[eavesdropper]

[quote=davelj] As the Reverend Chris Rock notes:

“A man is only as faithful as his options.”[/quote]

Damn, so true, davelj!! And it sums this mess up perfectly.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=davelj] As the Reverend Chris Rock notes:

“A man is only as faithful as his options.”[/quote]

Damn, so true, davelj!! And it sums this mess up perfectly.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=jpinpb] But I must emphasize that for me, the infidelity sexually is not as bad as the years of lying…..[/quote]

That was what I was trying to say in my response to davelj, jp. It was more than just the extramarital sex. The message I got from the interview I read right after they were married led me to infer that she believed that there were drawbacks to their relationship that were outweighed by the advantages. No matter what the relationship, an individual’s decision to accept the existence of intolerable behavior in that relationship is based on past experience. If the intolerable behavior escalates past that “acceptable” level, it presents a whole new crisis requiring a decision as to continue the relationship or end it.

Everyone has their breaking point. Whether they reach it in their lifetime is another matter.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=jpinpb] But I must emphasize that for me, the infidelity sexually is not as bad as the years of lying…..[/quote]

That was what I was trying to say in my response to davelj, jp. It was more than just the extramarital sex. The message I got from the interview I read right after they were married led me to infer that she believed that there were drawbacks to their relationship that were outweighed by the advantages. No matter what the relationship, an individual’s decision to accept the existence of intolerable behavior in that relationship is based on past experience. If the intolerable behavior escalates past that “acceptable” level, it presents a whole new crisis requiring a decision as to continue the relationship or end it.

Everyone has their breaking point. Whether they reach it in their lifetime is another matter.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=jpinpb] But I must emphasize that for me, the infidelity sexually is not as bad as the years of lying…..[/quote]

That was what I was trying to say in my response to davelj, jp. It was more than just the extramarital sex. The message I got from the interview I read right after they were married led me to infer that she believed that there were drawbacks to their relationship that were outweighed by the advantages. No matter what the relationship, an individual’s decision to accept the existence of intolerable behavior in that relationship is based on past experience. If the intolerable behavior escalates past that “acceptable” level, it presents a whole new crisis requiring a decision as to continue the relationship or end it.

Everyone has their breaking point. Whether they reach it in their lifetime is another matter.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=jpinpb] But I must emphasize that for me, the infidelity sexually is not as bad as the years of lying…..[/quote]

That was what I was trying to say in my response to davelj, jp. It was more than just the extramarital sex. The message I got from the interview I read right after they were married led me to infer that she believed that there were drawbacks to their relationship that were outweighed by the advantages. No matter what the relationship, an individual’s decision to accept the existence of intolerable behavior in that relationship is based on past experience. If the intolerable behavior escalates past that “acceptable” level, it presents a whole new crisis requiring a decision as to continue the relationship or end it.

Everyone has their breaking point. Whether they reach it in their lifetime is another matter.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=jpinpb] But I must emphasize that for me, the infidelity sexually is not as bad as the years of lying…..[/quote]

That was what I was trying to say in my response to davelj, jp. It was more than just the extramarital sex. The message I got from the interview I read right after they were married led me to infer that she believed that there were drawbacks to their relationship that were outweighed by the advantages. No matter what the relationship, an individual’s decision to accept the existence of intolerable behavior in that relationship is based on past experience. If the intolerable behavior escalates past that “acceptable” level, it presents a whole new crisis requiring a decision as to continue the relationship or end it.

Everyone has their breaking point. Whether they reach it in their lifetime is another matter.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=briansd1][quote=eavesdropper][quote=bearishgurl] The study of NPD is indeed fascinating.[/quote]

It is, indeed, when done from an academic point of view. Not so much when conducted from the vantage point of spouse.

Fortunately, I am no longer in that position. But I’ve conducted fieldwork worthy of that required for a doctorate![/quote]

Easdropper, I’d be interested in your academic view of the DSK affair. That one is much more interesting that Arnold’s. [/quote]

Okay, first of all, permit me to clarify my statement: it was my (apparently not so clear) way of saying that (1) I agree with BG’s statement that NPD is a fascinating topic of study and discussion, and (2) I spent many years married to a no-good worthless narcissistic prick (who actually loved and hated himself simultaneously) who, before I got wise, had me constantly questioning MY mental stability. That’s what I was referring to as “fieldwork worthy of a PhD”.

