Moral Struggles: Narcissism vs. Humility

William Sundwick

Power and Intimidation

Self-righteousness is the sole property of the narcissist.  He is always right. Those who have differing opinions are always wrong. And, he believes that if we are to be moral creatures, righteousness must be enforced. Wrong must be suppressed.

His instruments of enforcement include brute force, legal authority, religious dogma, bureaucratic hierarchies. He may even invent fictitious authority, for instance “history” or “custom” -- usually softer than the other more brutal instruments. But, the basic principle is intimidation, or cajolery and persuasion.

His aim is obedience. If he cannot summon sufficient instruments of power to carry the day, the narcissist becomes the submissive servant instead -- unworthy, despicable, a loser.

How much does organized society depend on this psychological cruelty? What is the payoff in this system?

An alternative appeared sometime early in the development of human consciousness. It was to foster cooperation. Doing the “right thing” depended not on the force of will, or authority, but on the anticipation of shared rewards. The sales pitch would be opportunity, not fear.

Then God was invented. From a simple concept, the doctrine of humility arose. The highest authority resided outside any one person – indeed, above all flawed humanity. Unfortunately, humans, being narcissists, had difficulty grasping this concept.  They projected their narcissism onto the emperor, or some collection of powerful people, like an ecclesiastical hierarchy.

Though the pull of narcissism proved strong, one spark did seem to persist through the ages – the deep desire to do better. Humility became a goal to strive toward. And, the moral struggle became an obsessive challenge for many a monk, and many a slave.

Mine

Toddlers discover agency. They can do things, get attention from parents … and soon learn the word “mine” to describe objects they want to control, to own. This creation of “Self” is the beginning of narcissism. I’ve seen my 22-month-old grandson achieve this level of consciousness, with a vengeance! When he appears to offer an object to someone else -- a toy, food, or when he points, naming something he sees -- it’s an attempt to influence them, to show off, not to be generous. Hopefully, he can relearn these behaviors as generosity when he gets older, but for now, it’s strictly ego gratification! If he doesn’t relearn, he will be in danger of becoming a pathological narcissist. That condition would arise if “mine” is the only idea he understands. In earlier times, it was called megalomania.

While psychologists can describe the symptoms of narcissism, the causes of the Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) are in dispute. The clinical description from DSM-IV is as follows: 

Narcissistic personality disorder is characterized by a pervasive pattern of grandiosity, need for admiration, interpersonal exploitiveness, and lack of empathy, beginning in early adulthood and manifest in a variety of contexts. 

Like many personality disorders, it seems to be a matter of degree (key judgmental words here – “pervasive,” “need,” “lack”). A 2009 survey estimated about

6% of U.S. population suffers from NPD. But the other 94% of us exhibit some of these symptoms some of the time, throughout life.

Here is an entirely amateur hypothesis, based only on my own introspection, raising two sons, and observing my grandson – as well as other people throughout my life. I think narcissism comes from difficulty reaching one’s Self. Most people can find themselves with a moderate amount of work, as they mature.  But, due to various circumstances, some just can’t quite get there.  Their Self is either opaque, or visible but unreachable. These aggravating circumstances might have to do with parental expectations, or even parental narcissism.  It could be an inherited disorder.

If children are taught to relate to others only through the prism of their own egos, something will remain undiscovered – and that something will likely include empathy. If expectations are exceedingly high for a child, that child may either fantasize that it has achieved those expectations, or surrender to perennial failure, never able to “measure up.” If parents teach children that their whole family is constantly subject to being judged, the child will adopt a persona of constantly seeking approval from others. And, so on.  I don’t believe “over-indulgence” of children causes narcissism. Instead, it results in strong egos, not the characteristically weak ego of the narcissist.

What if somebody realizes, as an adult, that they have NPD? What do they do about it? Probably nothing, since seeking help runs counter to their whole world view – they are already either perfect, or hopeless. Could friends and family persuade them to seek therapy? Depends. Greatest likelihood would probably be via threat (loss of job or spouse), but that may only cause them to dig in deeper!

