Take a photo of a barcode or cover
challenging
informative
inspiring
fast-paced
challenging
informative
reflective
sad
tense
slow-paced
Ouch
hopeful
informative
fast-paced
It seems I'm back on my dumb st*ff and reading books about toxic people again. This one is a pretty good introduction book and has a good amount of legit material going into depth.
The focus in very much on emotional abuse and gives strong advice on that - plenty of stories and vignette's to keep you connected to the material and overall hopefully building you up rather than maintaining abusive cycles.
The focus in very much on emotional abuse and gives strong advice on that - plenty of stories and vignette's to keep you connected to the material and overall hopefully building you up rather than maintaining abusive cycles.
slow-paced
informative
reflective
fast-paced
Not academically rigorous, but not everyone wants that, and I can see how this has a place for people healing. Also much more about romantic relationships than other kinds, so it's not going to be as helpful to people reading it for other reasons.
informative
It was a really difficult read emotionally, but truly healing. If you are prone to depression and anxiety be careful reading this, or skip to the last chapter on healing and then go back to the difficult exercises. If you are prone to ruminate I’d recommend reading this over a period of time and not like I did in a few days. I couldn’t put it down.
The letter at the end was so endearing and heartfelt. I’d recommend reading it last if you read the chapter on healing. Save the letter for last. Let that be what you carry from the book.
The letter at the end was so endearing and heartfelt. I’d recommend reading it last if you read the chapter on healing. Save the letter for last. Let that be what you carry from the book.
informative
fast-paced
dark
funny
hopeful
fast-paced
Here's the deal, I read this book as someone with BPD trying to draw distinctions between petulant borderline behavior and narcissistic behaviors, and also because I was told I might be a "narcissist." You can take that how you want, maybe I am a "narcissist," but I'm not writing this review out of shame or because my ego got damaged. I'm calling it how it is. I'll be using the same gender-biased pronouns in my examples that are ever-present in this book, but know that NPD is fairly evenly distributed between genders.
I gratuitously assume that this author means well for her intended audience, however, the recent boom in misinformation about NPD, "narcissistic personality styles," and hugely stretched and diluted use of the word narcissism in general, means that that audience is growing rapidly. The author begins by approaching the topic of "covert" narcissism very clinically, and from there switches to almost entirely speculation and anecdotes. This mix of anecdotes, speculation, mixing in clinical terms, and especially pointing at and misinterpreting the DSM-5 as a list of symptoms and not solely diagnostic indicators results in a phenomenon that ultimately just demonizes mental health, applies "covert" ill-intent to a lot of seemingly innocuous behaviors out of pure speculation, and paints a very black and white picture about the very nuanced topics of not only NPD, but interpersonal abuse. This book contributes to a growing stigma against NPD, age-old stigmas about cluster B personality disorders in general, and perhaps unintentionally capitalizes on a pop-psychology movement that has very little basis in clinical psychology, one that is largely perpetuated among people who already want to leave their relationship with a person.
"You were targeted and abused by a malicious person."
If those are the words you were looking for, you don't have to buy this book, because that's the only big take there really is to be had. The complex realities of NPD and of personality disorders in general are much, much deeper than that, and assigning this sentiment to NPD as an inherent trait is incredibly stigmatizing given what is known about the disorder. If you believe you have been targeted and abused by a malicious person, then there's no need to add any additional label here. If you want to buy this book to seek some understanding of what NPD actually is, don't. You won't find it here. If you want to buy this book because you think you're a victim of "narcissistic abuse," this book will validate that feeling until you're absolutely sure of it, even though it really has nothing to do with NPD or pathological narcissism at all. And if you already feel that way, or want to feel that way, you may ask yourself the question "why am I worried about whether or not this person is a 'narcissist?'"
