What is New?

WHAT IS NEWEST ON THIS BLOG?
July 30 New Post: Is It Possible that Gen Z and Millennials Having to Work 2 - 3 Jobs Is Contributing to the Nationwide Trend of Estrangement With Parents in the USA?
July 21 New Post: Don't Narcissists Care About Hurting You?
July 14 New Post: Reviews of "Narcissistic Rehab", "Narcissistic Detox" and "No More Narcissists" on Facebook
June 23 New Post: How I Came to Forgive the Narcissists in My Life (and it may not be what you think)
June 6 New Post: Why Do Sycophants Feel They Need to Follow Someone Who is So Unethical, Power Hungry, Cruel and Narcissistic? Comes with Personal Stories and a Deep Dive Into the Subject.
May 18 New Post: Family Obligation and the Scapegoat. Do You Owe Your Narcissistic Family Anything?
April 26 New Post: An Update: New Studies on Scapegoats of Narcissistic Families, Wills and Narcissistic Parents, Dissociation, and Some Other Topics of Note
April 6 New Post: Why Scapegoats of Narcissistic Families Are Unlikely To Turn Into Sycophants. Part II.
March 29 New Post: A Domestic Violence Situation and Tale - from a well known Canadian Musician.
March 9 New Post: Why Scapegoats of Narcissistic Families Find It Impossible to Turn Themselves Into Sycophants. Comes with a Discussion on Largely Involuntary Independent Thinking, C-PTSD and Healing.
February 28 New Post: Don't Get Narcissism Mixed Up With Alzheimer's Disease. How Similar Are They? Comes With a Discussion on Brain Science in Narcissistic Families and in Alzheimer's Disease
February 16 New Post: Perspecticide and Being Invalidated Often Feels Unsafe and Even Downright Dangerous On the Receiving End. Comes With a Discussion on Narcissism.
PERTINENT POST: ** Hurting or Punishing Others to Teach Them a Lesson - Does it Work?
PETITION: the first petition I have seen of its kind: Protection for Victims of Narcissistic Sociopath Abuse (such as the laws the UK has, and is being proposed for the USA): story here and here or sign the actual petition here
Note: After seeing my images on social media unattributed, I find it necessary to post some rules about sharing my images
____________________________________________________________________________________________

Tuesday, April 29, 2025

Why Children Do Not Make Good Narcissistic Supply, Raising the Chances of Child Abuse (with a section on how poor listening and poor comprehension contributes to it)

(note: in my rush to get this published, I noticed I made a mistake in what the daughter says to her mother. 
But I decided to leave it in as it can be interpreted as "it's not enough" or "I'm not enough". 
Sometimes when mistakes happen this way, they are perhaps unconscious ways of saying two things at once.
I'm reminded of John Lennon, as he used to have double meanings in his phrasing. Paul McCartney refused to see them as mistakes and encouraged Lennon to use them, so I'm doing that in this case)


INTRODUCTION
AND WHY I DECIDED TO PUBLISH THIS POST BEFORE
I PUBLISH THE ONE ON HOOVERING

For those of you who have been reading my blog regularly, I was supposed to publish my article on hoovering (hoovering means "attempts to win you back into a relationship with someone who has abused you), however I thought this article might explain why hoovering often has everything to do with narcissists missing your form of narcissistic supply.

Hoovering has everything to do with getting the narcissistic supply from you again that they miss. 

The hoovering that narcissists do can sometimes work in getting you back, but it often leads to a pretty miserable trauma bond if it does work, and not a very healthy one or happy one. You can tell how unhappy it is by either reading the article that follows or in particular, reading the section below entitled "NARCISSISTIC SUPPLY IS ALSO BASED ON WHAT NARCISSISTS HEAR
AND THEIR OWN INTERPRETING PROCESS IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY HEAR" (they don't hear much without a lot of distortion of facts - which hopefully becomes clear as you read).

The point is that you will always be relating to their disorder in every conversation you have with them, in everything you do for them, and in relating to them in general. Their disorder rules both them and you, and as I said, every conversation.

And since their disorder often means they are abusive, the abuse and the disorder go together. If they've abused you before, they will most likely abuse you again because that is the form that their personality disorder has taken. 

Most narcissists are abusive, and escalate abuse as long as you're in their life, and it's not anything new, and it doesn't have anything to do with you as I hope you will see once you've seen the section about what narcissists hear below. They will also be doing things very, very similarly to how other narcissistic abusers behave. All of the same tactics, even many of the phrases, are alike between one narcissistic abuser to another. Even what they rage about is similar.  

Anyway, I was looking around for articles I thought I'd written about narcissistic supply, and I found this one somewhat done, the one I'm publishing here.  This one is about children, but I think you can apply it to adult relationships in some way too. 

As usual, I have links to many things I raise as well as giving you other articles for you to look through at the end of the post. 

(note: this introduction will probably be taken down once the post on hoovering is up)

HOW NARCISSISTIC SUPPLY
BECOMES A CHILD'S BURDEN

While our computer was down, I was reading articles on my phone and came across this article by Bernadette Donovan titled If you want to maintain a close bond with your kids as you get older, say goodbye to these 7 behaviors, published by Daily Motivation News (or DMN).

In it she lists these things parents should let go of:

1) Trying to be their best friend
2) Dismissing their feelings
3) Overprotecting them
4) Not respecting their privacy
5) Micromanaging their lives
6) Ignoring your own flaws
7) Failing to listen

With the exception of the first and third things listed in this article, I thought, "Wow! This sounds so much like narcissistic parenting!" For the first and third things on the list I changed them in this way:

1) Trying to make them into narcissistic supply (flattering sycophants)
2) Dismissing their feelings
3) Forgetting that they are a person with a personality, thoughts, feelings and ambitions of their own and most likely with more capabilities in those areas than you may be giving them
4) Not respecting their privacy
5) Micromanaging their lives
6) Ignoring your own flaws
7) Failing to listen

A lot has been written about narcissists having children in order to get narcissistic supply from them. Narcissistic supply refers, in this case, to helping the narcissistic feel good about themselves (praises and flattery, helping them feel in charge and in command, making them look good in social circles, giving them undivided attention and special treatment, letting them win arguments, and enabling them to influence the lives of others in both altruistic and bullying ways, as well as enabling them to have domination, power and control when ever they want to have it).

I think we can see why children cannot live up to these impossible standards of narcissistic supply and why these children might adopt trauma responses to these demands and expectations instead. The major trauma responses are fawn, fight, flee and freeze, although more are being added as I write this.

For most of us, if we aren't giving our narcissistic parent what they deem as good or adequate  narcissistic supply, they rage at us and punish us. Some of the ways they might punish us are replacing us with someone else in their affections, or showing contempt for us, or they run smear campaigns on us, or rage at us some more, and more and more, until we break down and "give in", or they hit us, or demand praise (no "ifs ands or buts" forcing us to adopt inauthentic expressions), or neglect us, or criticize us to the point where we lose sight of our best qualities. Part of most of these punishments entail trying to make us a sycophant child even if we don't want to, giving up the self and eroding ethics in order to be a full time, ever-ready, on-demand, totally controlled and manipulated, endless source of narcissistic supply for the parent. 

The punishments are different from one narcissist to the next, but if you are a person who is relating to a person with heavy narcissistic traits, the types of punishments are likely never to change, no matter how much they promise otherwise, even in a hoover, and often narcissists add new abuses to the ones they are already using. It is because abuse escalates including adopting even more punishing tactics and methods. 

Pity the poor child who has to live under these codes of conduct, right? As well as the chaos making and never-enoughness narcissists feel towards their kids and use it to destroy a child's self esteem, sense of safety, learning, ambitions and sense of self that differentiates from the parent's personality, as well as the parent's demands and opinions. 

Why opinions? Because narcissists see their children as an extension of themselves. The golden child is seen to have the narcissist's best traits and breeding, and the scapegoat the worst traits of the narcissistic parent.

Indeed, if you are listening to your narcissistic parent bash away at your self esteem, see if they are really talking about their own worse traits first rather than yours, and I'd bet you'll find that narcissists are quite successful self-labelers in this regard rather than other-labelers. 

There is a reason why they are so poor at other-labeling, which I get to later in the post. 

But for now:
They are not able to see children for themselves, as individuated, or notice there are differences from their own behaviors to theirs because of their propensity to have black and white thinking (splitting - the psychological term for it) and on-going projection, projection being extremely common among narcissists as a defensive mechanism especially when they feel like their grandiosity is being threatened or eroded, when they are jealous, and when they are trying to alter reality (the truth).

Usually projection comes with rage too, at least as far as narcissists are concerned. I'd even go as far as to say that the more rageful they are when tearing a child's self esteem apart, the more projection they are using. From all I have seen, rage and projection go together, almost always, and once they go through the rage/projection phase, they will play the victim shortly afterward and expect apologies from a child who doesn't have the qualities the parent is saying they do - especially for covert narcissists and malignant narcissists. 

So the apologies from the child are not going to be authentic, only fear-based, only because the parent wants the apologies and demands them, and most children find if they don't apologize that they will be punished for not agreeing to their characteristics matching the narcissist's. That brings up a host of other problems for the child, injustice only being one tiny aspect of the egregious problems that come from feeling forced to apologize when you don't mean it and did not do what the narcissist accuses you of doing. 

Looking through forums, scapegoats overwhelmingly feel that they were not treated well, or reasonably, or consistently, or fairly, or even kindly for the most part. They may have had some bread-crumbing, or the parent managed down the child's expectations of love or reasonable treatment, or they may have had some enticement to keep them "in the game" albeit in a controlled, serving, hurt state, but for the most part they weren't treated right in childhood. A lot of the reason why can be explained by the projection and rage combo throughout their childhood, and the threat of it day in and day out which produces hypervigilance in the child and has emotional, psychological and physical manifestations, which often carry into adulthood (another link). 

Parents who are narcissists will not care what this does to their child except if the child backs away, avoids them, no longer shares with them, or abandons them. But the physical, emotional and physiological aspects of what their child is going through will either matter very little to them, be rapidly belittled or dismissed, and for malignant narcissists, the symptoms that the child is manifesting won't matter at all to them. Narcissists are blame-shifters.

There is no way to get through to them that what they, the parent, is doing to them. The reaction the child will get will almost always be is the blame-shifting one, or the "that's not me, that's you!", "That's your fault, not mine!", or with coldness, "I'm sorry you feel that way. Maybe you just need to run away and never come back", or "I can't help what you're feeling! Those are YOUR feelings to deal with, and deal with alone," or "Your feelings are always kind of crazy. Do you want me to take you to psychiatrist so that he will put you on meds that make you feel bad? Hmm? Is that what you want?". All of this, of course, is just more escalation of the projection, blame-shifting and rage. 

The help for these symptoms has to come from outside the narcissist's realm of influence - just about always. 

And if the narcissist is trying again, and again, to pass their own worst qualities on to a child, it mostly means that the child will be abused if that child isn't already. Since the child serves as the narcissist's worse qualities, it is, for all sakes and purposes, a type of self-flagellation. It explains to some degree why they DARVO (i.e. play the victim after abusing). They've victimized themselves, because in the end, the scapegoat who receives all of this abuse often goes no contact after one trauma response after another trauma response, and nothing works to clear away the conflicts (fixes by narcissists only work in the narcissist's favor, never in the child's favor). In terms of feeling healthy, loved, cared about, fulfilled in the world, un-abused, scapegoats are serving no good in the role the parent put them in. 

The narcissist is left with their worst traits to face yet again (or pass on to another person through innuendo or suspicions or coercion - the more likely outcome ... they always have a number of scapegoats to dump on).

What narcissists are often left with is either no children, or a golden child who isn't a good enough servant, sycophant, enabler, flatterer, mind slave, phrase-repeater of the narcissistor grateful enough. Again, never enough-ness plays into most relationships that the narcissist has, even, to some extent, the golden child. Just one little minor flaw in either sycophancy or mirroring can set a narcissist into a rage, and the golden child isn't exempt from it, especially if they are the only one left of the children who will deal with the narcissistic parent.  