[quote=briansd1] The DSK affair shines light upon an establishment that’s protected the good ol’ boys for too long. What does it say about French democracy and the ideals they hold so dear? [/quote]

To be honest, there’s no shortage of people in both France and the United States, as well as elsewhere in the world, who cannot or will not distinguish an act of violence from a sexual activity. Even in cases where people do actually acknowledge a clear distinction between the two, there is a tendency to envision rapists as crude uneducated individuals from the lowest social classes who have long histories of aberrant behavior. When a person of high social standing or of outstanding professional accomplishment or academic achievement is accused of sexual violence, there is, quite often, a rush to judgement – of the victim. Why? Who knows. Perhaps it is because of rape being seen as the ultimate act of depravation, of violation, and to realize that we are vulnerable, no matter what the setting, is too terrible a concept to consider. Or perhaps it is because, deep down, we still think of rape as a sexual act, and we cannot conceive of how a wealthy, accomplished man of position who could have any female he desired, would choose a hotel maid.

I believe that, as a society, we are still largely clueless about the real reasons for rape. Despite rape being accomplished through an act involving sex organs, it has nothing to do with sexual desire. It is based solely on one human being’s compelling lust for complete power over another human being.

[quote=briansd1] What does it say about the wife, Anne Sinclair, who’s standing by her husband? [/quote]

Not being in the position of Ms. Sinclair’s counsel, confessor, psychiatrist, or BFF, I haven’t the faintest idea. But I’m thinking that what appears to be unwavering loyalty to her husband is more than likely an unwillingness or inability by Ms. Sinclair to part from her vision of the role played by her husband in their relationship. I can understand why people are completely puzzled by her seemingly unshakeable faith in the innocence of her husband, no matter the gravity of the acts he commits. However, would you still be puzzled by her faith in a man who hadn’t committed any of those acts? My own opinion, for what it’s worth, is that whatever need that Ms. Sinclair has for the presence of this man in her life will not permit her to even entertain the remotest possibility that he could be guilty of these acts of which he’s accused.

However, I do believe that Ms. Sinclair’s non-stop no-holds barred defense of DSK may be, in large part, responsible for the attitude of many of her fellow citizens in their view of DSK as victim. After all, if an accomplished, beautiful, liberated woman like Anne Sinclair stands by her man in the face of these accusations, they can’t possibly be true (shades of Monica Lewinky-era Hilary Clinton anyone?)

When it comes right down to it, no one knows what actually goes on in another human being’s mind, and no one really knows what goes on between two people in a relationship. Our tendency as humans is to look at all other situations from our personal point of view which is based on our own singular experiences.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=briansd1][quote=eavesdropper][quote=bearishgurl] The study of NPD is indeed fascinating.[/quote]

It is, indeed, when done from an academic point of view. Not so much when conducted from the vantage point of spouse.

Fortunately, I am no longer in that position. But I’ve conducted fieldwork worthy of that required for a doctorate![/quote]

Easdropper, I’d be interested in your academic view of the DSK affair. That one is much more interesting that Arnold’s. [/quote]

Okay, first of all, permit me to clarify my statement: it was my (apparently not so clear) way of saying that (1) I agree with BG’s statement that NPD is a fascinating topic of study and discussion, and (2) I spent many years married to a no-good worthless narcissistic prick (who actually loved and hated himself simultaneously) who, before I got wise, had me constantly questioning MY mental stability. That’s what I was referring to as “fieldwork worthy of a PhD”.

[quote=briansd1] The DSK affair shines light upon an establishment that’s protected the good ol’ boys for too long. What does it say about French democracy and the ideals they hold so dear? [/quote]

To be honest, there’s no shortage of people in both France and the United States, as well as elsewhere in the world, who cannot or will not distinguish an act of violence from a sexual activity. Even in cases where people do actually acknowledge a clear distinction between the two, there is a tendency to envision rapists as crude uneducated individuals from the lowest social classes who have long histories of aberrant behavior. When a person of high social standing or of outstanding professional accomplishment or academic achievement is accused of sexual violence, there is, quite often, a rush to judgement – of the victim. Why? Who knows. Perhaps it is because of rape being seen as the ultimate act of depravation, of violation, and to realize that we are vulnerable, no matter what the setting, is too terrible a concept to consider. Or perhaps it is because, deep down, we still think of rape as a sexual act, and we cannot conceive of how a wealthy, accomplished man of position who could have any female he desired, would choose a hotel maid.

