July 16, 2010

Why Is Mel Gibson So Angry?

robyn gibson.jpg
should've stuck to the plan

Time Magazine:

"I've witnessed thousand of arguments at this point and in my opinion this is not typical," says Sharon Rivkin, psychotherapist who specializes in arguments and affairs and is author of last year's Breaking the Argument Cycle. "I think he's got some very serious psychological problems. I think he's dangerous at this point. This goes beyond just a bad relationship. Even if he's been drinking, that's too much... I'll bet every penny I've ever made that he was abusive in all his previous relationships."

Paypal button is on the right, as long as it's under 14 grand it's not reportable.

She couldn't be more wrong, every single word is exactly wrong.

First, this isn't extreme, it's not even uncommon, these rants happen all the time in relationships everywhere.  And the men who yell like this are rarely bipolar, panicking, or even drinkers (and if he was drinking, getting sober isn't going to change this.)

Just like Olga, the women aren't screaming back, they are mostly mute (which drives the men bananas) or sporadically say something infuriating.  These exact same arguments happen all the time.  (This isn't to justify them or lessen their severity.)  And I doubt very much that he's dangerous, though he is quite intimidating and scary. 

I should write more about this later, but five things that jump out at me:

1. Coiled spring. 

Whatever it is he's arguing about is just the switch to bring up every other sleight he's ever experienced, many that don't have anything to do with her (e.g. ex-wife.)  It's not that he's been looking for an excuse to yell about those things, but he sees them as logically connected to his arguments now.  She thinks, "what does that have to do with anything?" and he thinks, "see, just like this thing!"  He's angry at her, but he's really angry at this "pattern of things that are always being done to me."

NB: the one constant in all of your failed endeavors is you.

2.  The threat that is a gift. 


She accuses him of something (being crazy, being mean) to which he responds, "oh, you think this is crazy/mean?  You don't know what mean is!"   I could hurt you, but I'm not, because I'm a good, anyone else this angry would hurt you.  Usually, that move is reserved for people you "love," or are jealous of.  His expectation is that she will realize how good he is because he's not hurting her, because he is so wrapped up with her, that she will come around: "oh my God, you're right, how could I have been so stupid?  I'll make it up to you, let's get someone to videotape us having sex!"

3. Sex, sex, sex, sex, sex, sex.  He's not yelling at an ugly chick.  You might think that he'd be happy to have her, and one missed blowjob isn't a big deal (apparently she fell asleep before he got to bed.)  But that anger isn't about missing the blowjob.  It's that she missed a blowjob, but for sure she never missed an opportunity to blow her past boyfriends.  She liked giving them blowjobs.  She was way more wild, sexual, open with the other guys.  Why not him? 

Man: Don't show you love me by marrying me, of course people would want to marry me, show me you love me by being a slut for me, the way you were for the other guys!  In other words, prove it! 

Woman: That doesn't make sense!  And I'm way more sexual with you than I've ever been with any other man! 

Man: Didn't you one time have sex in a car?!  Ah ha!

Woman: What?

Man: And remember that time you had a one night stand with a guy at the beach, right there in the open?  See?!

Woman:  But didn't you have one night stands in your life...?

Man:  Not with you!  You never had a one night stand with me!  You gave that to someone else!  You didn't think I was sexy enough to have a one night stand with!

Woman: ?!??

Man: !!!!

If you've never had that fight, you'll think it impossible.  If you have had that fight, exhale; it happens all the time.


4.  Violence up to the line, and a peek over


Pulling a gun and punching her in the mouth are abuse, but he's not beating her to a pulp.    (Not justifying it, please follow along.)  The violence is explosive and terrifying-- and then restrained.  He sounds out of control, he wants to convey the impression he's out of control, but he's not actually uncontrolled. Though sometimes it gets out of control. He wants to hit her, but the point is to show it.  He doesn't want to get in trouble for it.  He is aware of rule outside himself and fears them.  He doesn't want to be known as a guy who hits women.

What would provoke a man like this to actually commit extreme violence?  Shame, with backup support.  She has to do something to him that destroys the image of him in the eyes of others (gee, like, say, leaking phone tapes) and he has to find enough people willing to do a Chris Rock: "I'm not saying he should have killed her-- but I understand."  As long as the violence has less shame than the thing that originally shamed him, it becomes a possibility.

5.  Envy

I lost my money, I lost my career, I lost my family... you have big breasts, you're hot, people desire you, you don't desire me, you have all these friend and I have no friends-- but you know, your friends aren't really your friends, only I'm your friend and you don't even desire me--

It would have been much better if your presence around me proved to me and everyone else that I'm awesome.  But you're getting older, and so am I, we don't look as good-- and besides, every time they see you they realize you're only with me because I'm Mel Gibson, so everyone envies you but no one envies me, they think I settled for a Russian whore.  And the irony of it is... you're not actually a whore so I don't even get that!