Rather than attempting to get somebody to deny Self, the more fruitful approach might be to teach them to incorporate others into Self – a philosophy that knows no bounds! The whole world could conceivably be viewed as the Larger Self (invoking a vaguely spiritual presence?). If my ego encompasses everybody, what might be the implications for society? For morality, itself?

Healthy skepticism of the “Larger Self” view is warranted, however. We always need to be on guard against false humility. Some of the best examples of false humility are people who make lots of promises, or try very hard to make you feel good. Think about preachers, teachers, politicians! They have all mastered some professional acting skills – they may not convince so much as “stroke” the Self. We naturally find them hard to resist. On the other hand, if we knowingly submit to their wiles, perhaps we are on the way to true humility ourselves – can willing submission outweigh the need for dominance? Sometimes. The secret might be to recognize that we were being manipulated, and accept it – it may be benign.

NPD and the Rest of Us

Of course, most of us would not be diagnosed with NPD by a mental health professional.

“Everyday narcissism” can be described in a similar way as NPD, but can be better controlled. We can engage in a modest amount of introspection when confronted by apparent rejection, or demeaning comments by others. We can learn to ask ourselves about others’ personal agendas, as well as ours. We can acknowledge that we ought to do better, and try tweaking our interpersonal behaviors accordingly.

Two examples of everyday narcissism which many of us experience, and can be considered beneficial to human welfare, are flirting and leadership.

Flirting, though perhaps banal, is based on the principle of physical attraction. It is an intimation of bonding between individuals, but with no commitment to intimacy. Within socially agreeable constraints, it is generally thought to consist of ego “strokes” we find appealing. Both parties to flirtation are indulging essentially narcissistic fantasies. They are presuming worthiness of intimacy, but unconsciously agreeing not to engage in intimacy with each other (if either party consciously says “no,” or “are you kidding,” the flirtatious exchange, by definition, is over). The usual social constraints include keeping the flirtation hidden from a spouse, and knowing the prudent stopping point. But, given these rules, flirting is an exploration of getting outside one’s Self, an attempt to reach out. It has the benefit of making both participants feel good, appealing to them with “narcissistic supply.”

More consequential, the quality of Leadership has been identified as a combination of narcissism and humility. True enough, many people occupying leadership roles may show much narcissism, and only false humility. But, the best leaders have goals governed by ego needs, yet know in their hearts that cooperation (teamwork) is the only way those goals can be achieved. This is genuine humility, not exploitation. Steve Jobs has often been cited as the archetype of the successful narcissistic leader, mostly because he managed to come back from humiliating failure, caused by his narcissism, as a changed, humbler, executive. He then achieved phenomenal success up to his death. Social organizations do require leadership, and we cannot deny the role narcissism plays.

The important moral lesson about narcissism is that being good is a quest, not a state. You are on your way when you finally realize that their welfare matters to you. Intimacy depends upon this realization. Leadership depends upon it, as well. Giving is learned behavior, and practice will tend to improve one’s skills. Sometimes, occasional role reversal helps us to understand the dynamics of narcissism. If we are usually ensconced in a grandiose dominance role, try switching to the submissive listener role. If we are stuck in an unworthy ”piece-of-crap” self-image, try being more assertive. Over time, with practice, we may come to understand our ego dynamics better. But, the quest continues … thinking we’ve finally “made it” spells certain defeat!

Nice support for two recent blog posts: "Misogyny: It's a Matter of Degree ..." and "A Feminist Manifesto (From a Heteronormative Male ...)"