That is because the personality disorder never changes. The personality disorder is always in charge and culpable, not the people surrounding the narcissist who the narcissist has decided to pick on. Raging, projecting, giving you the silent treatment, conspiracy theories, chaos dramas, scapegoating, playing the victim, head games, and breadcrumbing you on love, attention, care, and sometimes food, and other needs you have as a child, are all due to narcissistic traits that almost all narcissists use on at least one of the children.

Reminding yourself continually that narcissistic traits are part of every conversation you have with that parent, I think erases trying to make sense of anything they have to say or do. It's a lot easier to DEEP them too (a method devised by the mental health community to deal with narcissists), once you realize that narcissistic supply, power and control are all that they care about. 

Talking about the narcissist: In the end it doesn't pay to project your own worst qualities on to others, but narcissists lack the wisdom and foresight to see this, certainly the kind of narcissist who abuses to try to get their own way in everything, everywhere and with everyone. If they are raging about not getting their way and playing the victim, they aren't enlightened, and probably will never be enlightened or learn anything new except more drastic splitting and projecting.

For us though, it is like playing a record that skips and hoping that it won't skip and replay the same parts over and over again. That's not going to happen because there is a scratch that the needle touches which puts the needle back into the prior groove. Nothing new or better is going to happen with the narcissist either which is why scapegoats, especially, go with the flee response in the end. 

WHAT THIS HAS TO DO WITH NARCISSISTIC SUPPLY

The reason why children don't make very good narcissistic supply is because:

1. Children need consistent care, consistent love, consistent respect, consistent incorruptible empathy, to trust the parents in their life to put the child's best interests at heart at all times, to provide safety from violence and exploitation and abuse from others, emotionally regulated parents, lots of parental and adult patience, to be taught by example by parents, honesty, and truth - all impossible goals for a narcissist. 

2. What narcissists care about most (and demand) is money, complete loyalty (even though most are incredibly disloyal themselves), flattery, competition, being spoiled, being the center of attention, being put on a pedestal, having a high reputation that does not necessarily resemble their own character, to have power, control, domination and a scapegoat (or scapegoats) in their family life, to have the last word, to play head games without it being noticed, to have loyalists and sycophants who do what they are told to do by the narcissist without question, to win every argument, to lecture others without it being construed as controlling behavior, to triangulate without anyone suspecting or noticing, to have agendas and manipulations that they hope most people are blind to, to be able to be disloyal without repercussions, to be able to blame-shift anything they feel is uncomfortable on to someone else without repercussions, to be able to rage at people without repercussions that make the narcissist feel ashamed and put the narcissist in a precarious social position, to be able to lie and be believed, to be able to rage and abuse and have it kept secret by their victims and have this behavior normalized by their victims, to have children and a spouse make them look good no matter what they do or say  - most are impossible for children to fulfill. If they do fulfill some of this, then it is highly toxic for the child, and it is a relationship that is truly toxic as well. 

Thus trying to fit children into the mold of fulfilling all of these narcissistic supply demands does not work, and if it does for awhile, it probably won't last. There will be a lot of disappointments for the narcissist. There may even be heartbreak for those children who can no longer live under these expectations. 

There are reasons why adults fulfill these roles better, but it doesn't mean that the relationships are less toxic. 

Sycophancy when demands for narcissistic supply are involved has enormous repercussions for adults, so imagine what it does to a child. Either a child is going to hang on, against all odds, to ethics or "give in" to the narcissist because of the narcissist's threats, abuse or coercive control. I think we can all see that "giving in" to the worst parts of them, the most evil parts of human nature, is not a good thing.  

It doesn't produce what is best in humans which are the things I listed that children need (consistent love, consistent care, respect, honesty, truth, etc) plus compassion, peace, inventions, creativity, higher capacity for learning, building rather than destroying, diplomacy instead of threats and invasions, all of these things are what our higher, more evolved, selves want and need, just as we did as children. 

A lot of what narcissists represent is a de-volution of our species, not an evolution, and I think even small children can see the difference, and know that going that way, even if it's because there are threats over their heads, will never garner the results that a utopia of on-going peace and love will garner. 

If violence is so much a part of our species, then why do people who are exposed to it get PTSD? Even our minds are not made for it. And anyone, even the strongest among us, can get PTSD - except primary psychopaths (and who would want to be them?). With enough "giving in" to a world of criminality, invasions, violence, wastelands of burnt up buildings and trees, endless triangulations, endless head games, endless lies and untruths, endless competitions and breaking of the rules, and all the other sincerely bad-for-anyone narcissistic supply demands that are never about respect for others, and the autonomous lives others lead, children still know the difference between peace and hell. 

And they also know they have a choice: to be fawning sycophants to bullies, bribers, coercive controllers, invaders, liars, cheats, triangulators, people who create unloving environments with fleeting belonging, or to be strong and seek a better life for themselves and the next generation. 

Narcissists will always test us, and turn our world upside down when they aren't getting the next narcissistic supply they think they want so badly. It's up to us to test ourselves though, and our strength, and our resolve "not to cave into" all of this (if one can dare to dream of a better life than being hostage to narcissistic supply). 

NARCISSISTIC SUPPLY IS ALSO BASED ON WHAT NARCISSISTS HEAR
AND THEIR OWN INTERPRETING PROCESS IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY HEAR

In addition to what they require for narcissistic supply, they are terrible at listening (poor at "other-labeling" as I said earlier in the post, but there is so much more to it, and includes most everything in discussion except "the gray rock topics": impersonal subjects like cooking, nature, travel, space, chemistry, physics, engineering, gardening, laundry, art, etc - and many therapists will tell you that these are the only discussions you should have with a narcissist if you are going to keep a narcissist in your life). 

To make matters worse in talking about interpersonal topics, the narcissistic supply they do receive is going to be distorted because of what they are able to hear and not hear. Here are some examples:

