, self-interested, self-seeking, stingy, ungenerous \n\n\nhope it helps :)
754096
Personality Issues and Appearances.
573136
Ooh, I like the sound of those words! I will definitely use them in my story, tx!\n\n(By the Merriam-Webster Online)\n\nmalignant\nhttp://m-w.com/dictionary/malignant\n\ndestructive\nhttp://m-w.com/dictionary/destructive\n\nnarcissism\nhttp://m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?va=narcissism
865195
(1) If we only look at the surface, therefore reacting to perceptions and not to facts...\n(2) Organisations try to screen out people who "react to events"\n\nevents are facts, narcissists do not react to them (according to (1)) - ergo organizations do NOT try to screen out narcissists (at least, it is not deducible from (2)).\n\nlogic, my friend...
73745
mentally or physically?
984142
they are both sad yes...none more so than the other.\n\nAlthough...if i HAD to pick...I'd say the PERSON doing the controlling as they are knowingly doing emotional harm to another human being...taking advantage if you will.\n\nA PERSON that controls another person thinks too highly of themselves and has major issues that need to be addressed and a false sense of self esteem.\n\nAnd the PERSON being controlled is often lacking any self-esteem and the ability to make choices that benefit themselves...and needs help to understand their true selfworth.\n\nYep...pretty even there, but I definitely think the controlling person is worse..\n\n(side note...your question is fair..but some of us find the words sissy and ''soft little pansies' used to describe people just a LITTLE offensive..... :)
1183168
Zadanliran, I keep using the male third person singular because most narcissists (75%) are males and more so because there is little difference between the male and female narcissists.\n\nIn the manifestation of their narcissism, female and male narcissists, inevitably, do tend to differ. They emphasise different things. They transform different elements of their personalities and of their lives into the cornerstones of their disorder. \n\nWomen concentrate on their body (many also suffer from eating disorders: Anorexia Nervosa and Bulimia Nervosa). They flaunt and exploit their physical charms, their sexuality, their socially and culturally determined "femininity". They secure their Narcissistic Supply through their more traditional gender role: the home, children, suitable careers, their husbands ("the wife of…"), their feminine traits, their role in society, etc. \n\nIt is no wonder than narcissists – both men and women – are chauvinistic and conservative. They depend to such an extent on the opinions of people around them – that, with time, they are transformed into ultra-sensitive seismographs of public opinion, barometers of prevailing social fashions, and guardians of conformity. The narcissist cannot afford to seriously alienate his "constituency", those people who reflect his False Self back to him. The very proper and on-going functioning of the narcissist's Ego depends on the goodwill and the collaboration of his human environment.\n\nTrue, besieged and consumed by pernicious guilt feelings – many a narcissist finally seek to be punished. The self-destructive narcissist then plays the role of the "bad guy" (or "bad girl"). But even then it is within the traditional socially allocated roles. To ensure social opprobrium (read: attention), the narcissist exaggerates these roles to a caricature. \n\nA woman is likely to label herself a "whore" and a male narcissist to self-style himself a "vicious, unrepentant criminal". Yet, these again are traditional social roles. Men are likely to emphasise intellect, power, aggression, money, or social status. Women are likely to emphasise body, looks, charm, sexuality, feminine "traits", homemaking, children and childrearing – even as they seek their masochistic punishment.\n\nAnother difference is in the way the genders react to treatment. Women are more likely to resort to therapy because they are more likely to admit to psychological problems. But while men may be less inclined to DISCLOSE or to expose their problems to others (the macho-man factor) – it does not necessarily imply that they are less prone to admit it to themselves. Women are also more likely to ask for help than men.\n\nYet, the prime rule of narcissism must never be forgotten: the narcissist uses everything around him or her to obtain his (or her) Narcissistic Supply. Children happen to be more attached to the female narcissist due to the way our society is still structured and to the fact that women are the ones to give birth. It is easier for a woman to think of her children as her extensions because they once indeed were her physical extensions and because her on-going interaction with them is both more intensive and more extensive. \n\nThis means that the male narcissist is more likely to regard his children as a nuisance than as a source of rewarding Narcissist Supply – especially as they grow older and become autonomous. Devoid of the diversity of alternatives available to men – the narcissistic woman fights to maintain her most reliable Source of Supply: her children. Through insidious indoctrination, guilt formation, emotional sanctions, deprivation and other psychological mechanisms, she tries to induce in them a dependence, which cannot be easily unravelled.\n\nBut, there is no psychodynamic difference between children, money, or intellect, as Sources of Narcissistic Supply. So, there is no psychodyn
99818
Hi I also suffer from NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder).\n\nIt took me a very long time to get to know that something is wrong with me (and not e.g. with the others). I was constantly searching all over English and Czech speaking internet (I'm from the Czech Republic) and I was searching in all possible psychological and psychotherapeutic books.\n\nThe best I have found so far were books from James F. Masterson, a New York City researcher, psychiatrist and psychotherapist. I have visited him also personally on 60 Sutton Place South, Manhattan, NYC, but I hadn't enough money to afford therapy by him, his affiliates or his followers. He is head of www.mastersoninstitute.org\n\nLuckily he publishes his therapeutic approach and it was helpful for me even without a therapist. I'm still going back to his books and still finding something new (within me). You can have a look at the content of his books at www.amazon.com, search for James F Masterson in books section.\n\nMedication is of no use, except you develop a depression or some psychosis, it will help you get back into life (and into NPD again).\n\nHope this might help you.\n  Martin D
220765
I have been the reciepent of both.  The scars run deep and are life long.  However, with time you start not dwelling on it every day of your life, only when someone asks about it.  It is very humiliating and demeaning, and uncalled for. I will never get over it, it is always with me.  I have tried putting it in the dark recesses of my mind and have pretty much succeeded.  I really don't want to talk about the details.  Hope this has answered some of your questions.
783285
If I have to choose between the two, I would say the Preachy one is worse.\nPersonally, I rather deal with the patronizing one, because I know what I would be dealing with, than the sweet holier than thou preachy one.
1147319
Perhaps both.\nThe two are not necessarily mutually exclusive.
462989
Honest. I try to always be honest and frank with people and this is not always well received.\nI think it is important to be honest with people. When people ask me for my opinion I have learned to say, "Are you sure you really want to know?" Some people admire it and some hate it.
212934
egoistic, egoistical, egomaniacal, egotistic, egotistical, individualist, individualistic, megalomaniac, narcissistic, pompous, self-absorbed, self-centered, self-concerned, self-indulgent, self-interested, self-loving, self-serving, selfish, stuck-up, vainglorious
1089832
Well, I used to be, but then I went and got all these self-help books, and I made a point of only looking at myself in the mirror five times a day, and I dumped all my lame friends who couldn't find anything nice to say about me. And I wanted to do some charity work, so I started serving Thanksgiving meals at a homeless shelter in LA--which is amazing because of all the celebrities you get to meet. So, yeah, I'd say I'm over it. \n\nI enjoy telling others about how I've overcome narcissism; I do it every chance I get.\n\n;-)
205662
Aaaaaah, let us see. Both are a way of conveying thoughts. Both are a form introspection. Both are a round about way of saying a very simple thing\n:)
603176
I would be both. Probably stew about it and keep asking myself why I didn't say this or say that. Perhaps in most cases it is better to not say what you wanted to say simply because it could cause more anomisity and hostility.