Practical solution:

You split up.  I know that seems obvious, but even though this kind of a fight is about other baggage, it implies the relationship itself is an outgrowth of that other baggage (e.g. he picked her because to show the world he could still get models) and thus doomed to failure.  You don't love each other, you want to love each other.

I'll point out that it is also typical that once these fights start happening, you'll probably stick together for another decade or so.






Comments

Did you see this? <a href="... (Below threshold)

July 16, 2010 2:56 PM | Posted by Adrian: | Reply

Did you see this? http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/16/opinion/16brooks.html?_r=1

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
thank you. that was an awes... (Below threshold)

July 16, 2010 4:48 PM | Posted by randy: | Reply

thank you. that was an awesome analysis.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 2 (4 votes cast)
Thank you.... (Below threshold)

July 16, 2010 4:51 PM | Posted by KS: | Reply

Thank you.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 2 (4 votes cast)
Awww shit! Nice... (Below threshold)

July 16, 2010 9:07 PM | Posted by Eddy: | Reply

Awww shit! Nice

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
I'd be interested in a post... (Below threshold)

July 16, 2010 9:17 PM | Posted by Annie: | Reply

I'd be interested in a post on what's motivating her behaviour. Well, in this case, I get it - staying cool while she tapes his outbursts.

But in typical situations (non-celebrity, I guess), especially when the women stand to gain cash in the divorce, why aren't they "screaming back?"

Is it the woman or the man who is keeping the relationship going for another decade?

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (6 votes cast)
Maybe Alone is David Brooks... (Below threshold)

July 16, 2010 11:00 PM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

Maybe Alone is David Brooks.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
While I don't exactly agree... (Below threshold)

July 17, 2010 12:27 AM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

While I don't exactly agree with your analysis, I do find it quite interesting and my respect for you has grown. This is a rather unique and intelligent insight on the situation.

I don't agree with the therapists / doctors who are saying mel gibson is extremely unstable and in need of immediate psych services (ala britney a few yrs ago). They are clearly drama queens trying to make a name for themselves.

This seems like a pretty stable thing for him... something he just does when he is frustrated angry upset, go on a rant and become horrendously abusive.

Fights like this may happen all over the country, many people may channel their parents when they listen to it, but even my crazy ass alcoholic father was a sigma less abusive and insane than gibson is on that tape. And, I'll let it be known, my father has said some extremely abusive things in his long career of emotionally abusing my mother during drunken rants.
There is something quite... special... about the skill and viciousness in gibson's abuse. I can't quite put my finger on it, but it's as if his abuse suggests a total lack of feeling and concern for the person it is directed toward. Even my father, when he was out of control emotionally saying horrid things there was a feeling of "he's just out of control right now and drunk, he will regret this later". Not that regret and lack of intention excuses it, but it does make it less horrible.
When listening to this tape one gets the impression Gibson really does want to destroy this person, emotionally speaking. On the other hand, my father was more in a "I am so out of control over my feelings and I don't know what to do so I am going to abuse you emotionally" type zone. Gibson isn't out of control, he's just like, systematically abusing this person with the intent to break her down.


I don't think your analysis captured that clear intent and desire to break her down and control his girlfriend. This is what is most shocking about the tape, IMO. It reveals him for what he apparently is: a man who controls the fuck out of his women by any means necessary, resistance and an attempt to break away is met with atom bomb like abuse with the intent to destroy any shred of confidence and self sufficiency she may have had.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 13 (15 votes cast)
Guilty as charged. I've ha... (Below threshold)

July 17, 2010 1:04 AM | Posted by TM: | Reply

Guilty as charged. I've had that very argument dozens of times, man, I couldn't get her to understand and I had a secret suspicion I was crazy. I see that I was. I'm speechless. You just saved my life.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 11 (13 votes cast)
The David Brooks piece show... (Below threshold)

July 17, 2010 4:26 AM | Posted by Ben: | Reply

The David Brooks piece shows either 1) TLP has gone viral; or 2) NPD is the new cooties for adults: everybody is starting to suspect everybody else of being infected, and nobody wants to join the ranks of the walking dead.

Both would probably be generally positive developments.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
You seem to be right about ... (Below threshold)

July 17, 2010 8:27 AM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

You seem to be right about the violence, anyway. News is out that she may be lying about getting her caps knocked out. In any event, that's the only allegation of abuse she's even made.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
"Gibson isn't out of contro... (Below threshold)

July 17, 2010 9:35 AM | Posted, in reply to Annie's comment, by brainchild: | Reply

"Gibson isn't out of control, he's just like, systematically abusing this person with the intent to break her down."