Everything they hear from other people has filters: 
* suspicions about what they are hearing
* projection
* their ego is involved ("is what is being said flattering to me or not?" - this kind of thinking style)
* worried that they will be betrayed ("how much loyalty do they have for me in what they are saying?" - this kind of thinking style)
* worried that you will see - into their insecurities, secrets and their evil side and denounce them
* a distrustful nature
* lack of empathy - you can only get so far having a conversation with a person with a lack of empathy. It's as if they say internally to themselves, "If I'm being called on to have empathy he (or she) has something to think about." 
     Not caring about your feelings nullifies a lot of what you have to say, as well as nullifying a whole swath of the conversation. Talk about selective hearing! Which I discuss next:
* selective hearing and selective interpreting (only hearing how things might effect them in the future - Dr. Ramani has an excellent video on this)
* denying they are ever culpable for anything
* too ready with come-backs before you get to say what you want to say - At the point where they have their come-backs is the point where they stop listening to you, even if you've said "let me finish what I have to say" or "please don't interrupt me."
     A lot of conversations with narcissists are about verbal sparring, rather than a conversation with sensitivity that takes both of you into account. It's not about sharing. Or ideas. Or going on a "perspective adventure" or about opening the "empathy chakra." 
     If you listen to them, the interruptions of their "come-backs" are most often defensiveness, or because they think their "come back" is so brilliant and so important that they can't wait until you're finished to speak. 
     While some of us non-narcissists do this on occasion too, especially if we were not loved as children, or the parenting style with us was insecure attachment, the difference is that we can can grow out of this whereas the narcissist won't. 
* giving the person they are hearing either flaws or attributes which they put ahead of what they are hearing from that person, i.e. the narcissist filters what they are hearing through what they think the personality of a person is, and whether they like that person or not.
     If they dislike you, or hate you, they won't hear what you have to say no matter what. 
     How to tell if a narcissist hates you:
     For overt grandiose narcissists: they tell you that, usually more than once. And you can tell because they don't care what you feel. 
     For covert vulnerable narcissists: it's harder to tell, but some tell-tale signs are the cold shoulder, snippy one-word answers when you ask them what is wrong, they are spreading false narratives about you to others, they engage in some smear-campaigning about your character, they look affronted when you speak to them, they dismiss most of what you have to say, and they "rain on your parade" when you are happy or celebrating something. 
     For malignant narcissists, they scheme against you, and sometimes take things from you which are not theirs, or are joint property, or they brainwash children to think of you as dangerously insane or as a monster. 
     If they hate you, I see no point in talking to them, because as I said, they aren't interested in a word you have to say and it can be dangerous as they most often want to hurt people they hate, as well pointless. They aren't even open to whether they may have gotten you wrong, and frankly they don't care if they get anyone wrong. 
* interpreting other people's words as lying to them (where suspicions come in) - and that's because they often lie especially when they want to feed their grandiosity that it is projection that others lie as much as they do
* feeling that they can read other people's minds and that other people can read their mind enough to know why the narcissist is angry or hurt over something (totally delusional and contributes to distortion of what they hear in a major way)
     If you need to question this and you are scapegoat, how many things did you experience as a child that the narcissist never knew was happening. If they can read minds so well, and there was a huge event or many events in your life that you felt you had to keep secret, or did keep secret, and impacted you emotionally, then they don't read minds.  
     Even when you experience something with a narcissist, narcissists gaslight a lot, and insist that you didn't experience something that you both know you did. This isn't exactly mind-reading: it is the opposite.
* insisting that people are thinking, feeling and experiencing certain things that those people are not thinking, feeling or experiencing (called invalidation and perspecticide), also contributes majorly to distortion of information and the truth. All narcissists invalidate and try to devalue the perspective of others.
* feeling that they understand body language and facial expressions more than they actually do.
     They feel they have enough information from body language to judge and brand others with their opinions. It's very much like the former in that they insist they know what you're thinking, feeling and experiencing when they do not.
     They feel they know other people when they do not.
     If they insist that a look on your face, or an attitude in your voice means something about you (when it doesn't), they are pretty far down the rabbit hole of distorting reality in most, if not all, situations.
     Sociopaths, psychopaths and alcoholics often see hostility when there isn't any - often it's a brain matter in all three cases. For the sociopath, it's often the result of their own hostility and hypervigilance (fight or flight responses), and exploitation of others. For the psychopath it is because of their autonomic nervous systems which are different from others in the population and control their brain. And for alcoholics it is because alcohol distorts their perspectives, especially in this area. 
     Malignant narcissists are part sociopath, and this can increase seeing hostility in others when there isn't. 
* gaslighting - trying to distort reality to fit the narrative they want that will make them look better, or superior, to exploit the truth, or to exploit the child. They also assume others gaslight them too. My post on gaslighting is HERE
* interpreting other people's words and actions as "acting" (again where suspicions come in, and this is where we get false accusations) - and it also has to do with the fact that they put on acts and change their personalities, likes and dislikes to mirror people. They don't really have much of a personality, or they have the beginning of one that was arrested in childhood. This means they are chameleons and mirrors who largely use other people's personality styles, expression styles, styles of dress and hair, pretend their interests are the same as yours, to express themselves. Not having their own developed and accepted personality aside from the personality disorder which dictates how they act and perceive, means, in essence that you are talking to the personality disorder.
     What does this mean exactly?:
     Narcissists are extremely predictable and they don't differentiate that much from other narcissists except in DNA, the most outstanding traits among them all being a lack of empathy, divide and conquer objectives and strategies (triangulation), arrogance, entitlement, exploiting, dysregulated emotions (most often in the form of raging overtly or covertly), and most often bullying or coercing too. 
     If you try to explain to them why you weren't acting or why you wouldn't have a reason to act, they will put their beliefs before your words, thereby silencing you to say anything more.
     Eventually what this turns into (and every child abuse victim with a narcissistic parent can relate to this in spades, even a golden child who is more likely to take on acting for both safety and promotion reasons) is that when you are not acting, you are deemed to be acting, and when you are acting (mainly to appease the parent) you are deemed not to be acting. It proves they have no idea what truth is or how it should be treated. 
     Most people treat the truth reverently.
     In fact, for the narcissist, the truth is an amorphous thing that can be molded and interpreted any old way to fit agendas and win arguments.
* arrogance - The narcissist can't hear you because everything other people have to say is discounted to a large degree because they think they are superior to others. Also, unless the communication isn't of a flattering nature that's enhancing their arrogance, or dis-flattering enough to detract from their arrogance, they tend to get bored and go "off-line" (not hear). This is when you get the brick wall kind of stare. Or they might do a double-take and ask you to repeat something. Or they might leave the room when you are in mid-sentence. 
    Again, Dr. Ramani brings this up in the same video I'm looking for. Unless the conversation has to do with them, and the effect on their future, they can't be bothered to hear what you have to say. 
* lack of object constancy - people they originally love bombed are treated drastically differently by the narcissist. Often a difference of opinion, or an argument, or being away from the narcissist for a short period of time can mean they devalue you and discard you from their life. 
     For narcissists, the lack of object constancy means constantly losing relationships and meaningful connections. 
     Utilitarian love also falls under the category of lack of object constancy. 
     If you're trying to communicate with someone who has a lack of object constancy, it can feel uneasy, baffling, tumultuous, unreliable, often like a wall of silence, and often the ultimate conclusion that most of us make is that they are untrustworthy. With a lack of trust in them, communication either becomes purely emotional or goes completely off-line, especially when you realize that even emotions don't move them. 
     It can also produce trauma because the high majority of us have object constancy, value it and assume others are just as invested in it, innately understanding that if we have an argument, a different opinion or are away for awhile, we don't stop communicating with them afterwards. 
     When parents do this to children, neglect is usually the outcome, but abuse can also follow especially if the child reacts (which most children tend to do), thereby setting off the parent's shame-rage cycle, producing more and more trauma for the child as the narcissist's shame-rage cycle intensifies and escalates. 
     The message that the lack of object constancy sends to a child is to be silent and not react (i.e. develop a freeze response - very unhealthy), eventually producing estrangement. 
     Most narcissistic parents realize the impulsivity that led to their decision of a discard, and that is when they hoover. If the child is successfully hoovered back into the relationship, it tends to be a cycle of abuse, with discards followed by hoovers. As mentioned before, in the case of children "discards" tend to mean neglect (emotional, psychological, physical), abandonments, silent treatments, absurdly long "time outs" with the more severe outcomes being false imprisonment (and for child abuse victims that usually means locking a child in a room and not allowing him or her to come out for days, weeks, months or years, a criminal offense ... I discuss one of the more egregious cases in this post, but the phenomenon of locking a child abuse victim in a room for hours or days by their abuser is not unusual and is part of the escalation and intimidation process). 
     For the child, the outcome of estrangement is the healthiest outcome even though it comes with a lot of grief. For the parent, they lose narcissistic supply because of the impulsivity that innately comes from a lack of object constancy, and as a result can often go through a narcissistic collapse, with on-going paranoia becoming the final outcome (paranoia is discussed later in the post). 
* a belief that they are always winners and the most intelligent person in the room no matter what the reality is around them. This is tied to their arrogance which I discuss above. The reason why it's hard to communicate with a person with a mindset like this, is that any suggestion that they haven't thought through things enough, or actually didn't win something, will set off their rage, and will mean that they will turn vindictive towards you or give you the alternate challenge that you must be loyal to them under any and every circumstance, via sycophancy. 
     And yes, insisting you be a sycophant can be a form of punishment because most of us don't like being sycophants. 
* belief oriented - They are primarily belief-oriented, not fact oriented, and they believe that others are too. In fact, I'd bet they believe we are in a constant world of distorted facts, distorted agendas, fakeness and fake flattery in order for exploitation and sabotage to take place. Again, this may be as projection-oriented as anything they judge. 
* tactic, agenda and manipulation oriented - everything they say is oriented to get more narcissistic supply, power, control and domination over you and others. Unless your issues can be manipulated to that end, they are not that interested. It is one reason why, when you go to them about a dire issue, they get bored or largely discount it as unimportant. You are more likely to be judged, lectured at, and told what to do without them understanding much about your issue. In other words you won't get comprehension about the issue, or empathy, or a solution which makes sense or will be effective. 
     If you complain that the issue is not resolved, they often shut the conversation down (i.e. silence you, which can have the effect of you turning away from them and adopting other relationships where people are more capable of listening than they are, which in turn, enrages them - it's hard to figure out why, when they really don't want to hear you out, or to be empathetic, understanding, and give you fixes that actually work. 
     The problem with relating to someone who is so tactic and manipulation oriented is that those things  will always come first in your conversations with them. They may want to play "the great sage" and lead you in a certain direction, but it is too self-oriented to be effective for you.  
* exceptional confirmation bias - once they've made up their minds (and it can seconds), especially in judging other people, they've made up their minds for good. Most of the confirmation bias they have took very little investigation, very little thought (mindless), most often impulsive even if it's "a forever decision", and distorted by their ego and flawed interpretations. Sometimes the flawed interpretations are CPTSD - triggered interpretations, especially for covert vulnerable narcissists, the narcissists who  weren't spoiled or the golden child. 
     Confirmation bias is usually way more pronounced in narcissists than it is in the general population. 
* distortion of past events - this can make it almost impossible to discuss present events that are tied to the past events. 
* insisting on the distortion of reality, and pressuring you to agree to the false narratives they tell - again, real communication cannot happen with this agenda. It's coercion instead of a conversation. 
* intolerance of other people's differences, different ways of looking at things, different thoughts and perspectives, different lifestyle, their creativity, their openness to new ideas, and autonomous decision-making - again, with intolerance, there is no hope of a real conversation. This can turn to coercion by the narcissist pretty fast. They are notorious for obsessive criticizing, making fun of people, and vilifying those who don't think and believe exactly in the way they do, or in the way they want people to think and believe. 
     Sometimes people feel so intimidated that they renounce their former perspectives, personality and dress to fit in with the narcissist and their group of sycophants, but again, this isn't healthy and there will be repercussions along the way because of that fact. The worst part of it is that there is not much self-pride in being a sycophant. 
     Just as often, however, people feel put off by the menacing disdain, and feel good about who they are, how they think, and their perspectives no matter how much they are being criticized by the narcissist and their flying monkeys. This is especially true of people with integrity. They can just as easily have a bad opinion of the narcissist as the narcissist has of them.
     The resisters of the narcissist may also move into more autonomous thoughts and perspectives than usual (seen as rebellion by the narcissist) because they feel hypervigilant or sick internally being around the narcissist and their sycophants. Some of us are a lot more sensitive to the health signals in our body enough to want no part in being any kind of narcissistic supply for narcissists, and some of this may also come from very early childhood experiences of not feeling well around adults who did not have our best interests at heart. Hypervigilance at an early age can have its positives in that it can be counted on to be a "detector of toxicity" 
* never enough-ness - this is a huge topic among child abuse survivors: "I was always told as a child that I was not enough and didn't do anything good enough", "I was always told I wasn't good enough for them", "The dog was treated better than I was", "Mom always expected apologies, but when I gave them to her, even when I did nothing wrong which was a big sacrifice and self-flagellation on my part, it still wasn't good enough", "Nothing was ever good enough for my Dad. He'd rage all night about how his workers, no matter how many he had hired and fired over the decades, were never good enough for him. He terrorized everyone he knew, even us kids, to work harder and harder for him to no avail."
     Narcissists never feel satisfied with the amount of narcissistic supply you already give them, even if and when they become your whole world, when your whole life is relegated to their demands, so in that way they are like bottomless pits, trying to get ever more narcissistic supply. 
     The reason they can't hear you when you are deemed to "not be good enough" is that they are focused on that rather than what you are saying. The want, want, want - is all that matters to them. 
     Some of the phrases you hear are: "You better do this when I get home", "You better not disappointment me or you'll get it", "You better do ----", "You better believe me when I tell you", "You better do it the way I like", "You better not do it your way or you'll mess it up and I'll be furious", "You better not say anything to anyone about this", "So I rule your life; it's all that you deserve", and so on. 
     There isn't a "you" in these demands and commands - they have managed your expectations down to being a puppet for them, the ultimate in narcissistic supply. If you try to make it "I'm in this too, and I have my own ways of thinking things through and doing things", most often they aren't interested in your methods. "Don't tell me how you do it, you do it the way I tell you to do it."     
     Narcissists aren't just self centered in terms of them thinking primarily about themselves, they are self centered in just about any way you can think of, including not taking into consideration that you are person, a person with a brain of your own, that you have your own ways of doing things, that if you have reached your total full capacity in adulthood, you are creative enough, are smart enough, have enough feelings, are capable of learning as much, and that you are capable enough, and that you are "enough." You are as enough as they are enough. 
     Don't fall into the trap of their "never enough" bullying style of thinking when it comes to yourself. 
     Be aware that all narcissists have this "never-enoughness" problem, and that it's their personality disorder driving it, not you. 
     Actually the never-enoughness is a burden, an albatross, that they carry as it promotes more negative thoughts such as rage that won't go away, obsessional thinking about who they hate, resentment, jealousy, obsessions with labeling others and criticizing them, envy, obsessions about hurting others, acting happy when they don't feel happy, playing the victim when they know they were the perpetrator, acting arrogant and grandiose when they feel inadequate, and just about every negative feeling and action they have is generated through this "never-enoughness". 
     Even if they have a narcissistic collapse and try to get a pity party going to tell you that they always felt they weren't good enough to others, realize also that it is part of the personality disorder. Unless they are depressed, or suicidal, it's just another desperate act to get narcissistic supply. 
* gratitude shaming - there is such a thing as "gratitude shaming" in narcissistic abuse ... and it also goes with the narcissist grasping at getting positive narcissistic supply after they haven't treated you well. Gratitude shaming is about the narcissist shaming you because they feel they are not receiving enough gratitude for who they are and what they've done. 
     Gratitude shaming tends to happen right after they've abused you, or criticized you, or bread-crumbed you, or cheated on you, or blamed you for things that weren't your fault, or after they've hit you, or when they're trying to hoover you back after they've abandoned you. 
     It's about shaming you for noticing that they are cruel to you - you're supposed to ignore that and show gratitude instead. 
     From someone who lives in a constant state of "never-enoughness" when it comes to you and everyone else!? 
     Again, it's both hypocrisy and projection. Why projection? Because they don't show gratitude for who you are and what you do when they live in a constant state of criticizing you, flaw-picking, dreaming up the next false narrative about you, and ultimately abandoning you, showing you constantly that you aren't "good enough" for them.  
     It should show you that sycophancy, gratitude, not noticing the bad stuff about them, not holding them accountable for the hurtful things they do, and being a mind slave to them are all that really matter to them. The question for you to ask is that all that matters to you too? And are you willing to be bullied so that the narcissist can get it (note: narcissists bully people to get what they want, including gratitude) - because if you want more from a relationship than being a sycophant, bullied, and supplying flattery when they are harming people, including you, then their tactic of gratitude shaming is not going to work on you. 
     Trying to relate to someone who is ungrateful in spades and who shames you for being ungrateful yourself when you've brought up the things they do that are hurtful, means you're only going to be heard if you've agreed to be one of their flatterers/sycophants, and a full time agree-er and repeater of all of their thoughts, phrases and agendas, i.e. a constant source of narcissistic supply.
     No one needs to be narcissistic supply to a narcissist.
     In fact, it baffles me why so many people sign up for the job willingly especially when a narcissist is wielding power so destructively, so abusively, and when it will be noticed by others that you have an affiliation to them, and their bullying. You have a right to talk about things that aren't flattering to them, especially if they've been thoughtless and cruel to others or to you (which they will be if they are narcissists). If you go along with sycophancy, they keep living in this cloudy fantasy world that all people flatter them even when they are mean, and that something is direly wrong with you or anyone else who dares not to be a sycophant. Are you going to go along with everything they want to the point of destroying yourself or others? Are you going to fight for them and take the blame for them when their cruelty gets noticed and other people want them to be accountable? Why, it's like being a mindless soldier of a corrupt leader. 
     I would say that having a reputation as a thinking, questioning, research-guided, non-sycophant is a way better life than a non-thinking, dictated-to, phrase-repeater, robot-like sycophant. 
     Will they try to punish you for rejecting this job they want to put you in? Sure they will. Probably even hurt you more than you imagined, because remember: they get what they want through bullying.
     But after awhile they'll probably stop after they find better sources of narcissistic supply than you were. That can happen pretty fast, so maybe it's worth the wait. Again there are plenty of people who are willing to be sycophants (just look at our present government in the USA). Let them do the job if they choose.
     Also if you threatened them with demands for narcissistic supply in every conversation and told them they needed to kiss your ring and make you their leader, would they do it? Of course not! They'd throw a tantrum. 
     If you're a child, you can't get out of this unless you are physically abused, sexually abused, starved, locked up in a room or basement, recorded emotionally abusive situations and showed them to authorities, or they pushed and shoved you around, at least in the United States, although some states have begun to tighten laws particularly about coercive control. Anyway, as an adult you have a right to leave this thankless childhood job behind, especially if you can not get caught up in learned helplessness type of thinking patterns that keep you stuck dealing with this.   
     I think it's obvious you can't talk to a person with a mind-set like this unless you've advertised that you're looking desperately for work or volunteerism as a sycophant ("desperate, will do any job" kind of advertising too).       
* paranoia - narcissists have extraordinary levels of of paranoia, especially over the people they hurt.
     Why?
     Because if they feel hurt, they rage and very often retaliate and scheme how to hurt the other people worse than they were hurt (escalation is always the name of the game for narcissists who abuse and use abuse to solve their problems). They figure you're like that too. 
     And because they are paranoid of being found out in terms of the amount of abuse and retaliations they enact, they rage at the person they are abusing, hoping that the intimidation will keep the person (or child in this case) in a state of silence about the abuse. 
     It doesn't take much to hurt a narcissist either (they are much more sensitive to being hurt than to hurting others, by a long shot, which is where the imbalance comes in as well as the lack of empathy). The smallest inconsequential phrase can do it, especially if they feel it hits their reputation. Not getting invited to a party can do it. Refusing to engage with them in gossip can do it. Yawning can do it. A facial expression that they don't like can do it. Expecting an apology from you when you didn't do anything wrong can do it. Or they just distort the truth so much that they see things or hear things that don't exist, also somewhat common among narcissists.  
     The amount of rage, or the ending of a relationship over these kinds of things, the amount of retaliations exhibited over these things, the amount of false narratives and smear campaigns over your character afterwards, the amount of fear they want to put into you, tells the story of how hurt they are (or how much they feel their reputation is being threatened more likely).
     How much they want to hurt you back is also something to keep an eye on. It tells the story of how much empathy they have for you as opposed to how sorry they feel for themselves. If it's incredibly lopsided where they are playing the victim all of the time, and painting you as the victimizer when they've retaliated to extremes, that explains how high they are on the narcissism scale, and how low they are on the truth-telling scale.
     If the reaction is much, much more abusive than the yawning, or slip, or thoughtless phrase you gave them, then that's the story of how abusive they are, and how far they'll go to abuse you without regrets or thoughts like "I don't feel good about going any farther with this", and how regulated they are, and how dangerous they are.
     And yes, they mean to hurt you. It's rare for a narcissist to say, "I didn't mean to hurt you." Or "I regret hurting you as much as I did." They will almost always justify the hurt, and try to normalize the amount they hurt you with as well. 
     And the reason they hurt others to the extent they do is because they don't have thoughts like "I didn't mean to hurt her as much as I did", or the emotional regulation to even consider these perspectives even if there are others who question the narcissist's ambitions to hurt others. 
     They also generally inflict a lot more pain on others than they receive, so that should also speak volumes about who they are and to what lengths they are willing to go with damaging other people. 
     Paranoia that they will be "found out" in terms of this level of abuse and retaliation, especially if it concerns their children (as most people care about the fate of children, and care about child abuse), can increase their paranoia a lot.
     The more obsessive they get about hurting you and keeping it a secret, the more paranoia they are enduring - you can count on it. 
     One of the reasons they end relationships permanently, even with their own children, is because they are so incredibly paranoid at being found out, that in order to play the victim successfully, they can't have that child in their life. If you're hearing, "I need to protect myself from my child. My child is a monster!" the relationship with that parent should be over. Also, don't ask why they are smearing your name again, ask yourself if this is just another case of projection, especially if the retaliation went above and beyond what ever you did or were perceived to have done. They can't allow themselves to have a relationship with you if they feel the desire to play the victimhood game to an absolute hilt. 
     Often the child will end the relationship just after the narcissistic parent did just to let the narcissist know that they are not going to come back begging, or putting up with the narcissist's false narratives, which is discussed in the "lack of object constancy" section above. It has to do with a combination of the shame-rage spiral and narcissistic collapse, traumatizing the child enough that the child flees  (i.e. the flee trauma response kicks in ... again, the main trauma responses are fawn, fight, flee, freeze). 
     And this, folks, is just one of many reasons why about 90 percent of scapegoats are estranged from a parent. 
     Once the narcissist is displaying this much paranoia and this much fake victimhood, there really is nothing to talk about with them again. You're just going to run into their shame-rage spiral again and again, only so much worse, so much more violent or annihilating for you, with worse "punishments" and retaliation than the last time. They want the narrative so badly (with you only, not with others) that they hurt you so badly because you seemed threatening to them (i.e. more like their reputation). Abusive parents who have killed or neglected their children even use this narrative and you can look up cases of this for yourself. It's a DARVO on steroids. 
     Even if you haven't gotten to the point of slipping up (yet), or forgetting to invite them to a party (yet), or haven't had a facial expression that made them furious (yet), their paranoia will still run the show and the conversation, and in this case it might be that you'll do one of these things *some day* just like all of the rest of the people they've known throughout the years, endlessly disappointing them over narcissistic supply, that they won't be able to help themselves and hurt/trash you again. 
     All psychologists say that if you get too close to narcissists you'll get hurt. Narcissists probably even know this, otherwise their paranoia wouldn't be so off the charts.
     Enablers and sycophants who normalize, give credence to their lies about being victimized, DARVO-ing for them, and give credence and narcissistic supply to all their paranoias, are actually setting themselves up for their own dismissals and retaliations from the narcissist however many sycophants are willing to totally break with their own ethics and reputation. 