It is not ever made clear, but this book should not be used in any way as a "field diagnostic manual" to gauge whether or not someone has NPD, or even a narcissistic personality style. The fact that this is lauded on a certain Chinese video-hosting network as some sort of psychological authority on these things has the potential to be incredibly harmful, and there are quite a few speculations and assertations in this book that are harmful as well. This book could be used to paint a case for ANYBODY being a "covert passive-aggressive narcissist," and I don't think it's a coincidence that it's so popular among people who are trying to do exactly that. A lot of things the author points at as "subtle abuse" are behaviors that are hallmarks of a lot of other psychological issues and personality disorders, and then it applies a speculative intention behind it.
The author immediately begins by pointing at the DSM as a list of traits and not just diagnostic criteria. The most harmful assertation here is that just because the DSM lists "lacks empathy" as a diagnostic criteria, that it means people with NPD or 'narcissists' are devoid of empathy altogether, and can only feign empathy. This is markedly untrue, and a misinterpretation of the DSM not just in the semantics of the word "lacks," but also in the actual application of the DSM. It's a list of diagnostic flags, not symptoms or a rulebook to say 'this is how these people are,' and you can be a diagnosed narcissist, even a grandiose "overt," while missing any 4 of the 9 indicators for NPD. They literally left that part in the book, and then 2 paragraphs later go on to assert that "all the narcissistic traits are true of overts and coverts." Not only that, but it doesn't touch on the fact that the traits listed must be presented at what's called a "borderline" severity of disturbance to a person's personality, essentially meaning that the traits must be present at a severity that more often than not inhibits their ability to discern their own thought patterns from reality. It leaves it open for anyone to apply these traits as freely as they wish to "discover" that someone is a narcissist. That a "grandiose sense of self importance," could be construed as "selfish person, thinks he's all that and a bag of chips" rather than what the diagnostic criteria means "I am a very important, great person who is looked up to" (or in vulnerable narcissism, "I am the worst person to ever exist"). That a "lack of empathy" means "sometimes he doesn't make an effort to understand, and that makes him evil" as opposed to "quite literally lacks the ability to put himself in someone else's shoes, is unable to identify with the feelings of others."
The next section covers the "narcissistic abuse cycle." For a long time I've been skeptical about the model of the "narcissistic abuse cycle." You can apply this model to almost every single failing relationship. Things are good in the beginning, they gradually or not-so-gradually deteriorate, and then someone leaves or "discards" the relationship. It's very vague in description, and the sort-of 'clinical' basis for this in relation to NPD as a disorder is because they split, and usually feature a fearful-avoidant attachment style. This book doesn't mention the splitting defense, or fearful-avoidant attachment ONCE, never mind explaining what those are, so it sets the stage for this "cycle" to be applied to any failing relationship ever as proof of a 'narcissist.' I feel it also paints a picture of the whole thing as almost a conscious 'trick' or deception and not just a function of splitting, further demonizing the "narcissist."
The third section is about the traits of the narcissist's victims. I don't mean to be insensitive to anyone who has been abused, whether the person is or isn't a narcissist, but to think that "narcissists" target and look for specific traits in people to victimize, especially in terms of a long-term romantic relationship, and to think that all of them look for the same traits is a bit silly. People are attracted to who they are attracted to, and narcissists are no exception. While some malicious people may seek a relationship solely for personal gain or to take advantage of someone, that's not a necessary trait of a narcissist, and you don't have to be a narcissist to do that either. This section is mainly just to fluff up the reader, and tell them all the good things the author presumes or wants you to believe about yourself.