He's not in control either, he's trying to assert control by any means necessary. This is what narcissists do, they specialize in breaking people down in both small almost mundane ways and this kind of overt way when in the midst of a narcissistic rage. They try to draw people in close and use them and if their use of the other gets frustrated they resort to violence. Non-alcoholic narcissists do like to pretend they're in control even when they're not really (as if ritualized abuse is somehow less abuse than non-ritualized abuse). It's pretty clear that he's not in control of the conversation - the person taping it obviously is.

Abusive alcoholics simply use alcohol as their excuse (it wasn't me, it was the booze speaking/acting) so they can pretend to themselves and everyone else that they're really a wonderful person and that the repressed aspects of themselves that they let out when they drink isn't really them (they disassociate, repress and deny this aspect of themselves when sober and give it free reign when drunk with total impunity because they blame the alcohol). Not all alcoholics' personalities change when they drink. Not all alcoholics get angry or abusive when drunk, only the ones with anger who feel entitled to abuse others when drunk. The drinking is their "get out of jail free" card when it comes to taking responsibility for how they feel and behave. There is certainly a narcissistic element to most alcoholism and hardcore drug addiction (the grandiosity, sense of entitlement, etc) and many narcissists seem to be attracted to drinking (just like the rest of us) but being an alcoholic/addict and selfish doesn't actually make one a narcissist. What truly defines a narcissist is their total lack of true empathy - not that some people with NPD can't do a performance that resembles empathy or don't actually desire to be seen as compassionate people.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 2 (6 votes cast)
Brilliant... (Below threshold)

July 17, 2010 3:47 PM | Posted by Marcus: | Reply

Brilliant

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I've been reading this blog... (Below threshold)

July 17, 2010 3:59 PM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

I've been reading this blog for a while, and I want to know, what do you do if you are a narcissist and you don't want to be one any more? I think I must be one, and I feel like a monster, and maybe I should put a bullet in my head.

What's the answer? I'm not happy; I surmise that I'm not supposed to feel entitled to happiness, but what the fuck's the point of living if not happiness?

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 8 (8 votes cast)
@ Anon 3:59Admitti... (Below threshold)

July 17, 2010 4:41 PM | Posted by Meat Robot: | Reply

@ Anon 3:59

Admitting you're a narcissist already sets you on the road toward cure. Be wary that it's a road that's easy to find your way off of. Now, go find a therapist who will support you empathetically while relentlessly calling you on your BS.

Happiness comes in lots of forms. One great path to your own happiness is to focus on the happiness of others and actually intend their happiness, whether it benefits you or not. (In other words, don't fall into the trap of, "When they see how much I care for them, they'll really appreciate me.") That's altruism in a nutshell, and it's the universal solvent for narcissism.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 10 (10 votes cast)
Didn't TLP suggest to fake ... (Below threshold)

July 17, 2010 5:26 PM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

Didn't TLP suggest to fake not being one? Being a narcissist is less about you having a problem and more about your neighbors having one...think of them first occassionally.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 9 (9 votes cast)
There are men who really th... (Below threshold)

July 17, 2010 6:05 PM | Posted by Linda: | Reply

There are men who really think like that? That if she marries him and fucks his brains out is not enough, she needs to want him for one-night stands? Only then we can marry them? Then they'll believe they're loved?

Jesus. My God. I'm afraid us girls are doomed.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 6 (12 votes cast)
@Linda, perhaps you weren't... (Below threshold)

July 17, 2010 6:09 PM | Posted by Marcus: | Reply

@Linda, perhaps you weren't following, examine many relationship arguments and you'll likely find it's about abstract meanings and intentions rather than the specific topic. M v F is simply not the point.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 4 (6 votes cast)
There are people in general... (Below threshold)

July 17, 2010 6:17 PM | Posted, in reply to Linda's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

There are people in general who are just messed up, they're frustrated and broken, and not a thing this girl could do would ever fix what's wrong with Mel Gibson's internal state. He wants not just her present and future, but also her past. More than that he wants himself to be more than he is.

And girls and guys are all doomed equally.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
3:59, as a rule of thumb th... (Below threshold)

July 17, 2010 8:52 PM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

3:59, as a rule of thumb the more narcissistic a person is, the less narcissistic they think they are. If you read this website and see yourself as a narcissist, odds are you are not truly NPD. You may have narcissistic traits or tendencies or subclinical NPD, or you may have an entirely different problem (depression resulting in excessive guilt, problems relating with people due to poor social skills resulting in unintentional selfish behavior/offensive behavior, whatever).

A person with true NPD will *NEVER* read this website and say to themselves "I am this person and should kill myself".