I believe that, as a society, we are still largely clueless about the real reasons for rape. Despite rape being accomplished through an act involving sex organs, it has nothing to do with sexual desire. It is based solely on one human being’s compelling lust for complete power over another human being.

[quote=briansd1] What does it say about the wife, Anne Sinclair, who’s standing by her husband? [/quote]

Not being in the position of Ms. Sinclair’s counsel, confessor, psychiatrist, or BFF, I haven’t the faintest idea. But I’m thinking that what appears to be unwavering loyalty to her husband is more than likely an unwillingness or inability by Ms. Sinclair to part from her vision of the role played by her husband in their relationship. I can understand why people are completely puzzled by her seemingly unshakeable faith in the innocence of her husband, no matter the gravity of the acts he commits. However, would you still be puzzled by her faith in a man who hadn’t committed any of those acts? My own opinion, for what it’s worth, is that whatever need that Ms. Sinclair has for the presence of this man in her life will not permit her to even entertain the remotest possibility that he could be guilty of these acts of which he’s accused.

However, I do believe that Ms. Sinclair’s non-stop no-holds barred defense of DSK may be, in large part, responsible for the attitude of many of her fellow citizens in their view of DSK as victim. After all, if an accomplished, beautiful, liberated woman like Anne Sinclair stands by her man in the face of these accusations, they can’t possibly be true (shades of Monica Lewinky-era Hilary Clinton anyone?)

When it comes right down to it, no one knows what actually goes on in another human being’s mind, and no one really knows what goes on between two people in a relationship. Our tendency as humans is to look at all other situations from our personal point of view which is based on our own singular experiences.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=briansd1][quote=eavesdropper][quote=bearishgurl] The study of NPD is indeed fascinating.[/quote]

It is, indeed, when done from an academic point of view. Not so much when conducted from the vantage point of spouse.

Fortunately, I am no longer in that position. But I’ve conducted fieldwork worthy of that required for a doctorate![/quote]

Easdropper, I’d be interested in your academic view of the DSK affair. That one is much more interesting that Arnold’s. [/quote]

Okay, first of all, permit me to clarify my statement: it was my (apparently not so clear) way of saying that (1) I agree with BG’s statement that NPD is a fascinating topic of study and discussion, and (2) I spent many years married to a no-good worthless narcissistic prick (who actually loved and hated himself simultaneously) who, before I got wise, had me constantly questioning MY mental stability. That’s what I was referring to as “fieldwork worthy of a PhD”.

[quote=briansd1] The DSK affair shines light upon an establishment that’s protected the good ol’ boys for too long. What does it say about French democracy and the ideals they hold so dear? [/quote]

To be honest, there’s no shortage of people in both France and the United States, as well as elsewhere in the world, who cannot or will not distinguish an act of violence from a sexual activity. Even in cases where people do actually acknowledge a clear distinction between the two, there is a tendency to envision rapists as crude uneducated individuals from the lowest social classes who have long histories of aberrant behavior. When a person of high social standing or of outstanding professional accomplishment or academic achievement is accused of sexual violence, there is, quite often, a rush to judgement – of the victim. Why? Who knows. Perhaps it is because of rape being seen as the ultimate act of depravation, of violation, and to realize that we are vulnerable, no matter what the setting, is too terrible a concept to consider. Or perhaps it is because, deep down, we still think of rape as a sexual act, and we cannot conceive of how a wealthy, accomplished man of position who could have any female he desired, would choose a hotel maid.

I believe that, as a society, we are still largely clueless about the real reasons for rape. Despite rape being accomplished through an act involving sex organs, it has nothing to do with sexual desire. It is based solely on one human being’s compelling lust for complete power over another human being.

[quote=briansd1] What does it say about the wife, Anne Sinclair, who’s standing by her husband? [/quote]

Not being in the position of Ms. Sinclair’s counsel, confessor, psychiatrist, or BFF, I haven’t the faintest idea. But I’m thinking that what appears to be unwavering loyalty to her husband is more than likely an unwillingness or inability by Ms. Sinclair to part from her vision of the role played by her husband in their relationship. I can understand why people are completely puzzled by her seemingly unshakeable faith in the innocence of her husband, no matter the gravity of the acts he commits. However, would you still be puzzled by her faith in a man who hadn’t committed any of those acts? My own opinion, for what it’s worth, is that whatever need that Ms. Sinclair has for the presence of this man in her life will not permit her to even entertain the remotest possibility that he could be guilty of these acts of which he’s accused.

