BPD and npd at same time , really?

[Depression = 72% of members]

OC --

Thank much for elaborating.  Again, wow --

It's the "raising from a child" aspect that seems to be key. In my case, all I ever knew was pain ... .so today, 60 years later, all I vividly "see" (regarding women) is pain. If you are "normal" - I don't know what I'm looking at ... .there's no "connection." I'm guessing that if my mother was loving and caring and huggy, I would see THAT when I looked at a woman - but I don't know what that's like.

Just wow. This very much could be it for me -- I "get" this on a direct level. Trying to determine specifically the source. I suffered no abuse or neglect from my mom, but I don't recall her has being "huggy" when we were kids -- likely because there were just too many of us. Never questioned that I was loved by either parents, but I can see where its a more kind of practical love, kind of taken for granted. It helps me see that where, on my end, I've consistently been told by partners something along the lines of "you're inscrutable" -- and I've even argued that it's overwhelming to feel like I have to blatantly demonstrate my love all the time -- often at a moment when I'm feeling both present, committed and warm towards my partner.

But I'm starting, I think, to piece together this "image" thing -- feels more like an archetype glitch, if you will. I tell myself I want a smart, secure, independent, happy woman, but I don't know what she looks like, because my mother -- loving and kind as she is -- was also insecure, dependent on her family and then my father, and often unhappy. So, despite their outward behaviors, the women I gravitate to in r-ships are the ones who I "recognize" as fitting the archetype that my psyche has created for "woman," based on my mother.

Can this be correct? It SURE as hell would solve my utter confusion over why I would be picking these women without any serious trauma in my own background!

[eyvindr]

OC --

Thank much for elaborating.  Again, wow --

It's the "raising from a child" aspect that seems to be key. In my case, all I ever knew was pain ... .so today, 60 years later, all I vividly "see" (regarding women) is pain. If you are "normal" - I don't know what I'm looking at ... .there's no "connection." I'm guessing that if my mother was loving and caring and huggy, I would see THAT when I looked at a woman - but I don't know what that's like.

Just wow. This very much could be it for me -- I "get" this on a direct level. Trying to determine specifically the source. I suffered no abuse or neglect from my mom, but I don't recall her has being "huggy" when we were kids -- likely because there were just too many of us. Never questioned that I was loved by either parents, but I can see where its a more kind of practical love, kind of taken for granted. It helps me see that where, on my end, I've consistently been told by partners something along the lines of "you're inscrutable" -- and I've even argued that it's overwhelming to feel like I have to blatantly demonstrate my love all the time -- often at a moment when I'm feeling both present, committed and warm towards my partner.

But I'm starting, I think, to piece together this "image" thing -- feels more like an archetype glitch, if you will. I tell myself I want a smart, secure, independent, happy woman, but I don't know what she looks like, because my mother -- loving and kind as she is -- was also insecure, dependent on her family and then my father, and often unhappy. So, despite their outward behaviors, the women I gravitate to in r-ships are the ones who I "recognize" as fitting the archetype that my psyche has created for "woman," based on my mother.

Can this be correct? It SURE as hell would solve my utter confusion over why I would be picking these women without any serious trauma in my own background!

[OC]

But I'm starting, I think, to piece together this "image" thing -- feels more like an archetype glitch, if you will. I tell myself I want a smart, secure, independent, happy woman, but I don't know what she looks like, because my mother -- loving and kind as she is -- was also insecure, dependent on her family and then my father, and often unhappy. So, despite their outward behaviors, the women I gravitate to in r-ships are the ones who I "recognize" as fitting the archetype that my psyche has created for "woman," based on my mother.

Can this be correct? It SURE as hell would solve my utter confusion over why I would be picking these women without any serious trauma in my own background!

It sounds like it could be ... .if whoever needs you to "demonstrate your love" and mommy never did. You'd kinda take it for granted "they got it" - but, maybe not. Then too, what's THEIR problem rooted in that they'd need such a "demonstration?"

It's like the BPD woman I was involved with ... .I honestly believe who I saw WAS THE REAL PERSON when she said to me - "You can see ME!" Unfortunately, the "glitch in the system" shorted her out, and all hell broke loose.

The base picture in my head states we are a two part construction ... .part one is the real you, and has been called consciousness, soul, spirit, whatever. I call it by the neutral name - the quantum-self. THAT is YOU. That YOU is taught by, part two, your brain, all of your life - and if there is a glitch in the bio-mechanical system - it's game over. For those without a bio-mechanical glitch, it's all a total lack of hard data; we simply have no clue what's going on.

If nothing else, this BPD experience has opened up an interesting door for me, as I have never looked at myself in this way. Yeah, she has her problems ... .but it seems I have mine too. THANKS MOM!     

[jjclark]

Well then, reading this resonated.


Thank you so much.

[eyvindr]

Cliff's notes:  Poor choices likely tied to unconscious labeling of insecure women as archetypes, based on childhood models and impressions.