It's like a catch 22. NPDs never say they are NPDs, and the more a person thinks they may be a narcissist the more likely it is their social/emotional problems are unrelated to narcissism. NPDs as a rule do not care about other people and how they feel and the impact they have on the world, so an NPD would never feel any sort of guilt or bad things about being a narcissist.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 2 (4 votes cast)
@Anon 8:52, I think what yo... (Below threshold)

July 18, 2010 6:09 AM | Posted by Meat Robot: | Reply

@Anon 8:52, I think what you say is generally true of the more oblivious narcissists, but I think it's perfectly reasonable to think a fragile narcissist could have enough insight to post anonymously in a "Holy crap, I think that's me!" kind of fashion. NPD's, like everyone else, are not cut from one cloth.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 3 (5 votes cast)
Anonymous - "NPDs as a rule... (Below threshold)

July 18, 2010 8:27 AM | Posted by brainchild: | Reply

Anonymous - "NPDs as a rule do not care about other people and how they feel and the impact they have on the world, so an NPD would never feel any sort of guilt or bad things about being a narcissist."

Recognizing a pattern of behavior or recognizing that one is unhappy are quite possible for people with NPD. People with NPD even go into therapy voluntarily and of their own volition. They, quite naturally and like most of us, balk at having to deconstruct their persona, at accepting that many of the things they've done in the name of "love" are actually abusive and/or not loving, and then the hardest thing to accept....that they're just humans and no more special than the rest of us. People with NPD aren't the only people with mistaken ideas about love and being loving, and who mistake abusive behavior for part of the dynamic of love. Eric Fromm's The Art of Loving is a very good place to start understanding the difference between love as feeling and love as behavior/action.

People with all kinds of personality disorders resist treatment and going into treatment. And very few people can admit to themselves that they don't actually know what love is or that they're not loving people (at least to those around them). Someone who can recognize that they are behaving and feeling like someone with a NPD - and is motivated to change because they're unhappy and frustrated with how their life is playing out - has a pretty good chance of making the kinds of changes that will genuinely make their life better (and the lives of those around them better too).

And I'd say it's not really true that people with NPD don't care how people feel. They do, it's just generally in relation to themselves. And they care very much about their impact on the world, their public image and place in the world is incredibly important (whether it's as a grandiose victim or grandiose powerbroker). Most people with NPD frame their abuse and exploitative behavior as being "for their own good", "it's a dog eat dog world" or similarly frame exploitative behavior as being "just how things are". Which is actually quite true when we're talking about the world of corporate business and finance (colonialism - with it's god/kings, constant expansion and corporate entities with "human" rights - is all about feeling entitled to exploit the world and others, about making others conform to ones own needs/image...think about the evangelical aspects of colonialism and the destruction of another's identity...and so on...all in all, NPDs are highly rewarded in the halls of power in our society). And people with NPDs do want to be in loving relationships and to be loved, they just don't know how to do it so they do what they know how to do. And, like changing any behavior it helps to have an environment that supports the new behavior instead of reinforcing the old.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 3 (5 votes cast)
@brainchild you may be putt... (Below threshold)

July 18, 2010 12:39 PM | Posted by Marcus: | Reply

@brainchild you may be putting too much weight on arbitrary labels affixed to psychological tendencies. This is not World of Warcraft or a zero sum game, this is just our limited intellectual classification of certain observed but not actually measurable traits.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
@brainchild additionally, o... (Below threshold)

July 18, 2010 12:41 PM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

@brainchild additionally, one of those observable narcissistic tendencies is to see the world as a zero sum game ;)

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
oops, that last comment was... (Below threshold)

July 18, 2010 12:43 PM | Posted by Marcus: | Reply

oops, that last comment was me too

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
Here's the thing that nobod... (Below threshold)

July 18, 2010 1:17 PM | Posted by hemitian operator: | Reply

Here's the thing that nobody here seems to get. Including TLP. Gibson's rage is caused by his sub-conscious realization that he violated his core principles by leaving his wife and taking up with Oksana.

He was raised Catholic and until his affair was very devout. Intrinsically troubled perhaps, but still devout. That residue of the call to fidelity never went away. Gibson shoved it aside for Oksana and with familiarity, it came back to haunt him.

An now he rages at Oksana, because she is the explicit manifestation of his spiritual failure.

Sorry TLP, it's not about BJ's or being hot or big breasts. It's about that.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 1 (11 votes cast)
Marcus - I recognize that l... (Below threshold)

July 18, 2010 1:33 PM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

Marcus - I recognize that labels and categories are just that, labels and categories, they're constructs and they change with time and understanding. However, naming and categorizing is part of identifying and understanding something. It's also a basic function of human cognition. I also recognize that with most mental health issues and the categories we assign them to we're really just groping the elephant's leg and trying to discern the whole beast from that leg at this point in time. I'm not sure where you got the WOW thing from or the idea that I see NPD as a zero sum game...or is it something else you're referring to....care to explain?

And, sure, seeing things in black/white, good/evil terms is a problem for many people and unrealistic since we're all a mix of constructive and destructive impulses and actions.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
MeatRobot - "NPD's, like ev... (Below threshold)

July 18, 2010 2:03 PM | Posted, in reply to Meat Robot's comment, by brainchild: | Reply

MeatRobot - "NPD's, like everyone else, are not cut from one cloth."