The fourth section covers the "traits of a covert narcissist" and is very anecdotal in propping up these traits. They basically just took a group of selfish, lazy, and immature traits and applies it to the word narcissist. It places all the pressure on the reader to apply these anecdotal traits to whomever they wish, as liberally as they please, and most of these traits are just true of any emotionally immature person, not necessarily a narcissist. You could replace "covert narcissist" or "CN" with "headass" and it would all still make sense. It basically just gives a list of things one might resent about their long-term partner in a strained relationship. I think a cynical and self-reflective reader in a bit of a rocky relationship could look at these things and say "hey, I do/have done that, but I don't/didn't mean to." If you removed "narcissism" entirely and just looked at it as a list of things you shouldn't do to improve the health of a relationship, this is actually really good. One of many glaring issues:
"Over the years, she would ask her husband, “Are you okay? You seem angry.” He would respond by saying calmly, “No. Just tired.” Then he would stay quiet while Mary would wonder who to trust: her own instincts or his word. Her body could feel his anger, but why would he lie? She chose to trust him and ignore her own feelings. This is part of gaslighting (will discuss further in the next chapter) and other manipulative tools used to get the victim to slowly, after time, believe the CN over their own inner guidance."
This is a giant reach by the author, and the book is fraught with them. There are plenty of reasons why someone might deny their own outward expression of feelings, the most glaring being alexithymia. People with NPD often have alexithymia, but so do people with BPD, autism, and lots of other issues. Maybe the person has some self-awareness that they might be neurotic, that what they're angry about may not be important, and that the feeling will pass. Also, the societal pressures put on men from a young age to "suck it up, be a man and deal with it" certainly play a role here. To label this behavior as necessarily "gaslighting" is reaching at straws and victim-creating, although I acknowledge it could be used to do so.
The section about "divorcing a covert narcissist" is probably the best section of the book. My mom had narcissistic and manipulative tendencies, probably could have been diagnosed with NPD or at least severe BPD, and it describes her to a T.
As someone who feels they may be a victim, you should take this book with a tablespoon of salt. It should not be used to diagnose anyone with anything, and it depicts a pretty dichotomous, anecdotal and non-clinical picture of what a narcissist is, even with the initial appeal to clinicality. Even in the realm of personality disorders, no two people are the same. One person with NPD might still have a completely different set of morals and values than another, each person is a unique cluster of personality traits present at a varying degree, there's a LOT of overlap between personality disorders, and NPD a very misunderstood, demonized, sensationalized disorder. Before deciding someone in your life is a "narcissist," maybe check out some content creators that live with and treat NPD and see if some of the attitudes your partner has expressed are similar. I recommend 'The Nameless Narcissist,' Dr Daniel Fox, and Dr Mark Ettonsohn at 'HealNPD."
This book is coldly irreverent to just how bad someone with a cluster B disorder can get, the complex underlying conditions that cause a person to display these traits, and focuses more on minute details and speculation. It ends up seeming more like a witch-hunt. I question just how many of the "100 women" interviewed that were married to a "covert narcissist" actually had a diagnosed partner, and how many armchair diagnosed their partner using sensationalized information from the internet.
Please don't approach this book if you think your partner is a "narcissist" based on some shit you saw on TikTok. You are probably the gaslighter in this scenario, you just don't know it. Maybe approach this book if your partner was diagnosed by a medical professional with high-functioning NPD. Less than 1% of patients present with NPD within their lifetime. You're (fortunately) probably not that lucky, and there are certainly better resources out there if you want a genuine understanding of cluster B personality disorders, and not just to reinforce or establish a victim complex based on pure speculation by this life coach or another.
I gratuitously assume that this author means well for her intended audience, however, the recent boom in misinformation about NPD, "narcissistic personality styles," and hugely stretched and diluted use of the word narcissism in general, means that that audience is growing rapidly. The author begins by approaching the topic of "covert" narcissism very clinically, and from there switches to almost entirely speculation and anecdotes. This mix of anecdotes, speculation, mixing in clinical terms, and especially pointing at and misinterpreting the DSM-5 as a list of symptoms and not solely diagnostic indicators results in a phenomenon that ultimately just demonizes mental health, applies "covert" ill-intent to a lot of seemingly innocuous behaviors out of pure speculation, and paints a very black and white picture about the very nuanced topics of not only NPD, but interpersonal abuse. This book contributes to a growing stigma against NPD, age-old stigmas about cluster B personality disorders in general, and perhaps unintentionally capitalizes on a pop-psychology movement that has very little basis in clinical psychology, one that is largely perpetuated among people who already want to leave their relationship with a person.