With all of this going on it stands to reason that a child being understood by a narcissistic parent or caretaker is going to be unfeasible and often leads to an insecure attachment style or a disorganized attachment style
     
WHEN CHILDREN GIVE THEIR PARENT
THE NARCISSISTIC SUPPLY THEY WANT

Even when you give them the narcissistic supply they want, they often say things like:

* "You don't really mean that" (especially if they've hurt you a lot, or egregiously)
* "You're a liar. I know one when I see one." 
* "You're just saying that because you want 'that toy' for Christmas!" 
* "You can stop flattering me now. There's some ulterior motive going on here."
* "You can stop now. I know what flattery is really about!"
* "Do you really mean it? You must be one of my closest, most loyal friends", especially if you believe they were the victim of someone else (when they really weren't). And later on when they perceive that you found something out that contradicts their narrative, or when they "believe" you might have found something out, they might say, "You aren't as loyal as I thought you were", or "Just how loyal are you to question how I treated my (add person's name here)?" 

For the golden child, having to provide constant narcissistic supply to get the parent regulated and consistent emotionally, it can still be looked at as a form of child abuse, and definitely a form of parentification.  

For one thing, there is too high a risk of the golden child abandoning his authentic budding personality in return for being a mirror and sycophant to his narcissistic parent. Narcissists focus very heavily on how the behaviors of others aren't good, or good enough, for them. The constant need for narcissistic supply will also mean the parent will spend most of their time with the child either disapproving of behavior or approving of behavior, and because they can't comprehend what children are saying to them, the parent fills in the blanks of how their children behaves with their own personality traits (projection - and this is ultimately why and how narcissists create roles such as the golden child and the scapegoat).  

There are also so many down-sides to being a full time sycophant to an adult and losing your own personality, interests, thoughts, attitudes, reality and judgements to adopt the parent's. Golden children also run a high risk of becoming another narcissist by taking up Jekyll and Hyde behavior which can start by observing the parent doing it: being the ultimate lapdog flatterer, but then complaining about the parent behind their back.

All of the narcissists I have known manifested Jekyll and Hyde behaviors and some of it was sickening, like praising a person's singing abilities in the most sticky-sweet kind of way while they were present, and over and over again, for instance, and then laughing and making fun of them endlessly after they left the house, about how they were irritating and out of key in their vocal style was after the singer had left the house (mocking and play acting the most irritating parts of their vocal styles).

In general, narcissists spend a lot more time trash-talking about other people in this way than any kind of authentic admiring, and this is one reason their heads are full of negativity, why their attitudes are negative, why their judgements of others are so negative, and why they live as a "never-enough" grasping narcissistic supply addict. They continually make rash decisions based on the narcissistic supply they are receiving too, like for instance, changing their Last Will and Testament at a second's notice over how much narcissistic supply they believe they are receiving (and through all of the filters mentioned above). 

I would say that many golden children aren't particularly happy being close to their parent, that it's anxiety-producing, and sometimes down right nauseating, especially when the parent is trying to get them to believe in an event that isn't true, and that never comported with reality, but they are too afraid of losing the gravy train, so keep up the pleasing behaviors regardless, saying "yes" to all of the crazy-making false narratives, whereas scapegoats give up on pleasing their parent, being stuck in the parent's never-enoughness mind-prison. 

In other words, the molding and constant labeling of the child is completely over-done and often completely wrong. As I've said in the section before this one, most narcissistic parents do not care about reality/truth or of seeking it (that it should be, and can be, manipulated for their own agendas). Many children from narcissistic families are constantly being molded and groomed to accept the judging and labeling to the point where the child's defenses of their actions, thoughts and feelings are either not taken into account at all, or where the parent's ego feels threatened because narcissists feel they have to be right in every situation, even if it's a gross injustice of the authentic reality, that it's a hit to their "superior image" or self esteem if a child challenges their beliefs. And the child endures their parents rage or abuse once again over it (in the manner of the shame-rage spiral and most often the cycle of abuse).  

Anyway, when a child lacks in being a good source of narcissistic supply, the narcissistic parent often gets rageful or punishing over it, no matter what other circumstances the child is enduring, further challenging the relationship with that child, and challenging the endurance of that child to take on more trauma symptoms.

If the child is not going through anything major, the challenge is going to be either a mild punishment (favoring another child temporarily and intermittently neglecting the child who is a lousy narcissistic supply giver), or abusing the child (absurdly long time outs, favoring another child permanently, on-going neglect, silent treatments and rejections, repeated scenes of raging at their child, tearing their child's self esteem and interests apart, hitting, triangulation, betrayal, gaslighting, false narratives to describe them, including most of the punishments and abuses I talk about in the right hand column under "narcissistic abuse section" ... which also continues in this section, and if you were scapegoated, in this section.

IN CONCLUSION

Talking to a narcissist means that their personality disorder is going to be the main thing you'll be relating to and up against. You're not going to find convictions of morality because they don't have any. You're not going to get them to see your side of view because they don't care about reality or the truth. You're not going to find empathy because they either don't have any, or it is on the very low side. You're not going to find reasonable solutions because they don't have any. You're not going to find conversations satisfying because they are too self centered to think about how they, or anything else in your life, effects you. You're not going to find a satisfying connection with them because they are incapable of love, at least adult love (it would resemble more how a distracted 2 year old expresses love). And you're not going to find any kind of consistency of affection (more like hate followed by love bombing or hoovering, followed by more hate, followed by another hoover, round and round, especially if you are anyone else other than the golden child). You're not going to find ways of talking to them without triggering their rage, shame and jealousy because there aren't many positive emotions inside them to overcome the negative ones. 