Very true and well said.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Perhaps I dysfunctional bec... (Below threshold)

July 18, 2010 4:53 PM | Posted by Felan: | Reply

Perhaps I dysfunctional because I don't see NPD everywhere. I have no idea whether Mel is NPD or not.

Humans are ultimately just animals and hurt animals can and do instinctively lash out at a non-threatening others. The lashing out starts small but the other feels hurt and fires back. The cycle repeats and escalates. Just because we are freshly exposed to conflict at this crazy intensity doesn't mean that this is representative of the relationship.

The tapes could be a sound bite from his movies where he is threatening someone on the other side of the phone, which were always very dramatic and almost a cliche for him. Given that, it is surprising to me that anyone is shocked at how threatening he sounds.

Oksana illegally taping him ranting and then giving them the media is pretty low as well. I would even say it is character assassination. In civil liability sense I would think if she had any money, he could take her to the cleaners.

It may well be that Mel is an abusive prick. It may well be that Oksana is a manipulative whore. I suspect neither is really true. What I do think is 100% true is that they should split up. However their relationship got to where it is I think wagon ruts they have worn into it at this point are so deep that it would be far too easy to slip back into them even with the best of intentions.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -4 (8 votes cast)
"oblivious narcissist" and ... (Below threshold)

July 19, 2010 12:00 AM | Posted, in reply to Meat Robot's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

"oblivious narcissist" and "fragile narcissist" are terms you point blank made up. ALL people with narcissistic PERSONALITY DISORDER lack sufficient empathy to give a crap if they are NPD or not, meaning to say, they could not, are mentally incapable of feeling guilt for the pain their behavior causes in other people. They may care about being NPD for image/ego reasons, for shame, but not because of a genuine feeling of guilt for being a bad person and hurting people.

Having narcissistic traits, or tendencies, is NOT the same as NPD, and these are present in many healthy and mentally unhealthy people. Depressives can be narcissistic in that they think of themselves and are pretty oblivious to things outside of themselves (except if those things cause them pain, which they then whine about how bad they feel about the thing causing them pain). But no one but an asshole would argue that depression is NPD, it has nothing in common. For all we know, 3:59 is a depressive in a depressive episode with extreme guilt and pain leading him to read this website and say "I am a horrible human being, they are talking about me, I am this selfish rotten human being and I should kill myself". For all we know, the OP could have OCD or anxiety and his obsessional thinking is leading him to worry he is a narcissist. Or he could be totally normal.

I seriously doubt any genuine NPD would read this crap and say what 3:59 said.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -2 (2 votes cast)
Interesting perspective but... (Below threshold)

July 19, 2010 12:11 AM | Posted, in reply to hemitian operator's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

Interesting perspective but I would disagree. How do we know gibson was devout in his catholic practice prior to this affair? Were we with him every minute of the day?

I've met pleeenty of devout catholics in my life who pick and choose what they do or don't do, yet mentally they totally believe they are good catholics.

I think catholocism attracts the bullies and the hypocrites in the world, actually. Went to catholic school for a brief period in my life. The people running it were way worse, morally speaking, than ordinary folks in public school. Worse in the sense that they had this complex about them, and it was so fucking obvious... almost as if everything they did was black or white, like if they weren't being good, then they were being vicious.
Normal (non-religious,non-catholic) people don't go about their lives like that, with this extreme black and white moral behavior.

I think the religion attracts people like this (bullies and control freaks) and it makes people this way as well.

I'm sooo fucking glad I only went to catholic school for a short period as a child, and I'm glad my father was always very ambivalent about his catholicism. My father is a catholic, believes in christ and such, but he also hates the shit out of it too.
I'm an agnostic leaning toward atheism (please don't start about how this is hypocritical or weak of me, I don't want to start this fuckin' debate) and I look at religious people like strange fucking animals from another planet.

It isn't a coincidence that religious faith often goes along with being crazy or bigtime immoral in other ways. The normal balanced types are usually not particularly religious.

I believe religion is a commonly agreed upon type of delusional/psychotic thinking, seriously.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 3 (5 votes cast)
I wonder if brainchild mean... (Below threshold)

July 19, 2010 12:18 AM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

I wonder if brainchild meant his moniker to be ironic, heh.

I don't know who the hell is thumb upping' his posts.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -2 (2 votes cast)
hostile anon...you're so si... (Below threshold) Well, I'm not too proud to ... (Below threshold)

July 19, 2010 3:10 AM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

Well, I'm not too proud to say I have been 0wned here.

Still, I maintain it is unlikely a genuine narcissist will read this blog and become guilty and remorseful, and it is much more likely anyone doing that is depressed/anxious/obsessive/whatever.

