"Maybe we could go back to calling them psychopaths."

[bananas]

Interesting comment with this article:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-12-03/narcissism-should-it-be-in-the-dsm/

Narcissistic personality disorder is being dropped from the DSM.

<snip to comment>

As anyone who knows someone with this disorder understands, the main problem is not that he or she thinks they are fantastic in every way, but that they are not capable of considering the feelings of others at all. They believe that everything that happens in this world is in some way related to them. They interpret everything bad that happens to them as a personal attack and therefore feel entitled to attack those around them. Even a difference of opinion on a topic like what music you like is seen as a personal attack. They are vicious, and completely incapable of empathy or remorse, and if you have to live or work with a person with NPD, they can make your life hell.

This article could be confusing for people unfamiliar with the condition. It may have been taken out of some medical manuals but you can still find the list of symptoms online and there are some great websites out there written by lay people with great advice on how to deal with people with this disorder. Personally, I've been able to deal much better since I was able to take the perspective that someone who behaves this way isn't simply cruel, nasty, self-centered, etc. but sick. It helps you have sympathy for them, and not rise to their provocations.

NPD is most certainly a disease and it is not the same as having an inflated ego. It's an inability to connect with people in a meaningful way because of a total lack of interest in anyone but yourself. It's a lot more serious than getting a little too into Twitter, although I do agree that those things may be feeding it and/or allowing more serious cases to go undetected, which could be very bad for society - many serial killers had NPD.

Anyway, I don't care what the name of it is, it's out there, it's terrible, and hopefully it will still continue to be treated. Maybe we could go back to calling them psychopaths.

2:53 am, Dec 3, 2010

<snip other comments>

[Wednesdays]

1. 28% of Americans have it

Lack of empathy; lack of consideration for others' feelings? Check.
Everything's all about ME, ME, ME? Check.
Consider any disagreement as a personal attack? Check. (For more info, google "religious right.")
Vicious and completely incapable of remorse? Check.

Sounds like the usual 28 percent. :(

[laconicsax]

6. I thought the Republican base was smaller than that. n/t

[Posteritatis]

9. Love that reflexive "mental illness = Republican" meme DU keeps hauling out. (nt)

[laconicsax]

10. Is psychopathy so dissimilar to their mentality?

Not all mental illness is the same. Is it degrading to the mentally I'll to call Rove a psychopath or Palin a sociopath?

[Posteritatis]

11. The "as many mentally ill people as baggers? It can't be a coincidence!" thing certainly is. (nt)

[laconicsax]

12. I asked you two questions, you answered neither.

It's one thing to say that Republicans are all generically mentally ill or assign correlation to a coincidence, it's another entirely to point out that specific personality characteristics of a certain type of mental illness accurately describe the Republican base.

The former is inappropriate and plays up a derogatory meme, the latter is not and does not unless you consider a listing of specific traits to be offensive.

[Posteritatis]

14. And you - and most DUers in the context of that 20-30% figure - are doing the former.

A week or so ago there were a half-dozen threads in GD alone citing the figure that one in five Americans has a mental illness of some sort. Every single one of them had a pile of "now we have proof that mental illness is an intrinsically Republican trait!" comment, and the snark this thread pulled up is more of the same.

I don't recognize a difference between "to be mentally ill at all is to be Republican" and "to have a certain mental illness is to be Republican."

[trotsky]

15. And this is a big deal on an anonymous site that doesn't take itself seriously all the time...how?

Seriously?

[laconicsax]

16. Wrong.

The comment to which I responded listed specific traits and drew a parallel. That's the latter, not the former.

It's too bad that your grudge against people doing the former has clouded your vision.

[Demstud]

18. Are you a mental health professional?

[tinrobot]

19. Are you?

[Demstud]

17. Yeah, it's pretty insulting, and overused.

[Mopar151]

2. As of last Thursday

You are describing my ex-employer.... An insular, suspicious family who treat employees as if they are only there to steal the silverware.

[dynasaw]

3. I Seem to Know a Lot of Them

It's all about them from the word "go." Endless litany of what they did, what they have, what they think. In hours of conversation, you're usually there only to be talked at. Never at any point do these folk ever ask anything about you. If you even dare to say anything about yourself, there is usually this glazed expression and the conversation gets back quickly to them.

[txlibdem]

13. That may be part of it but you'd have to cover the other signs of psychopathy as well

Can you elaborate?

[hermetic]

4. That's the final decision then,

that it will be dropped from the DSM? Last I heard it was under discussion. I participated in a study that was trying to come to a final decision on that. For the past 3 years I have lived with someone who has this disorder. It has cost me thousands of dollars, tons of tears, and I would hate for it to become an obscure reference when it is such a real, damaging disorder.

Thanks for the info.

[phantom power]

5. I'm confused, I thought that was sociopathy.

[charlie]

8. I think you're right

"Sociopath" is the word they wanted.

[qazplm]

7. the world does revolve around me

or at least my cat which mean me by proximity.