OC --

Thank much for elaborating.  Again, wow --

It's the "raising from a child" aspect that seems to be key. In my case, all I ever knew was pain ... .so today, 60 years later, all I vividly "see" (regarding women) is pain. If you are "normal" - I don't know what I'm looking at ... .there's no "connection." I'm guessing that if my mother was loving and caring and huggy, I would see THAT when I looked at a woman - but I don't know what that's like.

Just wow. This very much could be it for me -- I "get" this on a direct level. Trying to determine specifically the source. I suffered no abuse or neglect from my mom, but I don't recall her has being "huggy" when we were kids -- likely because there were just too many of us. Never questioned that I was loved by either parents, but I can see where its a more kind of practical love, kind of taken for granted. It helps me see that where, on my end, I've consistently been told by partners something along the lines of "you're inscrutable" -- and I've even argued that it's overwhelming to feel like I have to blatantly demonstrate my love all the time -- often at a moment when I'm feeling both present, committed and warm towards my partner.

But I'm starting, I think, to piece together this "image" thing -- feels more like an archetype glitch, if you will. I tell myself I want a smart, secure, independent, happy woman, but I don't know what she looks like, because my mother -- loving and kind as she is -- was also insecure, dependent on her family and then my father, and often unhappy. So, despite their outward behaviors, the women I gravitate to in r-ships are the ones who I "recognize" as fitting the archetype that my psyche has created for "woman," based on my mother.

Can this be correct? It SURE as hell would solve my utter confusion over why I would be picking these women without any serious trauma in my own background!

[Maternus]

I understand it is more complex, but at least in one compartment I really struggle to see how!

Bpd, the subject has a weak or a lack of stable self

Npd, the subject has a strong , or to much of the self.

Should not these disorders equalize, at least in this separate view?

I think both disorders are closely related. The pwBPD has a broken, incomplete self, the pwNPD has a false, grandiose image of himself/herself but no real self. Both don't know, who they really are. The strong self of the pwNPD is just an imagination, behind his/her façade he/she is as empty and unstable as a pwBPD.

[OC]

I thought I’d update this with regard to the overall BPD learning experience in my life (yep, seems you’re never too old to learn MORE LOL).

I’ve tried getting her out of my head for the last month and a half … hasn’t really worked. Yesterday I was in my car listening to my cds, and a classical piece I had forgotten out, Adagio for Strings, popped up. It took all of about 2 seconds - and - I lost it. You should follow this link and listen to it – watch out though, it may get to you too LOL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lV3SHBFyDZM

I got home, and like an idiot - I played it again on my computer, and, lost it again. I jumped in the shower, lost it in the shower, but somewhere between the bedroom and my desk I was hit with a line in my head … “It’s not the person – it’s “IT.” Somewhere in my head I knew what that meant, but I had to find the words to explain it to myself. Here goes …

Essentially, we are a biological and environmental manifestation of certain “things” that make us – us. The “base” picture I call the “shwing factor,” where you meet someone, you are attracted for biological reasons (basically, to make babies) and off to bed you go. We’ve eliminated the “baby” factor, and just made it a “fun” experience.

The environmental factor is a bit more complicated, because we don’t focus on “the hidden thing we are looking for” … we’re focused on, and all we “see” - is the person. In my life, and really unbeknownst to me, I have been looking all of my life for a “thing” … that “thing” was the affection and love I NEVER got growing up. Yes, that “thing” is attached to a person, and we chase what we “see” (the person) falling ass over tea-kettle for them simply because that “thing” was there. We never ask WHY it’s there (deception?) nor do we ask ourselves if it is connected to a detonation device – like BPD. And then, when they up and leave, we whine for the “person” but it’s really the “it” we have been searching for and is now gone that saddens us. Why the hell would I want to put myself back in the soup with the “person” that really couldn’t give the “it” I was actually searching for? How many excuses would I make to get it? (You’d be surprised LOL.)

I don’t know if this makes sense to you; it does to me. It really “isn’t the person … it’s “IT.” Hence you look through people like you are looking through a deck of cards – who has the thing you want / need? Nope, not that one, no – not that one … yes, I found it - “this person has “IT” ” … But what else is lurking there that could mangle you up even more; do we ever ask ourselves? I know I never did.

[Invictus01]

I have been wondering about this myself. Mine was a waif BPD... .yet she couldn't shut up about herself. It was to the point where my friends were wondering what the heck was wrong with her that she couldn't stop talking about herself. She also used to the the captain of a Division I cheerleading squad and when I asked how she ended up in cheer leading she said "I always hated to the a part of the crowd, I always wanted to in front of the crowd". Speaking of which, she was a film/theater major in college, so - lights, camera, action. First time we kissed, I felt like I was in some movie she made it such a scene out of it... .Yet in all this, she was always very quiet, very reserved, you could never tell... .

[eyvindr]

OC -- good work! Sounds like you're making progress!

