I'm going to respect heyheyhey's wish to dip out of the conversation and not tag them, but I disagree with this:
"Eh, sorry but no one's stress response is too f*cked up to do that." (bolded and italicized for emphasis)
I think it is entirely possible that someone's stress response is too f*cked up to properly regulate their fight/flight response in the moment, which results in a lashing out response.
can anyone tell me why isolating is not a choice and lashing out is?
I think the point here might be that isolating can be seen as a coping mechanism (or preferred reaction) in lieu of lashing out.
Now, give me a scenario in this thread where someone is actually triggering these sufferers and I may have a different response. But as far as this thread goes and the examples in it....
"For example, when escalating he has a pretty standard pattern he follows: starts using a harsher tone during a conversation about our relationship (to include sarcasm, multiple questions directed at me in rapid fire, use of fake "pet names"); introduces and becomes fixated on a topic unrelated original conversation (anti-sanctuary city funding and hiring freeze); focuses the conversation on my connection to the unrelated topic (you supported this and I can't be with someone who thinks like that); introduces insults/belittling comments (you are so immature to support something like that. you don't understand the real world but you think you do just because you went to *insert college name here*) while simultaneously framing himself as more superior (I actually experienced the real world and I know what it's like while you live in a little bubble); ignores any and all grounding statements (I don't want to argue, let's talk when you are more calm, etc.) and obsesses over the unrelated topic......" (italicized for emphasis)
^This was an example I gave in an early comment of what I consider PTSD escalation. I tend to alter small things in my stories sometimes, in case my SO were to wander over here. Maybe that was a mistake in this instance. In this example, the unrelated topic that he obsessed over during a conversation about our relationship was actually the travel/immigration ban. I have a parent from the Middle East and my SO deployed to combat zones more than once in the Middle East. It is an issue that comes up in our relationship often, as might be expected. To add insult to injury, that parent of mine was killed unexpectedly years ago, so it is an issue I am particularly emotional and defensive about. We have agreed not to talk about politics because it turns into a circular argument, which is not productive, and often times the conversations turn argumentative. However, he sees things about T and the travel ban and all kinds of other political stuff on social media and on tv and when around his family they talk about it....so he can keep it in for a while, but eventually it seems to be too much and he brings it up and is already upset about it. It's as if I am the scapegoat for all of the immigrants that want to come to the US and I am the problem because I identify as half Middle Eastern when, in fact, I should identify solely as American because the United States is the greatest country in the world and I would know how awful Middle Easterners really were if I had fought over there (paraphrasing). In addition, the "pet name" he uses (sarcastically) when escalating is the same his ex used to call him when they were arguing. The same ex who cheated on him while deployed and then went after (and received some of) his military assets. So the trigger there? Recent politics and news coverage surrounding the travel ban of people with Middle Eastern origin. Another trigger? I sometimes do things that remind him of his ex. I haven't learned them all yet because he isn't aware of all of them, but once we identify one, I try not to do it again (i.e. laughing while arguing is a massive one). So YES that may be unmanaged this and that and poor coping skills and crappy communication and an already skewed morale. But another big factor is combat PTSD, fighting in a foreign country against a foreign enemy, and the overwhelming sense of patriotism that can come with all of that. There is also admitted survivor's guilt and (not admitted but mentioned) guilt over innocent lives taken. So I also think it is possible the grandiose, holier than thou machismo could be an attempt to make up for or rationalize those deaths.
I guess the overall point I am taking away is.....what's it matter what you call it? If I feel poorly treated or unsupported, it shouldn't matter if it meets the definition of "abuse" or not. If he isn't seeking treatment or taking other constructive steps to modify or curb his reactions, it shouldn't matter if he has "narcissistic" qualities or not.
I've come to realize that my initial desire to compare different qualities or symptoms to the more common PTSD symptoms was to broaden my ability to respond appropriately to situations in my relationship. Meaning, I am working on how I can manage my behavior in response to PTSD escalation incidents, but could there possibly be other factors at play here? And if there are, can I try to identify them enough to figure out additional ways I can manage my behavior to deal with those factors, as well? I think concern with categorizing or labeling may have clouded that, as well as a few instances of generalization.
All in all, I did not come here in an attempt to diagnose or label behavior. I can't change him, I can only change me, as we've all heard many times before.
