The seeming fashion for labelling people toxic, narcissistic etc

[Mee]

Ah, but where have you seen the "correct" connotation in popular culture? In fact, people - both men and women - are throwing out the phrase "toxic masculinity" to mean "men are toxic."

And there's a whole argument about whether so-called "toxic masculinity" is actually a thing. I say it's not, but I'm not going to hijack this thread about it. It's enough to say that an entire gender gets called toxic, and that is incorrect.

Agree, not here. But yes I have seen it used correctly in the (mixed gender) feminist group I was on before quitting Facebook! It’s where I first learned about it . And a fair bit on insta, Which has some incredibly good accounts. I sometimes wonder how people are watching problematic materials on there when I have such good, informative content. And cute animals.

If you want to discuss it some time I am up for it, and hopefully you know I do not think men are toxic and am generally on your side.

 

[MrMoonlight]

I had trouble with this today in therapy. I'm going round and round with myself trying to understand someone close to me. No matter the DSM definition this person is toxic to me. She isn't in therapy so there is no way to diagnose. I see narcissistic, borderline, ocd and trauma like behavior and trying to figure out exactly wtf is going on is really frustrating. Maddening really, so I feel like I just need to move on with myself and my healing, I'm thinking she is just toxic to me and that I'll just have to live with that "answer". I'm making myself mental trying to diagnose and understand what's been going on.

Does she love me less or more if some of her motivations were because of a mental problem?

 

[mylunareclipse]

I didn’t even know what NPD was I just knew of the word narcissism as used in general context. But when I will never forget the moment I realized I had been a target of a person with NPD awhile actually abused me ( I am not saying all people with NPD are abusers). It took me over a year in therapy to make a link in my brain. Two years to finally kind of talk about it. Four years to admit it in full voice. I will never forget that moment as all the behavior finally made sense! The gaslighting. Omg I used to think I was going crazy. But when I read about gaslighting and lovebombing and discarding and spreading rumors. It all made sense. It wasn’t as much about labeling the person but labeling my experience. It’s like finding out you have low thyroid or are diabetic for instance and it all makes sense. Like wow I feel this way when I eat sugar because I am diabetic. So yes putting a name to it was extremely important in this case. In other cases, like even my parents I don’t pathologize because the situation is more complex, not clear cut.
I just think that when you have been abused by a malignant/sociopathic narcissist putting a name is the first step towards healing.

 

[Tinyflame]

I think the proper definition of any of these things, would require real professional understanding and teasing apart, and also knowledge about or from the person themself, and even those around them.

However, for example, I heard a chilling account from a self-professed narcissist and psychopath (sociopath), on the differences between the two. But he also said (according to him), a sociopath would lie about everything. So how can one believe he was telling the truth? :confused:

I only know, if it doesn't fit, something else explains it better, or there are comorbidities. For example, I am ashamed to say I thought a family member was passive-aggressive, it fit, but didn't seem to, for her character and kindness. I was totally wrong and she must have felt terribly misunderstood. :(

In thousands of people I've met working, I would say one exhibited borderline personality disorder, a night and day difference to the way it's applied so frequently. And even then, who am I to say? But if it was so, and having bpd is like a wave, there are a lot of ripples out there being misdiagnosed or mislabelled.

I think the use of the term triggers is really overused too, or mixed up with stressors.

I do believe toxic is a personal definition- what is toxic to one person may be preferred by another.

Most of all, regardless of diagnosis or describing treatment by others, I think it's important people have somewhere or with someone that they can speak the truth. Not to validate their suffering only, but to actually reveal it, not minimize it, and try to make sense of it. Especially if it's people taught not to have the right to a voice.

JMHO though.

 

[blackemerald1]

So how can one believe he was telling the truth?

^I think it would be dangerous to expect the truth from someone with this diagnosis. Self-diagnosis is rarely accurate anyway.

I think the proper definition of any of these things, would require real professional understanding and teasing apart, and also knowledge about or from the person themself, and even those around them.

^Too true. Professional diagnosis, understanding and evidence are critical. Anecdotal information is relevant for sure but not always accurate and should be used with caution.

 

[Sideways]

And even then, who am I to say?

That’s just it - as a lay person? We can’t.

When it’s a person close to us? Then even the formal qualification to diagnose wouldn’t be worth squat.

The solution is to stop pathologising anyone and everyone you come across that behaves strangely, or differently, or in a way you find challenging or unlikeable.

If it’s a person you have issues with? Time is better spent figuring out where your boundaries need to be, not what illnesses you think they may or may not have.

 

[Tinyflame]

^I think it would be dangerous to expect the truth from someone with this diagnosis. Self-diagnosis is rarely accurate anyway.

I'm sorry, I guess I spoke badly- I have no idea if this guy is professionally diagnosed, he himself said he is paid highly to show up at these clinical conferences, so I assumed so (but assumptions are not good). That being said, I meant he is self-disclosing vs self-diagnosing. But tbh I didn't look up the content it cycled randomly on youtube and I heard him. As a relative said, I wouldn't even listen to that. But he says he's been speaking on it for years, before anyone else did.

The solution is to stop pathologising anyone and everyone you come across that behaves strangely, or differently, or in a way you find challenging or unlikeable.

