Malignant Self Love - Narcissism Revisited

Excerpts from the Archives
of the
Narcissism List

Part 9 cont.

3. Inverted Narcissism

The DSM IV defines the NPD using nine criteria. It is sufficient to possess five of them to "qualify". Thus, theoretically, it is possible to be NPD WITHOUT having grandiosity. Many researchers (Alexander Lowen, Jeffrey Satinover, Theodore Millon) suggested a "taxonomy" of pathological narcissism. They divided narcissists to sub-groups (very much as I did with my somatic versus cerebral narcissist dichotomy). Lowen, for instance, talks about the "phallic" narcissist versus others. Satinover makes a very important distinction between narcissists who were raised by abusive parents - and those who were raised by doting mothers or domineering mothers. I expanded upon the Satinover classification in FAQ 64.

I wrote "Malignant Self Love"exactly five years ago (1996). I corresponded with thousands (including dozens of mental health professionals) since then. It is clear to me from this correspondence that there is, indeed, a type of narcissist, hitherto rather neglected and obscure. It is the "self-effacing" or "introverted" narcissist. I call it the "Inverted Narcissist" and others on this list preferred to use "Mirror Narcissist", "NMagnet", or "NCodependent (NCo for short)". Alice Ratzlaff compiled an excellent "DSM" type "list of criteria".

Methodologically she erroneously insisted upon calling it a narcissist in the classical sense but finally we compromised on "Inverted Narcissist".

This is a narcissist who, in many respects, is the mirror image of the "classical" narcissist. The psychodynamics of such a narcissist are not clear, nor are his developmental roots. Perhaps he is the product of a doting or domineering primary object/caregiver. Perhaps excessive abuse leads to the repression of the narcissistic and other defence mechanisms themselves. I mean to say that perhaps the parents suppressed every manifestation of grandiosity (very common in early childhood) and of narcissism - so that the defence mechanism that narcissism is was "inverted" and internalized in this unusual form.

These narcissists are self-effacing, sensitive, emotionally fragile, sometimes socially phobic. They import all their self-esteem and sense of self-worth from the outside (others), are pathologically envious (a transformation of aggression), are likely to intermittently engage in aggressive/violent behaviours, are more emotionally labile that the classic narcissist, etc.

We can, therefore talk about three "basic" types of narcissists:

1. The offspring of neglecting parents
   They resort to narcissism as the predominant object relation (with themselves as the exclusive object).

2. The offspring of doting or domineering parents (often narcissists themselves)
   They internalized these voices in the form of a sadistic, ideal, immature superego, and spend their lives trying to be perfect, omnipotent, omniscient, and to be judged "a worthy success" by these parent-images.

3. The offspring of abusive parents
   They internalize the abusing, demeaning and contemptuous voices and spend their lives in an effort to elicit "counter-voices" from their human environment and thus to extract a modicum of self esteem and to regulate their sense of self worth.

All three types are doomed to eternal, recursive, Sisyphean failure.

Shielded by their protective shells (defence mechanisms) they constantly gauge reality wrongly, their actions and reactions become more and more rigid and ossified and the damage inflicted by them on themselves and on others ever greater. This damage is what my book is all about.

4. Narcissists and Women

The narcissist does regard the "subjugation" of an attractive woman to be a source of narcissistic supply.

It is a status symbol, proof of virility and masculinity and it allows him to engage in "vicarious" narcissistic behaviours (=being a narcissist through others, transforming others into tools at the service of his narcissism, into his extensions). This is done by employing defence mechanisms such as projective identification. Many of my FAQs and the essay are dedicated to these issues.

Primary NS is ANY kind of NS provided by others who are not "meaningful" or "significant" others. Adulation, attention, affirmation, fame, notoriety, sexual conquests - are all forms of NS.

Secondary NS is afforded by people who are in CONSTANT, repetitive or continuous touch with the narcissist. It includes the important roles of narcissistic accumulation and narcissistic regulation, among others. See: http://narcissism.cjb.net/msla.html.

The narcissist believes that being in love IS going through the motions and pretending to some degree. To him, emotions are mimicry and pretence.

5. Narcissists and their Ex's

There are two possible reactions:

The Ex "belongs" to the narcissist. She is an inseparable part of his Pathological Narcissistic Space. This possessive streak is not terminated with the official, physical, separation. Thus, the narcissist is likely to respond with rage, seething envy, a sense of humiliation and invasion and violent-aggressive urges to separation, especially since it implies a "failure" on his part and, thus negates his grandiosity.

But there is a second possibility:

If the narcissist were to firmly believe (which is very rare) that the ex does not and will never represent any amount, however marginal and residual, of any kind (primary or secondary) of narcissistic supply - he will remain utterly unmoved by anything she does and anyone she may choose to be with.

If you don't supply - you don't exist. 

There is a lot more on these issues in: http://narcissism.cjb.net/msla.html

6. Narcissists Victimize

"Classical, full fledged" narcissists victimize. Nothing evil here, nothing premeditated, no sinister grins. Simply an absentminded, offhanded, kind of indifference and lack of empathy. And a lot of hurt people.

On balance I (a narcissist) prefer to help the victims. They are far numerous and far more hurting. And I have done far too much to add to their numbers. This is my way of trying to make amends, I guess.

To me, women are either holy or whole. If holy, how could I dare contaminate them with sex, impinge upon their purity and saintliness with my bestial passions and infringe upon their perceived "aloofness" and "above the (sexual) fray status" with my demands.

If whore, sex with them must be impersonal, mildly sado-maso, somewhat autoerotic and devoid of every emotion.

top | next | table of contents

home | about me | narcissism defined | faq | narcissism list excerpts
the book | book excerpts | articles | email me