Think of them as either a spoiled rotten golden child who had to give up their budding personality to please a bully or abusive caretaker ... or conversely, a small insecure, shame-filled, imperfect childat least in terms of what one caregiver or bully possibly labeled them as in early childhood years: expecting impossible standards in perfectionism in deeds, looks and words that matched the bully's demands resulting in covert vulnerable narcissism. Both kinds of child's personalities were somehow arrested in early childhood, and they've surrounded themselves with a thick wall of impenetrable arrogances, made up stories, denials, defenses, armaments and battle tactics. While they operate these defenses, armaments and battle tactics with a lot of impulsiveness and rage, the wall is too thick to hear you. And that's what talking to a narcissist really feels like. 

Being fully estranged means not talking to your parent. And most of these reasons are why children of narcissists find themselves not wanting to talk to their parent, besides the trauma symptoms they undergo by getting too close to the narcissist (even adults get trauma symptoms from getting too close to a narcissist), and this is especially the case if the narcissist's child got burned and exhausted by being "a not good enough sycophant" or they were the narcissist's abused scapegoats. 

FURTHER READING

Do narcissist parents have children for supply? - forum, myptsd.com

The Impact of Narcissistic Supply -  by LaKeisha Fleming, and reviewed by Ivy Kwong, LMFT for Very Well Mind

The Concept of Narcissistic Supply
Pleasing a narcissist is thankless, like filling a bottomless pit.
When you say "Yes" to a person, make sure you are not saying "No" to yourself
 
- by Darlene Lancer, JD, LMFT for Psychology Today 

What Is Narcissistic Supply? - by  Nakpangi Thomas, PhD, LPC, TITC-CT, medically reviewed by Lynn Byars, MD for Choosing Therapy

An Insight into the Mind of a Narcissist - by LaKeisha Fleming, and reviewed by Ivy Kwong, LMFT for Very Well Mind

The Unraveling of a Narcissist: What Happens When the Narcissistic Supply is Lost - TherapyWithAb.com

What Happens When The Narcissist Has No Supply? | When A Narcissist Collapses - by Dr. Emily Mayfield for Mindset Therapy (You Tube)

a lack of narcissistic supply - what does it mean - a Google search

No Narcissistic Supply Self Supply Or Forced Supply - by psychologist, Sam Vaknin, for Vaknin talks
(note: Sam Vaknin, by his own accounts, has been diagnosed with Narcissistic Personality Disorder, and has described himself as a malignant narcissist, so the perspective is both as "an insider", i.e. inside the mind of a narcissist, and through his education in psychology)

another article along the same lines as the one above: The Narcissist's Reaction to Deficient Narcissistic Supply - by Sam Vaknin for Healthy Place

Impacts and Management Strategies - Bay Area CBT Center (Cognitive Behavioral Therapy)


FOUND ON FACEBOOK:










Thursday, April 10, 2025

The Kimberly Sullivan Case. A Stepmother and Father Allegedly Lock Away a Boy When He Is 12, Underfeeding Him, and Home Schooling Him, and at 32 He Takes a Chance of Being Rescued by Lighting the House on Fire

I still plan on posting the "Hoovering" article, but in the meantime the Kimberly Sullivan case caught my attention. 

Occasionally I make note of articles having to do with child abuse. Many of these cases are egregious, but even in milder child abuse cases, there seem to be some similarities such as not hearing a child out or not caring what they have to say (i.e. what they are going through), not caring about the child's feelings or their physical, mental and emotional health (neglect), "home-schooling" (also common, especially for controlling caretakers or caretakers who are trying to present a different image to the world than who they are at home), rageful caretaking where continual and escalating "punishments" put a child's welfare at risk, not feeding the child an adequate amount of food, or the wrong kind of food, or force feeding, or in general food and weight are a constant issue (super common), absurdly long "time outs", separating a child from the rest of the family or false imprisonment (common), reckless endangerment and other kinds of offenses which are talked about in forums for many, many adults of child abuse. Most just don't go as far as this story portrays.

But I think it is important to report on how far child abuse can go especially since abuse, in general, always escalates. It is obvious it did in this case. It is also why children cannot make up with parents who are abusive (it is ineffective) and why it is wrong to expect them to do so. 

So far, at the time of this writing, some other stories that I decided to write briefly about include The Kornegay case (mentioned in this post), the Turpin case, the Jeffrey Epstein case, and the Brian Coulter - Gloria Williams case

As for this news-worthy report, here are the headlines from The New York Times:

He Was Held Captive in His Room for Decades. Then He Set It on Fire.
Firefighters found a 32-year-old man who weighed 68 pounds. The police say his stepmother locked him away when he was 12.
 -
written by Sarah Maslin Nir

In this case, the 12 year old child is locked in a room in a house belonging to his father and stepmother, and at 36 years old, decides he will take a chance with a lighter he found in a jacket leant to him by his stepmother and start a house fire in hopes that he will be rescued by authorities. 

However, before then, a principal had found the boy coming to school with a dirty lunch pail, devouring his lunch in a restroom, and drinking the water in a urinal. He came to school looking hungry and disheveled. 

The principal made calls to the Department of Children and Families to no avail. The authorities kept reporting back that the child was fine. 

So one has to wonder what happened. Did the family quickly clean up their act or put on an act before the authorities arrived (common), or vacuum the house and get rid of things that were filthy or might make them "look bad" before they arrived, or were the authorities themselves blind as to what was going on, or lazy about investigating, or overlooking things they shouldn't have overlooked, or took the parents word for what was happening (can be too common, and of detriment to the child), or forgot to look in on the case after the boy went into home schooling?

What are the excuses here, and is there going to be an investigation into them? 

Right now this is just the bare bones of the story (it just came out). I hope I can find out more information as reporters delve into this horrific case. 

The story somewhat concludes with these paragraphs:

     ... Since the fire, the man has been ensconced in a hospital rehabilitation center, according to Amanda Nardozzi, the executive director of Safe Haven of Greater Waterbury, a nonprofit organization that has been helping coordinate his care.
     According to Ms. Nardozzi, he will need extensive physical rehabilitation — court documents state he has deformed knees and muscle wasting — and a carefully managed diet to avoid re-feeding syndrome, where a sudden flood of nutrients can kill a person near starvation. He is also receiving mental health counseling, Ms. Nardozzi said, funded in part by an official GoFundMe that has already raised over $200,000. ...

I hope he can find healthy relationships, physical health, mental health that begins to erase so many years of trauma, and emotional health (being with people with empathy so that it becomes his new reality and world view). Right now there is a "Go Fund Me" for the victim's care which has already raised $20,000. The article did not provide a link to that fund-raising campaign, but eventually maybe it will be publicly posted so that others may contribute.

UPDATES TO THE STORY:

* This USA Today article shows what the inside of the house looked like around the time of Ms. Sullivan's arrest. The squalor and filth reminds me of pictures of the Turpin family's home who I mentioned above. Ms. Sullivan's attorney objected to the photos being publicized by the police. 

* Bodycam video shows rescue of Connecticut man allegedly held captive by parents for over 20 years - from Channel 6 ABC News. 
Videos record the 911 call, the house on fire and other incidentals having to do with the case. 

* The CBS version of the story. The story talks to one of Sullivans lawyers on the case, and tells reporters that his client, Ms. Sullivan, is shocked by the allegations against her. 
My thoughts? How can that be unless abuse has been totally normalized and not seen as egregious since she was a child? And how could she not know the law on this when similar cases are on T.V. and social media? 

* 'He Was in Control': Father of Man Claiming Stepmom Held Him Captive Made Decisions About His Son's Care, Claims Her Lawyer
The lawyer for Kimberly Sullivan tells PEOPLE that Kregg Sullivan determined how his son was raised, not his client.
- by Chris Spargo for People Magazine
At the end of the article is a reminder to call authorities if you suspect a child is being abused:
If you suspect child abuse, call the Childhelp National Child Abuse Hotline at 1-800-4-A-Child or 1-800-422-4453, or go to www.childhelp.org. All calls are toll-free and confidential. The hotline is available 24/7 in more than 170 languages.
The comments are interesting. 
The father was the one to give the orders. But did she have to follow them? Is this sycophancy that has gone terribly wrong? And especially after her husband's death? 
One has to wonder where she went in her mind to think that this was right. And this is the question of all sycophants who are with people who break the law, abuse, bully, starve, and show very few ethics or empathy. It's not like he would come back from the dead to put fear in her. 
I wonder how this case will play out. 
Are "orders" from neglectful, abusive people a good-enough defense in a court of law? 
I'm waiting for the answers obviously. 

Forensic Psychologists Weigh in on Kimberly Sullivan Case - by Jenna Sundel, reporter for Newsweek (3/14/25)
excerpts from the article:
   ... Dr. John Fabian, a forensic and clinical neuropsychologist, spoke to Newsweek about the factors that could lead an individual to abuse others.
     "I've had cases where the father figure was abusive to the mother, and this led to neglect and abuse by [the] mother," Fabian said.
     Sullivan could also have been a victim of abuse during her childhood, according to Fabian. "Often, we want to look certainly at the woman's own upbringing and childhood and whether she had been abused," he said.
     In "very rare" cases, there can be a shared psychotic disorder between the parents, known as folie à deux, said Fabian. The parents could have shared a delusion that their child is "evil and they must keep him captive."
     Dr. David Hayes, a criminologist specializing in criminal behavior with a Ph.D. and master's in forensic psychology, told Newsweek that the prevalence of abuse by a stepparent on a stepchild is "much higher" than abuse by a genetic parent on a genetic child.
     "Alienating and treating the stepchild as the 'other' and not part of the family is, sadly, relatively commonplace. This is a very extreme version of that," Hayes said.
     "It hasn't been widely explored, but a concept called Cinderella Stepmother's Syndrome is something that can apply here," Hayes said. "According to research, it manifests when a stepparent has fears about placement within the family, their own ineffectiveness, anxiety, and hostility toward the living and breathing proof that there was a family before they arrived."
     Hayes said if the allegations are true, this would be a "very extreme" version of Cinderella Stepmother's Syndrome.
     "If true, I would assume that the Cinderella's Stepmother Syndrome is comorbid with a personality disorder (maybe something akin to borderline personality disorder) or even a pathological issue," Hayes said.
     Fabian spoke about what could have compelled Sullivan to continue the alleged abuse despite the possibility of being caught.
     "There may just be some inherent gratification of making this child suffer," Fabian said. "I'm not sure about what type of obsessive thinking she may have and what kind of goal or objective she would have in doing this."

Attorney for Kimberly Sullivan says her stepson was not held captive - by Amanda Pitts for NBC Connecticut (4/22/25)

Kimberly Sullivan - continual updates for COURT TV
Kimberly Sullivan is accused of holding her stepson captive in their Connecticut home for 20 years. The man, now 32, set fire to the house in a deliberate effort to save himself.
 (continual updates)

Pretrial hearing for Waterbury stepmother focuses on stepson’s medical records - by Kimberlyn Bouley, Dylan Fearon and Abigail Murillo Villacorta for Eye Witness News 3, Hartford Connecticut (7/8/25)

State adds charges against Waterbury woman accused of holding stepson captive for decades - by NBC Connecticut (news broadcast) You Tube (March 2026)
     Note: in this legal case, the state brought additional charges against Ms. Sullivan of kidnapping in the first degree, assault in the first degree, unlawful restraint and cruelty to person. At the time, the defense would not accept a plea deal, and the case will go to trial. Next court date is April 30th. 


Saturday, March 22, 2025

An Update: New Studies in the Field of Trauma Recovery and Reactions, 500 Peeps Latest Blog, and Some Other Thoughts on Sycophants in Today's Politics

 
From NICABM (features Pat Ogden, PhD, Stephen Porges, PhD, Bessel van der Kolk, MD, Janina Fisher, PhD, Kathy Steele, MN, CS, Deb Dana, LCSW, Ruth Lanius, MD, PhD   and Thema Bryant, PhD):

Treating trauma is some of the most demanding, complex work we do.

Eye contact can feel unsafe. Relationships can trigger survival responses. Clients can become overwhelmed and dissociate before they even begin processing their trauma.