But, really -- STOP listening to Barber's Adagio! It's a beautiful piece, but -- hell yeah, it's a tearjerker even on a completely sunny day!

Invictus -- wow -- adding you to the growing list of BPDFam members who sound like they've met my ex. She had all four speeds, though -- queen, witch, hermit and waif -- but she never tired of talking about herself, either. And she was a cheerleader    , too. And had started but not completed a graduate degree in theater. Routinely describes herself in online profiles as an actor, runner, yogi, writer, etc. -- all of which are things she has done, at best dabbled in, but by no means qualifies to be, except on the most superficial level. All words used to prop up her sketch core self. Also, part of her NPD streak, I think.

[jhkbuzz]

I thought I’d update this with regard to the overall BPD learning experience in my life (yep, seems you’re never too old to learn MORE LOL).

I’ve tried getting her out of my head for the last month and a half … hasn’t really worked. Yesterday I was in my car listening to my cds, and a classical piece I had forgotten out, Adagio for Strings, popped up. It took all of about 2 seconds - and - I lost it. You should follow this link and listen to it – watch out though, it may get to you too LOL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lV3SHBFyDZM

I got home, and like an idiot - I played it again on my computer, and, lost it again. I jumped in the shower, lost it in the shower, but somewhere between the bedroom and my desk I was hit with a line in my head … “It’s not the person – it’s “IT.” Somewhere in my head I knew what that meant, but I had to find the words to explain it to myself. Here goes …

Essentially, we are a biological and environmental manifestation of certain “things” that make us – us. The “base” picture I call the “shwing factor,” where you meet someone, you are attracted for biological reasons (basically, to make babies) and off to bed you go. We’ve eliminated the “baby” factor, and just made it a “fun” experience.

The environmental factor is a bit more complicated, because we don’t focus on “the hidden thing we are looking for” … we’re focused on, and all we “see” - is the person. In my life, and really unbeknownst to me, I have been looking all of my life for a “thing” … that “thing” was the affection and love I NEVER got growing up. Yes, that “thing” is attached to a person, and we chase what we “see” (the person) falling ass over tea-kettle for them simply because that “thing” was there. We never ask WHY it’s there (deception?) nor do we ask ourselves if it is connected to a detonation device – like BPD. And then, when they up and leave, we whine for the “person” but it’s really the “it” we have been searching for and is now gone that saddens us. Why the hell would I want to put myself back in the soup with the “person” that really couldn’t give the “it” I was actually searching for? How many excuses would I make to get it? (You’d be surprised LOL.)

I don’t know if this makes sense to you; it does to me. It really “isn’t the person … it’s “IT.” Hence you look through people like you are looking through a deck of cards – who has the thing you want / need? Nope, not that one, no – not that one … yes, I found it - “this person has “IT” ” … But what else is lurking there that could mangle you up even more; do we ever ask ourselves? I know I never did.

Yes. I think this is the beginning of the "shift" (if you can make it to that point) where we stop obsessively focusing on our ex and begin looking at ourselves. My T calls these the "connecting threads" - if you follow them backwards you will discover what IT is that is keeping you "hooked".

I have cried more tears than I ever thought I was capable of shedding over my ex... .but I still remember the day that, in the middle of a crying jag, that a lightbulb went off.  I realized that I wasn't actually crying over my ex - if she showed up on my doorstep I wouldn't take her back. I was crying over... .well, I didn't actually know what I was crying over - but I knew if I could name it it would be the beginning of my healing.

It sounds like you're getting there - bravo!

[OC]

Yes. I think this is the beginning of the "shift" (if you can make it to that point) where we stop obsessively focusing on our ex and begin looking at ourselves. My T calls these the "connecting threads" - if you follow them backwards you will discover what IT is that is keeping you "hooked".

I have cried more tears than I ever thought I was capable of shedding over my ex... .but I still remember the day that, in the middle of a crying jag, that a lightbulb went off.  I realized that I wasn't actually crying over my ex - if she showed up on my doorstep I wouldn't take her back. I was crying over... .well, I didn't actually know what I was crying over - but I knew if I could name it it would be the beginning of my healing.

It sounds like you're getting there - bravo!

Everything is made up of component parts ... .if you dismantle the "thing" you are dealing with and look at all the individual parts, try to understand what they do in the overall picture, then when you reconstruct it, you understand what it is.

I've taken history apart and gone back 40,000 years to a starting point where the information just drops off and I had to stop ... .but I never did that with "relationships." All I EVER did was to wall off ALL of my emotions, and approach everything logically - but that doesn't work. You can be drawn back out very easily, and even though I approached the picture with her logically at the start and said NO - the bottom line is that logic cannot control run away emotions that have a LONG history and a DEEP NEED.

My feelings for "her" right now are more along the lines of "I got out of it and now have "me" under control - but she may NEVER get out of it" ... .and I feel for her, but there isn't a damn thing I can do about it. She's off on another "relationship" and who knows how that is going to end up.