However, I do believe that Ms. Sinclair’s non-stop no-holds barred defense of DSK may be, in large part, responsible for the attitude of many of her fellow citizens in their view of DSK as victim. After all, if an accomplished, beautiful, liberated woman like Anne Sinclair stands by her man in the face of these accusations, they can’t possibly be true (shades of Monica Lewinky-era Hilary Clinton anyone?)

When it comes right down to it, no one knows what actually goes on in another human being’s mind, and no one really knows what goes on between two people in a relationship. Our tendency as humans is to look at all other situations from our personal point of view which is based on our own singular experiences.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=briansd1][quote=eavesdropper][quote=bearishgurl] The study of NPD is indeed fascinating.[/quote]

It is, indeed, when done from an academic point of view. Not so much when conducted from the vantage point of spouse.

Fortunately, I am no longer in that position. But I’ve conducted fieldwork worthy of that required for a doctorate![/quote]

Easdropper, I’d be interested in your academic view of the DSK affair. That one is much more interesting that Arnold’s. [/quote]

Okay, first of all, permit me to clarify my statement: it was my (apparently not so clear) way of saying that (1) I agree with BG’s statement that NPD is a fascinating topic of study and discussion, and (2) I spent many years married to a no-good worthless narcissistic prick (who actually loved and hated himself simultaneously) who, before I got wise, had me constantly questioning MY mental stability. That’s what I was referring to as “fieldwork worthy of a PhD”.

[quote=briansd1] The DSK affair shines light upon an establishment that’s protected the good ol’ boys for too long. What does it say about French democracy and the ideals they hold so dear? [/quote]

To be honest, there’s no shortage of people in both France and the United States, as well as elsewhere in the world, who cannot or will not distinguish an act of violence from a sexual activity. Even in cases where people do actually acknowledge a clear distinction between the two, there is a tendency to envision rapists as crude uneducated individuals from the lowest social classes who have long histories of aberrant behavior. When a person of high social standing or of outstanding professional accomplishment or academic achievement is accused of sexual violence, there is, quite often, a rush to judgement – of the victim. Why? Who knows. Perhaps it is because of rape being seen as the ultimate act of depravation, of violation, and to realize that we are vulnerable, no matter what the setting, is too terrible a concept to consider. Or perhaps it is because, deep down, we still think of rape as a sexual act, and we cannot conceive of how a wealthy, accomplished man of position who could have any female he desired, would choose a hotel maid.

I believe that, as a society, we are still largely clueless about the real reasons for rape. Despite rape being accomplished through an act involving sex organs, it has nothing to do with sexual desire. It is based solely on one human being’s compelling lust for complete power over another human being.

[quote=briansd1] What does it say about the wife, Anne Sinclair, who’s standing by her husband? [/quote]

Not being in the position of Ms. Sinclair’s counsel, confessor, psychiatrist, or BFF, I haven’t the faintest idea. But I’m thinking that what appears to be unwavering loyalty to her husband is more than likely an unwillingness or inability by Ms. Sinclair to part from her vision of the role played by her husband in their relationship. I can understand why people are completely puzzled by her seemingly unshakeable faith in the innocence of her husband, no matter the gravity of the acts he commits. However, would you still be puzzled by her faith in a man who hadn’t committed any of those acts? My own opinion, for what it’s worth, is that whatever need that Ms. Sinclair has for the presence of this man in her life will not permit her to even entertain the remotest possibility that he could be guilty of these acts of which he’s accused.

However, I do believe that Ms. Sinclair’s non-stop no-holds barred defense of DSK may be, in large part, responsible for the attitude of many of her fellow citizens in their view of DSK as victim. After all, if an accomplished, beautiful, liberated woman like Anne Sinclair stands by her man in the face of these accusations, they can’t possibly be true (shades of Monica Lewinky-era Hilary Clinton anyone?)

When it comes right down to it, no one knows what actually goes on in another human being’s mind, and no one really knows what goes on between two people in a relationship. Our tendency as humans is to look at all other situations from our personal point of view which is based on our own singular experiences.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=briansd1][quote=eavesdropper][quote=bearishgurl] The study of NPD is indeed fascinating.[/quote]

It is, indeed, when done from an academic point of view. Not so much when conducted from the vantage point of spouse.