That’s why we’ve gathered 18 of the world’s top trauma experts to share the latest insights on working with trauma in this Advanced Master Program.

When trauma takes hold, the nervous system goes into survival mode — trapping clients in patterns of fear, dissociation, and shame.

But new research is revealing groundbreaking strategies to help clients rewire their trauma response and break free from these cycles.

Join 18 leading trauma experts, including Bessel van der Kolk, MD, Janina Fisher, PhD, and Stephen Porges, PhD, in this advanced training.

One of the things these experts found out is that trauma survivors, and especially people with PTSD, don't do well in "talk therapy". There is a tendency to feel "flooded" in a talk therapy session - where you can hear the advice of the therapist for awhile, but then cognition starts to fall off, and then you can dissociate. This is especially true for people who feel the freeze response (fawn, fight, flee, and freeze being the main trauma responses). 

The freeze response is actually the most unhealthy of the trauma responses and that is where people (or clients) can dissociate or begin to have dissociative experiences. It starts out with minor dissociative experiences and then as traumatic experiences multiply, the dissociative experiences multiply too and also become deeper (i.e. where cognition of current events goes off-line in more extreme ways). 

The freeze response is particularly notable for child abuse victims because the fight and flee responses are more or less impossible for smaller children - and child abusers punish a child for having these responses anyway. I would also argue that the fawn response is not possible for children given the scapegoat role either as the caretaker rejects the fawning, or insinuates that the child doesn't mean it. So the only response that is left is the freeze response. 

However, this group of mental health experts also came up with other trauma responses, notably the Collapse and Submit Response, the Please and Appease Response, and the Attach and Cry for Help Response. 

I'd bet the Collapse and Submit Response as well as the Attach and Cry for Help Response have a lot in common with the Freeze Response in that they can lead to dissociation and an inability to be present at all times in conversations, and especially when lectured at, verbally abused, or told to do something that is wrong, or unethical, or repeatedly told to do things that you don't want to do (over years). 

The freeze response isn't just thoughts running through your head like "I don't know what to do" or "Nothing I do works", but it also has many, many physical ramifications where your ability to respond at all goes off-line. What responses you do have left feel frozen too: frozen screams, freezing up when you are touched, freezing up on choices you have to make (for the "mortal fear" of making the wrong choice), missing opportunities because you freeze up on responding, even thoughts freezing up (like becoming obsessive, or not being able to let a thought, or experience, or feeling die off). 

The freeze response is definitely one of the worst trauma responses in terms of what it does to the body and brain, especially for children exhibiting these responses. 

Because a child cannot express outwardly what he or she is feeling and because they are often silenced by the abuser too, the feelings have to be stuffed, to stay within the body, and this is where we find that it wreaks havoc on the head, heart, stomach, immune system, and muscles primarily, and probably other parts of the body too. 

It is one reason why scapegoats often prefer other trauma responses when they are finally able to do so (like in teen years or adulthood) such as running away, or fighting it out with lots of defenses, arguments, analysis and explanations, or being rebellious, or taking substances to get out of obsessive depressive thinking styles, feelings of utter exhaustion and retreating (often misunderstood as laziness), or feeling disgust for their torturers. 

Scapegoats also have a lot more ability to seek out real love than a golden child because narcissists most often neglect or discard their scapegoat children and those children often use those times to explore, and most often don't return, or return in a way where they are shoved back into their old role. But let's face it: most family scapegoats are expected to be scapegoats for life, thus most of them find their own way in the world.

Fawning isn't very effective for scapegoats because people who torture know that the amount of torture they inflict doesn't deserve a fawning response, so they suspect that it is "fake fawning". Fakeness  enrages narcissists, of course, even though they are a lot more fake and inauthentic than most everyone else on the planet. They figure you are them when you fawn. 

Freezing is the response of last resort (for golden children who mostly fawn, they can find themselves suddenly on the wrong side of a narcissist where fawning isn't producing good results, and may also use the freeze response, but it is usually only temporary, whereas for scapegoats, they may be reacting via the freeze response throughout their childhood and beyond).

Anyway, freezing is often an anxiety response, where the cortisol levels go up and cause stress to the body. Sometimes golden children will keep trying all kinds of fawning and flattering responses to get their systems and the narcissist to become more stable, as they were before. 

One of the leading trauma experts, Bessel van der Kolk, MD, found that trauma effects the entire brain, not just the hippocampus, prefrontal cortex and amygdala as has been touted for decades. Granted those areas of the brain are effected the most, but some parts of the brain become over-active, and other parts simply go off-line or don't function like they should, or used to. 

I always thought that had to be the case, but I was otherwise told it wasn't. It was great to finally be confirmed about what I knew from my own body and no longer be living in a state of denial about it. 

When I was around "bad people" (as I used to call them in childhood), I always got "whole head headaches" afterwards. Not that this proved then or later, that the whole brain was effected, but the physical ramifications were hard to miss.

The headaches could be very mild or severe and I always thought it gave me a gauge as to how dangerous or toxic a person was (although I didn't know the word "toxic" when I was a kid - I referred to it more as "too many nerves in my head that are making my head hurt"). I had plenty of other symptoms too including stomach aches, and a profound lack of sleep. And the lack of sleep also played a role in keeping the headaches going. 

And even when I had breaks from trauma-inducing experiences, there began to be a kind of feedback loop where the headaches produced a lack of sleep and the lack of sleep produced the headaches, and all of it made me uncomfortable living in my own body for a time until the symptoms could subside.

Anyway, when the whole brain is effected, I'd bet the entire body is effected too as another break-through study and course from NIACBM includes How to Work with the Limbic System to Reverse the Physiological Imprint of Trauma

Another hurdle that many victims of child abuse can relate to are feelings of "I'm not good enough" often transferred from a parent who does not love his or her child, or expects perfectionism in deeds, thoughts, facial expressions and looks, and especially if the child is rejected by a parent over these kinds of things. Parental "coldness" (not caring how you feel) is another way you can experience feelings of worthlessness. 

There is a new course for that too (mainly for therapists to get further education, but there is no harm in studying what is going on with beliefs like this). 

The course is called Practical Strategies for Working with a Client's Feelings of Worthlessness, also by NIACBM. 

What I have found most interesting is that feelings of worthlessness can effect the neuroplasticity of the brain. 

So much is happening in trauma research, types of trauma reactions and trauma therapies, and this is where I'd eventually like to take this blog, although I've started to discuss it in many of my most recent posts. It is a whole other research subject, and more interesting to me personally, but also tied to how to deal with abuse and the long term effects of it. 

500 HUNDRED POUND PEEP'S BLOG POST
ON SCAPEGOATS AND POVERTY
AND HOW SO MANY SCAPEGOATS ARE NOT TAUGHT LIFE SKILLS INSIDE THEIR FAMILY
AND ARE INSTEAD LAUGHED AT AND BLAMED FOR THE POVERTY THEY FACE INSTEAD

I had planned on writing a blog post myself on this subject, but Peeps, as I call her in public anyway, decided to publish hers before I could get mine done. That is what happened for another post on Do Scapegoats Rebel (one that I planned on publishing with her but still haven't totally finished).  

Yes, there are a lot of things distracting me at this time, so I understood her need to publish before I could get mine done. 

Anyway, I think her post on poverty is a really brilliant and much needed article and it is a subject that hasn't really been explored much, in research groups or through interviews, or even in terms of talking about individual experiences except in forums for survivors of child abuse and minorly in therapy groups. And why not, since most scapegoats experience it at least once in their lives? 

We know that narcissistic parents want to hurt their scapegoat children (most scapegoat children are abused and conspired against throughout their entire childhood unless the golden child screws up in some way that drives the parent to be angry enough to pit the golden child against the scapegoat child in a contest for Mommy or Daddy's love and attention). And what better way to hurt the scapegoat child than to thrust him or her into a black abyss of poverty, especially right when they turn 18 and can legally be thrown away like so much trash (until, again, the golden child does something that the narcissistic parent does not like). In other words, if you are discarded in the early part of adulthood, or at age 18, as so many scapegoat adult children are, they may very well intend to groom you to live in poverty and to tolerate poverty, intentionally, especially if you grew up with parents who had enough money to feed you, but you were being underfed, if they had enough money to dress you, but you were either given rags or dirty clothes, ill-fitting clothes, or hopelessly out-of-date hand-me-downs so that you were bullied and teased at school over them, if you were isolated from the rest of your family members so that they could not hear your side of the story and automatically assumed you were at fault for the absurd amount of punishments you received, and if you were treated like a second class citizen to your sibling(s). 

In addition, you were not taught how to traverse the world of adulthood, so you had no idea how to survive in it. 

I personally had to read her post in two parts as it starts out like a Russian novel and builds to most of  what scapegoats live through. 

Some of the passages I found to be particularly relevant and stood out for me are these:

* She talks about how ACONs (Adult Children of Narcissists) aren't taught how to live independently so they don't end up in poverty, about how they are mocked when they are a child ("You'll never live in a beautiful place like that!") instead of encouraged to do well "So that you'll end up with a beautiful house like that."
   "Slamming an ACON's self esteem makes it hard to learn important life lessons like this. Instead you are either laughed at for thinking living in a nice home is out of your reach, or taught to please and flatter your narcissistic parent as the most important lesson of your life."

* She talks about being an art teacher and director of art at a summer camp and why she chose it over other careers. I found this fascinating because that was largely my life too as well as selling in galleries and art centers.  

* I found this passage right out of the playbook of many ACONs:
     I saw it with Aunt Scapegoat, they seemed to derive joy listing off her horrific medical problems while clucking their tongues. Her poverty too often was the stuff of legends..."she hoarded food you know!", "Grandma had to buy all her clothes!'' "Her trailer was full of trash!" As a child, I lived in terror of ending up as poor as her, as she was put down constantly in front of me.  It would only occur to me later, that my mother had the means to make her life a lot better instead of letting her sink into such extreme poverty. I would end up as poor, though unlike her, we got some better working class years and her level of poverty was definitely worse.

*   I found this passage to be true to my own experience of talking to scapegoats with disabilities:
     I got into a discussion, talking about this issue. Family wealth for the scapegoat is not protection from poverty. One guy told me online on reddit that they should study what happens to the financial security of the disabled who come from better off families?
     He wrote: Do children of wealthy families with disabilities or visible abnormalities have a measurable difference in financial security relative to siblings, similarly-aged people from middle/upper class families, and comparable peers from poor families?
     He said that someone should do a graduate thesis on this, it would be an interesting sociological topic. I was in a disabled group, and a group for autistic adults [on Zoom] and a group for those with serious pain disorders and chronic disabilities [on Zoom]. I  did note that family support for the people I met, was far far higher. Many of the autistic adults lived at home with parents including 2 men at my level of autism, who were well into their 50s. There was a few married women like me, they encountered career problems and some were physically disabled, but they had supportive families. No one related to my level of poverty. It surprised me. One woman did live in subsidized housing but had a loving family which probably bolstered her feelings of independence.  In the pain disorder group, one lady who had lupus related problems but was still employed, lived with her mother and it seemed to be a positive situation. In the disability group, I met a man who lived with his brother, and another man who lived with his mother, who were locals and had about the same level of autism as me [what was referred to as Aspergers for decades] The latter man was very overweight at my size but he didn't have the same health problems and could still walk, function, drive and work.
     Many of these people had challenges, and in the case of the autistics, career troubles, were common, some did work very hard, and one man did volunteer work during his unemployed periods. Their families seemed to help them. The fellow fat man admitted to me he did face some judgment from his family but others seemed cared about and looked after. Their challenges were not used to reject them as people, like what happens with someone with narcissistic parents. My disabilities were seen as "my fault". All of them. The weight issues complicated that but they had no mercy for anything else including deafness and breathing problems. ...
     ... Some of the disabled people in my groups got really sick, and their families looked out for them. Sometimes it was hard for me to hear about because my situation was so opposite. I have a husband who has looked out for me so am not saying my glass is empty because he's definitely stepped up for decades. There's a lot of disabled people with serious health problems on their own. I get scared for them. It was just interesting to see the different attitudes of more loving families towards disabled members. It's pretty sick that narcissistic families will get out the hammer on people with serious health problems.
     But outside of illness, how many scapegoats find themselves in the streets? No home to go to? I dare say there's probably a lot of abuse victims who end up homeless who end up as "orphans" out in a harsh world. Social workers, churches and the world assume everyone has a family. This simply isn't true. For those of us without one, there's no one to turn to. No one has our backs. I learned the hard way, going no contact many years ago, no one in the family cared that I was gone. During my most extreme poverty in my 20s, no one cared about me. I missed meals [yeah I know that's ironic as fat as I am] and went without needed possessions, there were times I had literally nothing but ripped up clothes to wear.  ...