Especially considering like, half the god damned people TLP calls narcissists aren't even narcissists (see: the post below this one about the islamic father who killed his daughter - really stretching there amirite?)

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -3 (3 votes cast)
Mel Gibson is a good actor ... (Below threshold)

July 19, 2010 4:26 AM | Posted by jd50: | Reply

Mel Gibson is a good actor and he trained in the theatre at NIDA the hardest place to be accepted and which offers the most rigorous training.

Point is he like every actor is a bit of a self obsessed drama queen mix that with
years of alcohol abuse because of his wound up nervous tension and when things go wrong- watch out!

However , I do not for one minute believe he would act on his extreme threats
because you can hear him drowning as he yells down the phone- hyperventilating and swapping from you need a bat to the head to you don't love me to I will let you stay at the house and I will look after my child.
He's all over the shop because he has conflicting thoughts and only
kindness and understanding will eventually make him really face up
to his demons. Make him realize everything that has happened he has
brought on himself and that he actually needs to be sent to live with people that are really struggling so he can find some humility.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -2 (2 votes cast)
hostile anon - you kinda ke... (Below threshold)

July 19, 2010 9:23 AM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

hostile anon - you kinda keep owning yourself...repeatedly...I have no desire to own you but it would be impressive if you actually took ownership of your behavior.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Advice for a person who sus... (Below threshold)

July 19, 2010 1:19 PM | Posted by medsvstherapy: | Reply

Advice for a person who suspects that he or she is NPD, and wants to begin making life better: check out this book:

Living Successfully with Screwed-Up People.

This book is a practical book for someone, such as a person with NPD, Type A, who gets frustrated by the incompetence and foolishness of others, who are not as awesome as you may perceive yourself, your opinions, efforts, etc.

I was gonna post more, but I realized I would be crossing into delivering professional advice. So, a book recommendation is it for today.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
"Oksana illegally taping... (Below threshold)

July 19, 2010 2:02 PM | Posted, in reply to Felan's comment, by BHL: | Reply

"Oksana illegally taping him ranting and then giving them the media is pretty low as well. I would even say it is character assassination. In civil liability sense I would think if she had any money, he could take her to the cleaners."

Yeah. THAT's the problem. Because Oksana taped him, it's HER fault that she's proving that he's a vile, ranting bully. She took away your ability to portray her as a drama queen when she makes allegations about the verbal abuse to which she was subjected.

TLP may be absolutely right that Mel Gibson is not a time bomb or a danger to the public, but that does not preclude his being an abuser whose treatment of the mother of his child was reprehensable, no matter what the cause.

Just because TLP is able to explain some basis for the actions, and just because this happens all the time does not make it right, justifiable or appropriate.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 10 (12 votes cast)
Re Point #3:Yeah, ... (Below threshold)

July 19, 2010 2:23 PM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

Re Point #3:

Yeah, wincing in recognition a little. Where the hell does that come from?

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
"It would have been much be... (Below threshold)

July 19, 2010 9:07 PM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

"It would have been much better if your presence around me proved to me and everyone else that I'm awesome. But you're getting older, and so am I, we don't look as good-- and besides, every time they see you they realize you're only with me because I'm Mel Gibson, so everyone envies you but no one envies me, they think I settled for a Russian whore. And the irony of it is... you're not actually a whore so I don't even get that!"

Should it not be "and besides, every time they see you they realize you're only with me because I'm Mel GIbson, so everyone envies ME but no one envies you, they think I'm not good enough on my own."?

ie: He can only get super hot girl cause he's Mel Gibson, but really he's a shmuck. I wish I could get girl like that without truly deserving it.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
@Anon 12:00Was it ... (Below threshold)

July 20, 2010 4:03 AM | Posted by Meat Robot: | Reply

@Anon 12:00

Was it you who later said "I got owned"? If not, I wasn't point-blank making anything up. Narcissistic subtypes are well recognized within the field, with two of the leading theorists being Kohut (who is most closely linked with fragile narcissism) and Kernberg (most closely linked with oblivious or malignant narcissism). For a nice overview, see Gabbard's "Psychodynamic Psychiatry in Clinical Practice" which has a great chapter on NPD.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
I really hate this psycho b... (Below threshold)

July 20, 2010 6:42 AM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

I really hate this psycho babble haha pleeeease get real!

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Yeah. THAT's the problem... (Below threshold)

July 20, 2010 10:15 AM | Posted, in reply to BHL's comment, by Anonymous: | Reply

Yeah. THAT's the problem. Because Oksana taped him, it's HER fault that she's proving that he's a vile, ranting bully. She took away your ability to portray her as a drama queen when she makes allegations about the verbal abuse to which she was subjected.