Fortunately, I am no longer in that position. But I’ve conducted fieldwork worthy of that required for a doctorate![/quote]

Easdropper, I’d be interested in your academic view of the DSK affair. That one is much more interesting that Arnold’s. [/quote]

Okay, first of all, permit me to clarify my statement: it was my (apparently not so clear) way of saying that (1) I agree with BG’s statement that NPD is a fascinating topic of study and discussion, and (2) I spent many years married to a no-good worthless narcissistic prick (who actually loved and hated himself simultaneously) who, before I got wise, had me constantly questioning MY mental stability. That’s what I was referring to as “fieldwork worthy of a PhD”.

[quote=briansd1] The DSK affair shines light upon an establishment that’s protected the good ol’ boys for too long. What does it say about French democracy and the ideals they hold so dear? [/quote]

To be honest, there’s no shortage of people in both France and the United States, as well as elsewhere in the world, who cannot or will not distinguish an act of violence from a sexual activity. Even in cases where people do actually acknowledge a clear distinction between the two, there is a tendency to envision rapists as crude uneducated individuals from the lowest social classes who have long histories of aberrant behavior. When a person of high social standing or of outstanding professional accomplishment or academic achievement is accused of sexual violence, there is, quite often, a rush to judgement – of the victim. Why? Who knows. Perhaps it is because of rape being seen as the ultimate act of depravation, of violation, and to realize that we are vulnerable, no matter what the setting, is too terrible a concept to consider. Or perhaps it is because, deep down, we still think of rape as a sexual act, and we cannot conceive of how a wealthy, accomplished man of position who could have any female he desired, would choose a hotel maid.

I believe that, as a society, we are still largely clueless about the real reasons for rape. Despite rape being accomplished through an act involving sex organs, it has nothing to do with sexual desire. It is based solely on one human being’s compelling lust for complete power over another human being.

[quote=briansd1] What does it say about the wife, Anne Sinclair, who’s standing by her husband? [/quote]

Not being in the position of Ms. Sinclair’s counsel, confessor, psychiatrist, or BFF, I haven’t the faintest idea. But I’m thinking that what appears to be unwavering loyalty to her husband is more than likely an unwillingness or inability by Ms. Sinclair to part from her vision of the role played by her husband in their relationship. I can understand why people are completely puzzled by her seemingly unshakeable faith in the innocence of her husband, no matter the gravity of the acts he commits. However, would you still be puzzled by her faith in a man who hadn’t committed any of those acts? My own opinion, for what it’s worth, is that whatever need that Ms. Sinclair has for the presence of this man in her life will not permit her to even entertain the remotest possibility that he could be guilty of these acts of which he’s accused.

However, I do believe that Ms. Sinclair’s non-stop no-holds barred defense of DSK may be, in large part, responsible for the attitude of many of her fellow citizens in their view of DSK as victim. After all, if an accomplished, beautiful, liberated woman like Anne Sinclair stands by her man in the face of these accusations, they can’t possibly be true (shades of Monica Lewinky-era Hilary Clinton anyone?)

When it comes right down to it, no one knows what actually goes on in another human being’s mind, and no one really knows what goes on between two people in a relationship. Our tendency as humans is to look at all other situations from our personal point of view which is based on our own singular experiences.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=bearishgurl] The study of NPD is indeed fascinating.[/quote]

It is, indeed, when done from an academic point of view. Not so much when conducted from the vantage point of spouse.

Fortunately, I am no longer in that position. But I’ve conducted fieldwork worthy of that required for a doctorate!

[eavesdropper]

[quote=bearishgurl] The study of NPD is indeed fascinating.[/quote]

It is, indeed, when done from an academic point of view. Not so much when conducted from the vantage point of spouse.

Fortunately, I am no longer in that position. But I’ve conducted fieldwork worthy of that required for a doctorate!

[eavesdropper]

[quote=bearishgurl] The study of NPD is indeed fascinating.[/quote]

It is, indeed, when done from an academic point of view. Not so much when conducted from the vantage point of spouse.

Fortunately, I am no longer in that position. But I’ve conducted fieldwork worthy of that required for a doctorate!

[Author]

Posts