     
* This passage, I think, is super relevant to whether you can "make it" as an adult (trauma symptoms impacting your health and life):
      ... First and foremost due to ACE scores, stress, scapegoats can have health problems.You are on high alert, never can relax, your parents never let you sleep or even physically toss you on the floor from your bed. This wrecks children's health adding hormonal and obesity problems especially. As a child I never could relax or sleep. I was always on my parents schedule, for years I had severe insomnia, I never felt safe enough to fall asleep I always had to be on my guard.
     As your physical health is decimated, your mental health is at risk. Severe stress, and trauma all take their toll. Some people will get DID, disassocation, PTSD/CPTSD, anxiety disorders, depression and more. I have talked about this very much just here and there, but my anxiety disorders were very severe. They included almost daily panic attacks, and a feeling of "unease" and fear at all times. I have been diagnosed with PTSD/CPTSD by three different therapists, generalized anxiety disorder, panic disorder and OCD issues during my life. My anxiety disorders were not career enhancers. I had to learn to hide my worries and anxiety because I realized my "neuroticism" made people angry. There were years, I was checking things for hours and having to hide this from roommates and others. My anxiety is in a far better place now, I still struggle but it's nowhere as severe as it was.
     Sometimes at work, I could barely keep it together. No one during my student teaching when I had to move back home knew I was going from working with kids all day to having people scream at and threaten me and I could barely get any food either, which oddly made me fatter. I saw some old pictures from myself from the 1980s, and I'm always cringing, I always look like I'm ready to dodge an incoming hit. Well I had to be ready to duck at any time.  ... 

* Super relate-able:
     ... Mean Parents Don't Teach Their Children Anything
     One thing many ACONs attest to is the lack of life skills, one does not acquire much knowledge from narcissists, they chase their kids out of the kitchen or garage and slap at kids who don't become instant experts. Dad's good at the stockmarket? He'll never tell you it's secrets. Dad's good at fixing cars? While he's screaming at you about being lazy and to hand the tools over quicker, he'll never give you the chance to try and fix it yourself. Mom's good at cooking? She certain doesn't want anyone to outshine her, so you don't learn one cooking trick. You are given low knowledge tasks like whipping the mashed potatoes or wiping the counter. The only way I found out what my mother actually put in recipes was by finding her old handwritten cookbook in a notebook.  Paying bills? That remains a mystery. Narcissistic parents won't tell you things like what the monthly budget is. You won't learn how to write checks, or buy a car or rent an apartment unless you are one of those lucky kids who gets a life skills class. At the same time you remain hopelessly ignorant, they get angry at you for not knowing things but then still don't tell you anything!
     They want you to keep you helpless so you are dependent on them and don't want you able to stand on your own two feet. They desire your failure so you are easily controlled. They don't want you financially independent. Some narcissistic parents will even sometimes give a scapegoat a little money or help, it's random, and for control to keep you in the game but you'll never see them give help, like with a job even if they have the means to do so. You aren't taught how to function and often your attempts to gain more independent and financial independence are thwarted. They tell you to pay high rent as you desperately try and save money to get out on your own. They ignore your health problems while telling you to work hours, they  would never dream of doing, such as when I had a 7am-11pm schedule every day during student teaching.
     This is a common way scapegoats are sabotaged. Many of us grow up and then realize with horror the depth of life lessons and practical know-how that were denied us. We don't know how to do anything. My struggle with life skills continues, some of this can be autism, but right now I am doing calculus in my head, to even figure out how to pay 5-6 different medical bills, the electric bill and how we are going to afford food next week. I keep an entire notebook dedicated to survival. It has housing lists in there, everything turned out be HUD programs we don't qualify for except for the one I am on the list of or they were in very bad areas or ones off the bus lines. Lists of where all the food pantries are, and what day of the month they are open, the number and address of the car repair charity place, and where one can get free furniture and clothing. When I was young I didn't even know where to go to get charity or how to utilize a food pantry.
     Yes. My parents were upper middle class. We lived in a neighborhood of million dollar homes where people hired live in nanny's housekeepers and or at least a cleaning lady on the regular.  Our house was more humble but at 5-6 bedrooms it was very large and there were other large homes around us and the million-dollar homes were just down the street. The country club was right around the corner from the house I went to in high school. Many ACONS are people who descended the ladder. The life I grew up in was not the life I got later. I was unprepared for what awaited me. I was prepared for a culture I never would live in as an adult. 

There is so much more to her article that will ring true to any scapegoat who had to live through a period of poverty. I think the very personal experience she writes about is decidedly better than what I have to say on this subject, although I do have some more statistics to add to the discussion. 

I only lived through a little less than two years of poverty myself from age 19 - 21 or so, and it was super challenging. The lack of food was one major issue (my meals were mainly "unpopular vegetables" with a little butter on them because they were cheaper than anything else: eggplant, turnips, rutabagas, those sorts of vegetables ... and only one meal a day so that I wouldn't run out). I also had trouble with the bureaucracy at the food stamps office where they required me to get a refrigerator - I think you can understand why it was impossible for me to retain one. So I went without help or food. And I was working and going to college at this time. 

As for my career in art and art teaching, I did have that in common with Peep. Was it a good career to choose for someone like me who was trying to rise out of poverty? 

Maybe not, but I thought it was at the time because when I was 18, I lived in a seaside tourist town where I met a potter who was not only able to live on the money he made from his sales, but support a wife and send two children to college. I don't think that is possible to do today unless you have a good trust fund from rich parents or grandparents, or are teaching in addition to making pottery, or you are a "star potter" with a huge following. 

Also at age 20, I learned about Camille Claudel and wondered if that was a warning sign for me. Beatrice Wood served as another warning for me in later years. Over the decades, having met many, many female artists, I have learned that most of the successful ones in my field are either hated or resented by their families (birth family, that is). Many have found solace and contentment in their marriages and in their children, but so many of them feel like outcasts of their family of origin.

Many of these artists complain that they feel they have to "turn off their talent", or "turn off their authentic selves" or "turn off the beauty in their work and focus on what's ugly in their pieces, or what's not working" or "turn off that they are artists at all" or pretend not to be as successful as they are in their art career around their family at least. Very odd, and something I'd like to explore a little deeper. 

Granted there is something cultural about critiquing art and artists as compared to most other professions, so that definitely holds some sway in terms of how visual artists are treated, but I find that the rate of alienation between female artists and their birth families to be alarming and severe, especially among fantasy artists, surreal-art artists and statement-oriented expressionist artists.

Female artists who practice abstract art, landscape art, art for textiles, artists who paint "cute animals", or flowers, or pretty young women in gardens mostly seem "safe" from alienation comparatively. I am trying to figure out why. 

At any rate, as in early childhood and early adulthood when I was a scrapper (looked hard for the minimum to survive very adverse childhood experiences), I was also a scrapper as an artist. My catapult into the art world was in Neo-expressionism or what I call "statement art", but I couldn't make it in that alone, and "something had to give". In other words, Neo-expressionism requires a nest egg, or fantastic luck, or a trust fund to start a career in it, to get into the museums that show this kind of work, so since I realized that, I "scrapped" together an art career with art teaching, being a curator, a studio manager, art director at a summer camp, display chair-person, entered local shows where "statement art" is not accepted and where landscapes, "pretty pictures" and abstract art is accepted instead, a greeting card business, a graphic arts business doing advertisements, creating Etsy and Zibbet banners for other artists, and later website design with my husband where we made and maintained websites for authors, artists, a museum, and others. I also performed music on the weekends, and practiced music in the evenings for upcoming gigs. 

It's probably not an exaggeration that I worked 70 hours a week at the very, very least. 

I think most artists and art teachers have to work these kinds of hours. 

From talking with Peeps, her life went largely in the same direction, but being disabled with many challenging medical issues stopped her from insane schedules. It also put her into poverty. 

I can't help but think that her life would have been even more like mine had she not been so ill. 

Anyway, a post on poverty and scapegoats will appear one of these days (and also another proper link to her post besides the one above), but it won't reveal much more of my own personal details than I have written here. 

SOME THOUGHTS SINCE THE INAUGURATION
OF A NEW PRESIDENT IN THE UNITED STATES
AND TRUMP'S DISMANTLING OF SO MANY GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

What a time it has been since the second inauguration of Mr. Trump! Like so many Americans, we are trying to navigate our way through chaotic policies, the whiplashes of high tariffs followed by taking them off, a stock market and government employees gone crazy with deep losses and sometimes gains, the higher-than-usual prices at the grocery store, waiting to see if Trump invades Greenland, or Panama, or Canada, and wondering what will happen with Ukraine, Syria and Gaza. 

It's been hard to follow the flood of headlines since the inauguration, and even harder to understand why they are being done. Let's face it: the Democratic and Republican answers to much of what is going on is rooted in speculations as to what it will achieve, one party having a more dire interpretation to all of it, and the other party a more Pollyannish view. 

I tend not to have Pollyannish views when it comes to politicians as I believe many are there to have lifetime memberships in their appointed positions and will do anything, sway any way that is convenient to do so. Not that they are all like that, but I speculate that a majority are. 

I have talked about how disturbing the war in Ukraine has been for me personally. There isn't a day I don't worry about what's happening there since the war started and whether or not it will end up to be about Ukraine caving into and being swallowed up by Russia, or discussions between the United States and Russia about carving up the world into "empire building" where Trump might say, "You can have Ukraine, the Baltic States and Syria if I can have Canada, Panama and Greenland without interference from you", not that this is happening, but I wasn't the first person to think about that possibility.

These are the worst case scenarios, of course.

Then which child abuse survivor didn't feel triggered, or at least have a Deja Vu by watching President Trump and Vice President Vance shout down Zelenskyy at the Oval Office? 
* conspiracy theories (check): such as Zelenskyy wasn't really elected ("a dictator without elections" was what was said to him) as well as "gambling with the lives of millions of people. You’re gambling with World War III. You’re gambling with World War III. And what you’re doing is very disrespectful to the country, this country ... " 
* Victim blaming: trying to convince Zelenskyy and the world that he and Ukraine are at fault for the war (check)
* Zelenskyy being silenced (check)
* Zelenskyy being talked or shouted over so that he couldn't respond (check)
* Zelenskyy told that he's "said enough" as though he's a little boy. (check - and by the way, wasn't this meeting supposed to be about negotiating? How can you negotiate with this going on?).
* Zelenskyy being told he's not expressing enough gratitude (check).
* Zelenskyy told he needs to apologize (check).
* Zelenskyy was asked why he doesn't wear a suit (check. As though everyone should dress in the same uniform - to reveal the sycophant side of themselves?).  

Certainly Zelenskyy is not making a mindless fix easy with unwavering won't-give-up-any-gains-Putin. Putin has violated ceasefires 25 times, and that is making it even harder for Ukraine to cave into Russian aggression, including Russians' gains of "dead cities" and land-grabs. So ending the war in a day isn't working out so well for Trump and it was a grandiose statement to make regardless, not a thoughtful one of taking into considerations how opposed Russia and Ukraine are in terms of what would make peace or a compromise possible. 