"You were targeted and abused by a malicious person."
If those are the words you were looking for, you don't have to buy this book, because that's the only big take there really is to be had. The complex realities of NPD and of personality disorders in general are much, much deeper than that, and assigning this sentiment to NPD as an inherent trait is incredibly stigmatizing given what is known about the disorder. If you believe you have been targeted and abused by a malicious person, then there's no need to add any additional label here. If you want to buy this book to seek some understanding of what NPD actually is, don't. You won't find it here. If you want to buy this book because you think you're a victim of "narcissistic abuse," this book will validate that feeling until you're absolutely sure of it, even though it really has nothing to do with NPD or pathological narcissism at all. And if you already feel that way, or want to feel that way, you may ask yourself the question "why am I worried about whether or not this person is a 'narcissist?'"
It is not ever made clear, but this book should not be used in any way as a "field diagnostic manual" to gauge whether or not someone has NPD, or even a narcissistic personality style. The fact that this is lauded on a certain Chinese video-hosting network as some sort of psychological authority on these things has the potential to be incredibly harmful, and there are quite a few speculations and assertations in this book that are harmful as well. This book could be used to paint a case for ANYBODY being a "covert passive-aggressive narcissist," and I don't think it's a coincidence that it's so popular among people who are trying to do exactly that. A lot of things the author points at as "subtle abuse" are behaviors that are hallmarks of a lot of other psychological issues and personality disorders, and then it applies a speculative intention behind it.
The author immediately begins by pointing at the DSM as a list of traits and not just diagnostic criteria. The most harmful assertation here is that just because the DSM lists "lacks empathy" as a diagnostic criteria, that it means people with NPD or 'narcissists' are devoid of empathy altogether, and can only feign empathy. This is markedly untrue, and a misinterpretation of the DSM not just in the semantics of the word "lacks," but also in the actual application of the DSM. It's a list of diagnostic flags, not symptoms or a rulebook to say 'this is how these people are,' and you can be a diagnosed narcissist, even a grandiose "overt," while missing any 4 of the 9 indicators for NPD. They literally left that part in the book, and then 2 paragraphs later go on to assert that "all the narcissistic traits are true of overts and coverts." Not only that, but it doesn't touch on the fact that the traits listed must be presented at what's called a "borderline" severity of disturbance to a person's personality, essentially meaning that the traits must be present at a severity that more often than not inhibits their ability to discern their own thought patterns from reality. It leaves it open for anyone to apply these traits as freely as they wish to "discover" that someone is a narcissist. That a "grandiose sense of self importance," could be construed as "selfish person, thinks he's all that and a bag of chips" rather than what the diagnostic criteria means "I am a very important, great person who is looked up to" (or in vulnerable narcissism, "I am the worst person to ever exist"). That a "lack of empathy" means "sometimes he doesn't make an effort to understand, and that makes him evil" as opposed to "quite literally lacks the ability to put himself in someone else's shoes, is unable to identify with the feelings of others."
The next section covers the "narcissistic abuse cycle." For a long time I've been skeptical about the model of the "narcissistic abuse cycle." You can apply this model to almost every single failing relationship. Things are good in the beginning, they gradually or not-so-gradually deteriorate, and then someone leaves or "discards" the relationship. It's very vague in description, and the sort-of 'clinical' basis for this in relation to NPD as a disorder is because they split, and usually feature a fearful-avoidant attachment style. This book doesn't mention the splitting defense, or fearful-avoidant attachment ONCE, never mind explaining what those are, so it sets the stage for this "cycle" to be applied to any failing relationship ever as proof of a 'narcissist.' I feel it also paints a picture of the whole thing as almost a conscious 'trick' or deception and not just a function of splitting, further demonizing the "narcissist."