Misogyny: It’s a Matter of Degree …

William Sundwick

Last month, I published a piece entitled “A Feminist Manifesto (from a Heteronormative Male Who Raised Only Sons).”  In it I attempted to outline the long history of patriarchy in all Euro-Asian societies, beginning with the Neolithic revolution of agriculture more than 10 millennia past. But, I offered a hopeful glimpse of a future finally freed from those cultural burdens. This would be a future where science and technology will have rendered most or all excuses for patriarchy invalid, coupled with gender fluidity as well.

But, what about us men? What can we do to understand this “Third Wave Feminism” (or even a fourth wave)? It seems recognition of the arbitrariness of gender assignment is what finally produced that third wave. Will it help men overcome their fears of women … metastasized over all those millennia of patriarchy?

In the West, it is primarily social convention, not legal impediment, that enforces the secondary status of women. What roles should women expect to play when living with men? What degree of misogyny need they accept in their partners? Any?

Modern Times

In the modern era, men must try harder to hate women. Social conventions have been gradually breaking down for at least two centuries. The famous misogyny of Aristotle or Jean Jacques Rousseau would not be possible today, except perhaps in the diseased minds of men’s rights activists. As opportunities for interaction with women have increased for men, so has the need for some to make a point of rejecting and degrading them. Maintaining the norms of patriarchy requires more effort. Men must seek assistance from social institutions that still support those norms, like certain churches, or business sectors, and those institutions are getting harder and harder to find in mainstream culture.

Episodes like 2014’s “Gamergate”, where an online community of video gamers decided it wanted to purge itself of women, or the recent “Google Manifesto” where a Google employee made a public pronouncement of his atavistic patriarchal values, and was fired for them – making him a conservative cause celebre – illustrate the desperation of some male subcultures. Ordinary couples seen on HGTV’s “House Hunters” sometimes feature a male who lists among his requirements for a home an isolated “man cave.” We are supposed to chuckle, ultimately accepting, with his wife, the immutable and entirely justified desire for exclusion from association with women.

That “man cave” phenomenon illustrates two important features of modern misogyny: 1) benevolent sexism; or, paternalism -- the need to protect women from the rigors of a harsh world – and, 2) internalized misogyny, where women feel self-loathing of their gender – men really are better than they are. A man has a right to retreat to a refuge where he can vicariously enjoy violent sports not appreciated by his wife, or perhaps conduct business with other men when he wishes his wife to be “protected” from it (a deceptive business practice). Or, his wife knowingly allows his escape because she feels she is so unpleasant and unrewarding to be around (the ancient stigma of menstruation).

While having roots as old as patriarchy itself, the sexual submission of women to men has also become less clear-cut in modern times. As I pointed out in my “Feminist Manifesto” last month, the sexual revolution of the mid-twentieth century made many traditional sexual mores unjustified by modern medicine and technology. What didn’t change was the moral burden of monogamy – indeed, both men and women now had to grapple with deeper questions of relationships and intimacy. Many men (and women) were not up to the challenge. As “alternative” approaches to relationships between the sexes became more public, many began to question whether women really needed men at all! Feminists may have been in the vanguard, but the point wasn’t lost on men. As men began doubting their value to women, things like male performance anxiety became epidemic. Technology responded to demand here, too. But, technology couldn’t handle the deeper fears of men.

Competition

Women’s free choice strikes at the heart of what is known as “toxic masculinity.” This is the doctrine that “real men” must always be aggressors, must never show emotions, and will ultimately win their mates simply by overpowering them. It persists mostly because it is reinforced by family and perhaps some male-oriented cultural subgroups (construction workers? Police?). Women may buy into the “machismo,” but they may not – and, there is nothing men can do about it. A typical complaint of a lonely young male might be that he just can’t seem to find an “old-fashioned” girl. He assigns virtue to his toxic masculinity.

“Virtue” is the root of their narcissism. They may attend church regularly, but don’t really believe they are sinners. They devise elaborate arguments to justify their behavior, ultimately coming to the same conclusion: they aren’t wrong, the other person is. It’s amazing how far some people can go with this narcissism – even to being elected President!