Maybe Trump needs the adulation of ending the war quickly so he can keep his word, and when it isn't given to him as quickly as he wants, the punishments come? Or he hands "a win" over to one of them? And what's in it for him? That he can end the war in a day, adulation, attention, blaming and blame-shifting, or something that's a bit more thoughtful than many of us have seen so far?

Is the message here you must make peace? You must compromise? You both must take some losses? "Russia, you must give Ukraine back its territory"? or "Ukraine, you must cede some territory to Russia"? 

Or is it going to be: "You must give something to bullies and invaders, and give into bullies and be grateful for what they give you, and for what you have left."

Is it any different than what child abuse survivors deal with in their abusive families? "Negotiate with bullies"? Is that the way this always goes no matter if it's in the family, in the community or on the world stage? 

And must bullies always win something to keep them from attacking you further? I think we know the answer to that. 

This is where my curiosity is at the moment: what will Ukraine have to compromise on, if anything? And how will they be treated going forward? 

At the time I write this, no more weapons are being given to Ukraine from the U.S.A. to defend itself, but what other punishments must it endure I wonder other than more missile attacks from Russia?  

So that issue being played out on the world wide stage is also bothering me, as well as the continual disappointment that human beings are so violent, still so unempathetic to other people's plight (at least for my tastes), that human beings display way too much sycophancy when they feel over-powered (and that has kept my attention more than any other subject in recent current events), so inept at fair negotiations, so inept about assessing their own abilities, and more ego driven than seems reasonable, sane or possible. 

But most of all, there is the sycophancy of senators, congressman, justices, cabinet members, voters, newspaper owners, media companies, law firms, churches, and world leaders. That is so stunning to me.

But I shouldn't be so stunned from all of the research I do on this subject, but somehow or other I was not prepared or aware enough of the numbers (!) of sycophants. I also wasn't prepared to see how much people were willing to give up for a leader, and give into a leader, and to repeat crazy-making statements of a leader, and prostate themselves to a leader no matter what they did, what they said, how they acted and whether there are ulterior motives for all of these things. 

Who knew that being led without any reservations was so popular, especially with the whiplash policies enacted and detracted by this administration. 

What happened to: "I agree with this policy, but not that policy", "I think this step is too unethical; I'd rather go in this direction", "Why don't we try ----", "What would you think if we had a 3% tariff instead of a 25% one, and saw how a lower rate played out before raising it? With the advent of serious trade wars, is it really wise to slap a 25% tariff on so many things Americans now rely on?" - Where are these kinds of discussions among Republicans? 

Then there is what Martin Luther King described as "the appalling silence of the good people." 

I wonder to what lengths and depths the sycophancy goes before they stop being sycophants? Or is there a bottomless pit of it to the point where they appear to have absolutely no convictions, no thoughts or minds of their own, no actions of their own, like one of those wind-up robot storm troopers who fall all over one another in Darth Vader's regime?

Or will they simply be lobotomized in a final act of taking every shred of a will if they dare anything other than mere puppet strings attached to their mind and soul? 

People who have literally lost their own minds in exchange for being dictated to can't really serve a country, let alone constituents, can they? 

So maybe I'll write an article on the sycophants themselves after a number of years have gone by just to see how much they will sell their soul, to see how much they give up on morals and truth-telling, to see how much criminal behavior they have let become normalized and "every-day", to see how much hypocrisy they allow in policies and laws, to see just how much the sycophants mirror their leader even in terms of speech, types of words, types of expressions, and types of dress and hair (as the "favored" children in abusive households often do), to see if they all get voted out or disfavored when and if Trump ever vacates the Oval Office. He has said that "you'll never have to vote again" ... another link from Reuters via You Tube, another from ABC 7 in Chicago via You Tube, another from SP ESPN (full clip of Trump's part of that speech via You Tube) so I doubt he's planning on leaving willingly.

And how will that play out? 

Trump may have to go to The Supreme Court, or ignore The Supreme Court for a ruling on that!

So why won't we be able to vote again? Because each and every loyal sycophant and their storm troopers will guard all of the voting booths throughout the land from being used? Will there be Marshall Law because America has invaded Canada or Greenland, or because the country is too broken to function?

And then there's the Department of Government Efficiency run by a guy on daily doses of Ketamine, Elon Musk, a non-native from South Africa, who said that "empathy is destroying American life" (and here's another link where he remarks that "The fundamental weakness of Western civilization is empathy.") What could possibly go wrong with that? - said facetiously, of course! 

The dismantling of government agencies is startling, with many mistakes requiring re-hiring, which tells me that impulsivity and speediness are top agendas in these matters. "Destroy and build back if we need to"? But what if those workers find other jobs in the meantime?

In terms of the empathy deficit issue, the problem with having empathy (trying to mind-read Musk here) is that you can't just blindly and without reservation go fire thousands upon thousands of workers without feeling something about their plight, or about the beneficial jobs they did for the American people, or about the people who were reliant upon these agencies, or about any reactions to it at all? "We don't care about any reactions at all to the dismantling"? Is that it?

Without empathy, I'd bet you can destroy just about anything you want without thinking about repercussions fanning out into all aspects of society, culturally, personally (health, disability and education, transportation), and even ecologically, financially and internationally. 

Or is it a ticket to a couple of individuals feeling powerful and invincible 24/7? 

I heard from someone recently who lives in the northeast that their local Wildlife Reserve's building for its workers was without heat and lights, and that the government had taken them off of their website. So this is how they keep from firing workers directly, just make sure the heat and lights for the buildings aren't paid? Hmm, I suspect there will be other stories like this about government agencies or reserves, yes?

And then there are the tariffs (or at least the threat of very high tariffs). I agree with economics Professor Emeritus Richard Wolff on that. It's not about lowering taxes, the usual broad policy that American Republicans usually vote on. It's adding huge taxes of 25 % on imported goods when most of what we buy from food, to petroleum, to clothes, to construction supplies and everything in-between are mostly exported into this country. So it won't make the average Republican voter's life better; it will make their lives considerably worse. And it will cause inflation. 

As for Democrats who are willing to pay more taxes to get more services and safety nets, they've been let down too economically. The amount of taxes doesn't seem to add up to many services any more, at least not the kind of services you'd expect for the amount of money you pay, and not the kind of efficiency you'd expect. So they are disenchanted with the economic picture too, and probably even more angry than Republicans are that the tax money they pay are going to tax breaks for the billionaires. 

And the reason why the services are falling apart and getting dismantled more and more is because their taxes are being used to pay on the debt, at least partly. And who owns most U.S. debt? China and Japan. China has used the money to build their own big empire and to align with Russia, Iran and other dictatorships. 

Where do all of these facts I write about come from? Economists, and researchers and professors of economics (like Richard Wolff). Look them up yourself. 

Knowing all of this, I decided to take some time to reassess my own life and challenges in the present time, which is why I haven't been publishing posts for this blog. 

In the meantime, my general questions about humans who are granted power, attention or rewards run along these lines (talking about the sycophants among us mainly): 

* How often do humans give up their own convictions and moral codes to get more rewards, attention and power?

* What is the rate of abandoning convictions in terms of getting more rewards, attention and power?

* And are they more likely to give up convictions and moral codes of conduct when they feel threatened by a dictatorial person? 

* Are they willing to give up more convictions and moral codes of conduct to the more brutal dictators than the less brutal ones? 

* Are there any studies on whether sycophancy makes a person less intelligent, less able to make good decisions? Does it decrease cognition, shut off parts of the brain similar to PTSD, decreases the ability to decipher effective outcomes for problems that take a lot of detailed thought? Since all a person has to do is parrot, I wonder how much any kind of thinking goes off-line?

* Are sycophants more lazy than the rest of us? 

* Do sycophants primarily do what they are told to do to get the issues off of their back?

* Do sycophants fawn much more than they need to if they are yelled at or over-powered verbally (such as Trump did in the Oval Office when Zelenskyy tried to speak)? 

* Why do so many sycophants stay quiet when a leader is yelling at another person? Do they want to speak up? Or do they shrivel from speaking because they are frightened? 

* Which is more prevalent for sycophants: the freeze response or the fawn response, and in what contexts?

* What parts of the brain go off-line and which parts light up when they see their "dictatorial person" walk in the room looking angry? Looking calm? In a rage, even if they are just the bystander? In a blinding rage, even if the rage isn't making sense to them? Looking smug? Rolling their eyes? And so on ... (I'm sure these answers aren't available and haven't even been studied ... I haven't been able to find much of anything).

* Is the human race, in general, becoming more boot-licking or less? Are we evolving to become more fawning or less fawning? 

* And why do scapegoats of societies fight back against being expected to fawn? Are they really different in that way compared to most people? Is there something different about their brains even? And if fawning and sycophancy is "the normal way", do they feel outcast because they aren't like that? 

* How much do people respect sycophancy when it goes to more and more extremes such as normalizing constant raging, sins, ethics, crimes, and murders? Is there really no end to ever-deepening sycophancy once someone goes more and more in that direction? Do they even know what they think, believe, know any more? Or can it all change in an instant?

* Do they believe the dictator, or do they self-check? And if they do self-check, how much, and is it dependent on how ruthless the dictator is?

* And if "their great leader" falters and falls from disgrace, do they minimize the fall, or the unethical behavior and say things like, "He had his good points", "He's human. Like everyone, he made mistakes", "It really wasn't that bad", and so on. And do they tell others who were hurt by his actions to "forgive and forget", to "move on already!", to "think about the future", to "think about the good things rather than the bad things he did", to "be thankful for what you got rather than unthankful for what you didn't get", to "see him the way we did", and so on. 

* Do most sycophants have splintered personalities where they don't know who they are except as an arm and a brown-noser of a dictator? 

* Do sycophants like being similar to a dictator, or are their actions primarily fear-driven? 

* Do sycophants like being sycophants until their leader is disgraced? 

* Do they think that not being a sycophant isn't a normal human quality, that rebels are abnormal or sub-human? Do they have arrogance as a sycophant as compared to rebels? 

* Do they think that when they are a sycophant that they are showing gratitude, even if that leader has very few altruistic motives and very criminal ones? 

* Do all sycophants think in terms of loyalty and gratitude no matter what unethical policies are being enacted, or how many crimes are being committed (in other words, how common is this way of thinking for sycophants)?

* Are there more rewards for sycophancy, more acceptance, than speaking your own mind and having convictions? Or does it just look like more rewards with terrible down-sides towards the end of a reign? 

* How often do sycophants serve as flying monkeys to a dictator in the end (flying monkeys referring not to just enabling, but doing the dictator's bidding, dirty deeds, and crimes, and also taking the rap for those actions instead of making the dictator responsible and accountable)?

* How often do lawyers, prosecutors and judges become sycophants or enabling? What are the statistics on that? Does sycophancy in these professions lead to corruption? It would seem yes, right?

I'd really like to know the answers to these questions, but undoubtedly they have to be researched by bona-fide researchers at universities and colleges to make the research scientific, and I doubt there's anything but a handful of articles, if even that, written about this phenomenon. 

In the meantime, I'll watch congressmen, senators, judges, cabinet members, et al, to see how far they'll go into more sycophancy, to see if it is the popular personality type of the moment or of the years. I bet it gets tested to the max! And I'd bet this is what Trump means in terms of loyalty: "How much of a sycophant can you really be for me? And by the way, do you believe the 2020 election was stolen from me?"

FUTURE POST

Before I publish my posts on "Poverty and Scapegoats" and "Are Scapegoats Really Rebellious?", I finished another post on hoovering, a subject that is important in the study of narcissism and why survivors often go back to their abusers. Hoovering is also a precursor to stalking, and stalking is against the law.

Hoovering is something that I mention enough in my own posts, but there is either no link, or a link to other writers on the subject. Because it has been written about extensively I thought it would be a bit redundant or boring. 

No. It was actually pretty interesting and vital to the discussions and includes how narcissists use head games and manipulations to get you "back into your place" on their power and control hierarchy, where they take the lead, and you take the rear, of course. If you refuse to get back in place, I discuss the repercussions of that. And with narcissists there are always repercussions even with the ultimate in what they want: total and blind sycophancy.