I didn't say that was *THE* problem. But it is absolutely *A* problem and one that most are willing to gloss over.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -2 (6 votes cast)
The imagined argument remin... (Below threshold)

July 20, 2010 11:27 AM | Posted by Kevin Smith: | Reply

The imagined argument reminds me of Chasing Amy. Not quite the same, but it's probably the less narcissistic version of this argument.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
"I didn't say that was *... (Below threshold)

July 21, 2010 11:42 AM | Posted, in reply to Anonymous's comment, by BHL: | Reply

"I didn't say that was *THE* problem. But it is absolutely *A* problem and one that most are willing to gloss over."

Please define what the problem is, here. If you read my comment and then your comment, you seem to be saying that providing absolute proof of the verbal and sexual violence to which this woman was subjected, thus taking away your ability to to portray her as a drama queen, gold digger or liar when she makes these allegations (presumably in support of claims for a restraining order, or limitations on his time with the infant) is a problem.

How so?

How does this in any way vitiate or excuse the abuse?


Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
How does this in any way... (Below threshold)

July 22, 2010 11:36 AM | Posted, in reply to BHL's comment, by Felan: | Reply

How does this in any way vitiate or excuse the abuse?

My point was that she illegally taped phone conversations with Mel and then released them to public media to destroy his public reputation. The American public is not the court room that will decide what the outcome of their seperation and custody of the child will be. But the American public is likely the only venue that the tapes could be presented in.

This is a relationship that has reached ugly levels on both sides. To me, each seem to be lashing out at the other any way they can. She didn't need the tapes to get away from him. She needed the tapes to crush him. Given the illegality of tapes its unlikely to be much help in custody hearings.

Marriages ending often do so with normal people doing stuff that is crazy to people outside of the relationship. I think it is unreasonable to judge people too harshly for their insanity in a disentigrating relationship.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: -3 (3 votes cast)
She released the tapes to t... (Below threshold)

July 22, 2010 3:08 PM | Posted by BHL: | Reply

She released the tapes to the press because he cut off her funds and threatened her and she needed the money.

There was a market for the tapes because Mel Gibson is someone who makes an obscene amount of money by selling his art and his image to the public. He is also someone who has been pushing his version of Catholocism and has been holding himself out as a good Catholic. Mel is in the public eye, and has consciously crafted a particular image for himself. If he wasn't, none of this would have had the slightest interest for the general public.

In addition, Mel Gibson has money, power and a massive PR machine at his disposal. Even with this evidence, people who want to like him or his agenda are desperately trying to justify or deny the behaviour, despite the existence of the tapes. What would they have said without them?

You are really focused on whether or not taping this conversation was illegal. Frankly, Oksana is justified in obtaining evidence of threats uttered against her and of Mel's inability to control or moderate his rage. The tape would possibly be excluded as evidence in a criminal trial on the grounds of whatever statute you are referring to. (NB - here in Canada, any private citizen can tape any conversation in which he or she is a participant.)
On the other hand, custody hearings - which are governed by civil procedure - are focused on the safety and best interests of the children. A judge is not going to place an infant in the care of someone who is prone to drunken rages simply because of an evidentiary irregularity. Criminal and civil proceedings have very different rules and very different goals.

Finally, your last statement is accurate to a degree, but ultimately wrong. NOTHING is an excuse for dealing with another human being we hear Mel doing on these tapes. Sure it's normal to be sad and angry and hurt because your relationship is ending, but it's NOT okay to be abusive and oppressive to another person. The quicker that we, as a society, stop trying to excuse this conduct on those grounds, the quicker we can make people feel less entitled to behave that way.

If you take the view that we shouldn't judge people "too harshly" for their insanity in a disintegrating relationship, where do you draw the line? When he beats her? Stalks her? Tries to prevent her from having contact with lawyers or family or friends? Kills her?

Yes, I am well aware of what happens to people's brains when their marriages end. Not only have I been one of the parties in a few disintigrating relationships, I've been a divorce lawyer for 17 years. I can tell you that the vast majority of "normal people" in a disintegrating relationship are well aware of the difference between expressing hurt and anger forcefully and outright emotional abuse. Those who can't tell the difference suffer consequences. I have no problem with massive embarassment being one of them.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 7 (9 votes cast)
Don't forget what the years... (Below threshold)

July 26, 2010 8:31 AM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

Don't forget what the years of alcohol abuse may have done to this man's brain. Alcoholic psychosis, hallucinations, loss of control, impaired thinking... Gibson has a team surrounding him that can help him appear normal most of the time. Most late-stage alcoholics and other brain damaged folks (see Gary Busey, homeless woman on corner) don't have enough money and clout to shield their looniness from the public eye. Gibson does. I wouldn't be surprised if he were dead in the next few years.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Sudden unexplained acts of ... (Below threshold)

July 27, 2010 12:11 PM | Posted by L K Tucker: | Reply

Sudden unexplained acts of rage or violence happen around the world. They are named by the ethnic group based on their cultural beliefs as Culture Bound Syndromes. Examples are Amok, Malaysia, iich'aa among the Navajo, and Going Postal here in the United States.