I agree. ^^ I guess I was coming across it from the opposite direction. I work in a field where many self-disclose, and I work out with people no one does. Not because of self-diagnosing them as a lay person, but rather being privy to the realities, and creating work-arounds for them and myself. Regardless of all the factors that may or may not be contributing, of which I assume myself to be unaware.

I do however think it's more effectual building trust and rapport if one leaves the door open to what they 'may' be struggling with, and responds accordingly with sensitivity and compassion. And boundaries. If it's based on clinical knowledge, it still goes a very long way in smoothing out frustrations. When someone tells me they really weren't aware of the time, and I believe them because what I know of their proclivities, I can externalize the time and see if that's helpful, for example. As opposed to calling them selfish or self-centered or disrespectful. If someone seems to be going out of their mind with anxiety, I'm going to factor that in. If someone is totally emotionally disregulated, and I see them every day, I'm going to be aware if it's cycling between extreme highs and lows. That doesn't diagnose them, but I'd be blind, deaf and dumb to not notice and shift gears to the situation.

And yes, I've also heard the term abuse for example used by many where it didn't sound as much abusive as not agreeing with the other person's boundary, or even getting one's own way. I think it's also relevant to become aware of one's own contribution, relationship-wise. Making one person an angel and another a demon isn't usually accurate. For example, a person I know called her ex-H abusive for making a derogatory comment about her appearance. But, she makes derogatory comments about others. Only she knows (or maybe doesn't even remember?) if she did the same to him, or did it first. Tbh Idk, and I don't care. Not my business. I think, 'yikes'.

th? Time is better spent figuring out where your boundaries need to be,

Within family and relationships, I think absolutely. ^^ And working on your own self. And to be honest with any clinician, a person has to be aware of their own patterns and ask themselves very honest questions to be able to discriminate what's going on, also, and relay that honestly to their own doctor(s).

(Still JMHO though, lol).

 

[Mee]

I really like so much in this discussion.

I have slight difference of opinion with the word trigger. Trigger was a word used in language before it was adopted for usage to describe PTSD triggers. It still remains in usuage to ‘trigger a reaction’ that is not trauma related. ‘Hair trigger’. Not every thing is trauma informed and I think that’s ok. That it was adopted for the use in now has clinically did not remove it from other usage.

I really understand how frustrating it is when others’ drama feels invalidating. I lost a friendship last year because after a minor car crash a friend started to say she had PTSD . It was not possible for her to have been diagnosed with ptsd within the timeframe she was saying it was and her neediness from me drove a wedge between us. I now see this as my failure to not be upset by her stuff. Her drama was not mine and her stress had nothing to do with mine; whatever was going on had no reflection on my diagnosis, my situation. Her stress did not make mine lesser. My inability to hold it, caused by the ptsd did make me feel lesser than my previous - and I hope future - self.

I also understand word usage is really important to others, that’s cool. Words ARE important . For me I am ok if people get words wrong with no bad intent and would rather people concentrated on not causing traumatic injury. Then the numbers of people needing accuracy of terms would be even fewer and resources even less stretched.

 

[blackemerald1]

Occasionally I allow the media and random people to frustrate me by their over use of certain words and laziness I suppose to go the long way round and actually describe behaviour or traits rather than throw a psychiatric term into the mix as a short cut.

I might be sensitive to it because I have ptsd and really I understand better if descriptive language is used. Saying someone has ptsd, narcissistic personality disorder etc etc :rolleyes: doesn't really bring me any closer to understanding what their behaviour is. I can only use my own unprofessional, very limited knowledge of those disorders if those labels are used. Or my own personal take. Either way it's likely to be wrong.

I'm also likely to think that the use of these terms by anyone outside of professional to professional is probably inaccurate and melodramatic so I switch off. Over use of any term has that effect on me though. So if someone constantly uses a term like 'awesome' etc in their normal language it starts to detract from it's regular meaning. Is that simply a normal human reaction, just me or do others find this too?

 

[ChildofGod]

My experience has been that most of my abusers are narcisisstic and they got their "supply" off of me.
Because of that, stems much of my abuse.
Psychological, physical, mental and sexual abuse, severe neglect, starvation, exploitation of self and any money I made was not mine.
Because of my abusive background, I didn't know the signs of domestic violence, the non verbal ones anyway.

Because for me, there is a direct correlation and that's why it matters.(revictimization and being unable to determine what other's true intentions were/are. The intentions were never good and basically I became enslaved physically and emotionally, from homelife to picking a partner who used me for only his gain as well)

 

[Mach123]

I think it's all a sliding scale but there are boundaries in other words you can be way out in the edge of the bell shaped curve in terms of behavior but you are still in the same population.

When you fall outside the curve you're no longer a member, you are no longer in the group you're something else.

A violent abusive person can be that and feel remorse and even reform get help, admit they're wrong, stop drinking whatever.

A sociopath is something else. No conscience, no remorse. Both are dangerous but the sociopath is truly a monster and belongs in a cage because the rest of us are not safe from them.

 

[Ronin]

Both are dangerous but the sociopath is truly a monster and belongs in a cage

Without doing anything and a due process that would put anyone in the same circumstances, personality this or that, behind bars?

Yeah, the first one to object that.

(Mis) Labeling & deciding on rounding up someones for a set of traits, not even acts mind you, is dangerous as f*ck.