When it comes to relationships with women, the narcissist will often approach an existential feeling of emptiness. He can’t find the “other,” only himself. It’s possible that the high suicide rate among males (considerably higher than among females these days) is related to this phenomenon.

Of course, economic competition with women can’t be ignored as a contributing factor to misogyny. He sees more women in the workforce and fewer clear advantages of “maleness” in most jobs (see Google Manifesto case). And, he sees a general trend in capitalism for increased productivity not leading to increased wages. Increasingly, ordinary middle class living standards require two incomes. More and more, the only thing protecting men in high-paying jobs, vis-à-vis women, is cultural tradition.

The Worst Offenders

Gender roles are primarily learned from parents, with social convention a strong secondary factor. But, even with the rapidly changing social conventions we are now experiencing, we can’t easily change those behaviors and values imprinted from toddlerhood. This applies to women as well as men. You always are expected to be like your parent of the same sex, or perhaps “better” than them. Boys are exposed early to an Oedipal challenge from their mothers – they must compete with their fathers for mother’s attention, and perhaps with their sisters as well. In the most dysfunctional cases, values associated with “rape culture” might be inculcated into boys disturbingly early.

Rape culture seems to be a combination of toxic masculinity, narcissism, and inability to express anger at women except by objectifying them, then overpowering them – even while they are unconscious. It surely must be the most extreme case of misogyny we see today. It seems those demon memes many of us heard as young adults – “no means yes,” or “mixed messages” -- were never challenged successfully. And, certainly, when authorities still have an uncanny tendency to blame the victim when assault is reported, it’s easy to see how this can feed internalized misogyny in women, as well. Activists in the Men’s Rights Movement (MRM), being narcissists, will naturally buy into this – even to the extent of lobbying for greater protection from false accusations of rape. Why? Because, in their imaginations, there is a vast feminist conspiracy of “misandry” seeking to undo them and their narcissism. It’s defensiveness.

The Way Out

What is the way out of serious misogyny, for a conscience-stricken man who really wants to change? He is experiencing deep loneliness and isolation in the world he’s forced to inhabit -- the world composed of 50% women. His “bros” are deserting him – they’re moving on, dude! Yet, his ingrained toxic masculinity prevents him from engaging a female “significant other” in a meaningful relationship. He must learn to be open with her, so that she may respond in kind. Women have been known to be open with each other, far more than men – it may be their defense. He must learn to be more like a woman! If he’s successful, he will likely decide that it’s women who are the stronger sex. Then, he can take his place in life with the humility appropriate to a more egalitarian society. Men and women are in it together.

Lately, much attention has been given to the rise of groups of angry young white males. They seem to be resisting the pull toward a more egalitarian society. They are saying to society (which they may brand as the “PC culture”) that there is nothing wrong with masculinity – and seek to segregate themselves from women competitors. They are “male separatists.”  There may even be a corollary with white supremacist organizations. When they are drawn together, often via social media, they tend to exaggerate their toxic masculinity, and project it onto other ideological positions – generally racist and conservative ones – where they may be welcomed.

Some writers, notably Angela Nagle, have hypothesized that the reinforcement in those online communities (from “Gamergate”) may have started as a joke, but gradually morphed into a real belief system. These became the alt-right young men in white polos we saw in Charlottesville last month. She would say there is, indeed, a connection between misogyny and white nationalism. In fact, it started with misogyny. Misogyny is the last-ditch defense of patriarchy – and, thus, has become the struggle of our age.

The new revanchists in this struggle will ultimately be defeated, as were those revanchists in Europe after 1848. We need to move from misogyny to philogyny – a word which my spell-check highlights because it is so seldom used!

Jaguar Land Rover makes two (after Volvo) major European automakers to jettison ICE and diesel from 2020 ...

Now that antifa have been designated a "domestic terrorist group," it's worth revisiting my May post from The Past: Anarchism: Libertarian, Socialist, or Just Crazy?