The third section is about the traits of the narcissist's victims. I don't mean to be insensitive to anyone who has been abused, whether the person is or isn't a narcissist, but to think that "narcissists" target and look for specific traits in people to victimize, especially in terms of a long-term romantic relationship, and to think that all of them look for the same traits is a bit silly. People are attracted to who they are attracted to, and narcissists are no exception. While some malicious people may seek a relationship solely for personal gain or to take advantage of someone, that's not a necessary trait of a narcissist, and you don't have to be a narcissist to do that either. This section is mainly just to fluff up the reader, and tell them all the good things the author presumes or wants you to believe about yourself.
The fourth section covers the "traits of a covert narcissist" and is very anecdotal in propping up these traits. They basically just took a group of selfish, lazy, and immature traits and applies it to the word narcissist. It places all the pressure on the reader to apply these anecdotal traits to whomever they wish, as liberally as they please, and most of these traits are just true of any emotionally immature person, not necessarily a narcissist. You could replace "covert narcissist" or "CN" with "headass" and it would all still make sense. It basically just gives a list of things one might resent about their long-term partner in a strained relationship. I think a cynical and self-reflective reader in a bit of a rocky relationship could look at these things and say "hey, I do/have done that, but I don't/didn't mean to." If you removed "narcissism" entirely and just looked at it as a list of things you shouldn't do to improve the health of a relationship, this is actually really good. One of many glaring issues:
"Over the years, she would ask her husband, “Are you okay? You seem angry.” He would respond by saying calmly, “No. Just tired.” Then he would stay quiet while Mary would wonder who to trust: her own instincts or his word. Her body could feel his anger, but why would he lie? She chose to trust him and ignore her own feelings. This is part of gaslighting (will discuss further in the next chapter) and other manipulative tools used to get the victim to slowly, after time, believe the CN over their own inner guidance."
This is a giant reach by the author, and the book is fraught with them. There are plenty of reasons why someone might deny their own outward expression of feelings, the most glaring being alexithymia. People with NPD often have alexithymia, but so do people with BPD, autism, and lots of other issues. Maybe the person has some self-awareness that they might be neurotic, that what they're angry about may not be important, and that the feeling will pass. Also, the societal pressures put on men from a young age to "suck it up, be a man and deal with it" certainly play a role here. To label this behavior as necessarily "gaslighting" is reaching at straws and victim-creating, although I acknowledge it could be used to do so.
The section about "divorcing a covert narcissist" is probably the best section of the book. My mom had narcissistic and manipulative tendencies, probably could have been diagnosed with NPD or at least severe BPD, and it describes her to a T.
As someone who feels they may be a victim, you should take this book with a tablespoon of salt. It should not be used to diagnose anyone with anything, and it depicts a pretty dichotomous, anecdotal and non-clinical picture of what a narcissist is, even with the initial appeal to clinicality. Even in the realm of personality disorders, no two people are the same. One person with NPD might still have a completely different set of morals and values than another, each person is a unique cluster of personality traits present at a varying degree, there's a LOT of overlap between personality disorders, and NPD a very misunderstood, demonized, sensationalized disorder. Before deciding someone in your life is a "narcissist," maybe check out some content creators that live with and treat NPD and see if some of the attitudes your partner has expressed are similar. I recommend 'The Nameless Narcissist,' Dr Daniel Fox, and Dr Mark Ettonsohn at 'HealNPD."
This book is coldly irreverent to just how bad someone with a cluster B disorder can get, the complex underlying conditions that cause a person to display these traits, and focuses more on minute details and speculation. It ends up seeming more like a witch-hunt. I question just how many of the "100 women" interviewed that were married to a "covert narcissist" actually had a diagnosed partner, and how many armchair diagnosed their partner using sensationalized information from the internet.