As you can see from this thread psychosocial explanations are usually given. But there is a simple problem discovered when it caused mental breaks for office workers forty years ago to explain the episodes. The cubicle was designed to deal with the vision startle reflex in crowded office situations to stop it by 1968. No one has realized that the phenomenon is a problem of human physiology not office workspace. If Gibson, an actor/director and business man created the "special circumstances" for Subliminal Distraction exposure he is very near a mental break every time the episode occurs.


When my wife had this mental break thirty days after her office was changed eliminating Cubicle Level Protection I discovered the problem is unknown by anyone in medicine or psychiatry.

I suspect it is the unrealized cause of college student suicides and disappearances.

Gibson is at risk for suicide if he has Subliminal Distraction exposure to cause his rants. Repeating failed attempts to trigger the vision startle reflex eventually color thought and reason. Symptoms will revolve around fear, paranoia, panic attacks, depression, and thoughts of suicide.

VisionAndPsychosis.Net

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Did anyone doubt, after Gib... (Below threshold)

August 12, 2010 1:02 AM | Posted by Gina Pera: | Reply

Did anyone doubt, after Gibson's foray into religious pornography, that he is mentally unstable, a loose cannon in the limbic-system sense?

All else is just more pathology, IMHO.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
What an awesome comment, cl... (Below threshold)

August 12, 2010 3:19 AM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

What an awesome comment, classification, discriminating judgment diving those who are rule by differing and *perhaps* less rational behavioral patterns, perhaps, @Gina Pera.

It seems to me that most (not all) wannabe analysts are not self aware. Their inner caveman doesn't exist as far as they are concerned, at least not when they enter some intellectual debate. It's all the *other* cavemen who are the problem.

Funny that, to suddenly for the first time realize that psychiatrists (not the Last Psychiatrist as far as I can tell though) are just plain unaware. I hate that this sounds like trolling, I'm not, I really am just kicking myself for only getting this now considering that it suddenly seems so obvious.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
(for the sake of the dumbas... (Below threshold)

August 12, 2010 3:25 AM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

(for the sake of the dumbasses in the room i'll clarify the last comment: exactly *which* intellectual exercises are not religious pornography too...oh so sophisticated. I say this as an complete avowed atheist to answer the other dumbasses in the the room. Look at it this way, if the pure rationalists will admit, as they do, that they too are a cult, then everyone else who doesn't admit it are by definition delusional.)

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
(or to put it another way, ... (Below threshold)

August 12, 2010 3:26 AM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

(or to put it another way, which of us doesn't have a limbic system? please stand up, u shall be our leader)

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
In Psychoanalysis as well a... (Below threshold)

August 12, 2010 10:09 AM | Posted by Anonymous: | Reply

In Psychoanalysis as well as drug testing psychiatrists are unaware! They believe that there is no unified force acting to cause the bizarre behaviors we call mental illness or those like Mel Gibson's.

In fact they don't want to know any different.

Not one in several thousands is aware of Subliminal Distraction. They may not have taken the psychology courses that cover it. These courses treat it as something that happened once a long time ago rather than a feature of human physiology still happening today.

Although SD was discovered to cause temporary mental breaks for office workers no one has evaluated it to determine what other levels of exposure might bring.

Culture Bound Syndromes serve as a model for this. CBS are named by ethnic groups within their understanding of consciousness and reality. The startle-matching behaviors, Jumping Frenchmen of Maine, Latah, and others serve to dispel psychosocial causation beliefs. So strange they cannot be mistaken for anything else they appear across cultural and ethnic borders. They happen where too-small single-room living arrangements are used and where large single rooms are used, bunkhouses, longhouses, etc..

Mel Gibson may have accidentally created the "special Circumstances for this exposure. Simple research shows where these mental breaks still happen and what the outcomes are, fear, paranoia, panic attacks, depression, and thoughts of suicide. Sudden violence with attacks on people and things also appear frequently, Amok, iich'a, Going Postal.
VisionAndPsychosis.Net

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Brainchild's comments were ... (Below threshold)

September 7, 2010 5:31 PM | Posted by rational: | Reply

Brainchild's comments were quite rational, but there are always troll/bullies on these threads who try to push out people who support their ideas rather than just spout opinions without back-up.

Get off the thread if you can't back up your ideas with either experience, facts or logical arguments!

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Moreover, it is not about S... (Below threshold)

March 22, 2013 7:59 AM | Posted, in reply to Linda's comment, by Atarii: | Reply

Moreover, it is not about SEX, necessarily; it is about insecurity. I have felt, and even done, the same thing as Gibson. . . and it can be very scary.

Vote up Vote down Report this comment Score: 0 (0 votes cast)

Post a Comment


Live Comment Preview

July 25, 2014 17:58 PM | Posted by Anonymous: