YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → My Problem With "Narcissistic Abuse"

My Problem With "Narcissistic Abuse" — Transcript

by Heal NPD · 2,021 words · 387 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

0:00Hi, everyone. My name's Dr. Mark
0:01Ettensohn. Welcome to Heal NPD.
0:04A commenter posted a question that I
0:06suspect many others share. They wrote,
0:08"I find his take on narcissistic abuse
0:11very dismissive. Is he one of those
0:13people who solely relies on being
0:15scientific? Is it alexithymia? Is he
0:18trying to suppress his emotions? Is he a
0:21narcissist? Has he never been subjected
0:24to narcissistic abuse? Where are his
0:26emotions?"
0:28I was intrigued by this reaction and
0:30gave it some thought. I think the
0:32commenter's reaction rests on an
0:33important assumption.
0:35It assumes we're looking at the same
0:37thing, that narcissistic abuse is an
0:39established concept with a clear
0:41definition and a clear set of dynamics,
0:44and that I'm simply failing to react to
0:46it with the appropriate emotional
0:48response.
0:50But in my opinion, the issue isn't that
0:52I lack emotions. It's that I don't
0:54believe in the construct itself.
0:57I want to be precise about that because
0:59it's easy to hear I don't believe in the
1:01construct of narcissistic abuse and
1:04assume that I'm invalidating victims,
1:07that I'm saying the abuse people
1:08experienced wasn't real.
1:11That's not what I'm saying. I believe in
1:13abuse. I believe some of it correlates
1:15with pathological narcissism and NPD.
1:18What I don't believe is that this
1:20correlation justifies carving out an
1:22entire category of abuse and naming it
1:25after a personality disorder.
1:27Here's why.
1:29As a psychologist, when I look at
1:31narcissistic abuse through a construct
1:33validity lens, I find a concept without
1:36a core.
1:37It's incoherent because it doesn't refer
1:39to any identifiable psychological
1:42phenomenon.
1:43Ask 10 people what they mean by
1:45narcissistic abuse, and you'll get 10
1:47different responses.
1:49You'll get emotional abuse, verbal
1:51abuse, sometimes physical or even sexual
1:54abuse, coercive control, covert
1:56manipulation, even just arrogance or
1:58dismissiveness in a relationship.
2:01The term has become a sort of catch-all
2:03category. It can describe almost any
2:06experience of mistreatment as long as
2:08the person describing it believes that
2:10the other person was a narcissist.
2:13That's not how psychological constructs
2:15work.
2:16A construct has to be anchored in
2:18something you can clearly define and
2:20operationalize.
2:22The reason psychologists care so much
2:23about construct validity is because
2:26defined concepts quickly become
2:28impossible to evaluate.
2:31If we can't clearly define what belongs
2:33inside a category and what falls outside
2:36of the category, we lose the ability to
2:39determine whether two people are even
2:41talking about the same phenomenon.
2:43We no longer know what evidence would
2:45support the construct, what evidence
2:47would contradict it, and whether it
2:49explains anything that existing concepts
2:51don't already explain.
2:53At that point, a concept can mean almost
2:56anything, and concepts that mean almost
2:58anything usually explain very little.
3:01Physical abuse is anchored in the
3:03concept of physical harm.
3:06Emotional abuse is anchored in the
3:07concept of emotional harm.
3:10But the concept of narcissistic abuse is
3:12different.
3:13It appears to be anchored in a claim
3:15about the person causing the harm rather
3:18than in any distinctive form of harm
3:20itself.
3:21The adjective narcissistic doesn't tell
3:24us what happened.
3:25It tells us what we believe about the
3:27psychology of the person who made it
3:29happen.
3:30In other words, the category is not
3:32defined by the abuse, but by an
3:35inference about the abuser. It says, in
3:38effect, I was mistreated, and I believe
3:41the person who mistreated me was a
3:42narcissist. Now, I should acknowledge
3:45something here because some long-time
3:47viewers may be thinking, "Hold on a
3:48minute. Haven't you used this term
3:50yourself?"
3:52The answer is yes.
3:53In previous videos, I experimented with
3:56a much narrower use of the term
3:58narcissistic abuse.
4:00I suggested that repeatedly using
4:02another person as a self-object might
4:05produce a characteristic form of injury.
4:07What psychoanalytic theory would call
4:10narcissistic injury.
4:12And I wondered whether that process
4:13might reasonably be described as a form
4:16of narcissistic abuse.
4:18In other words, I wasn't defining the
4:20abuse by the diagnosis of the
4:22perpetrator. I was defining it by the
4:24kind of injury I thought it could
4:26produce.
4:27I've since become much less comfortable
4:29with that terminology.
4:31First, I think the phrase narcissistic
4:33abuse has accumulated so much cultural
4:36baggage that it obscures more than it
4:38clarifies.
4:40Second, I don't think the people using
4:42the term online would accept the
4:44implications of the definition I was
4:46proposing.
4:47If narcissistic abuse is defined by the
4:50narcissistic injury it produces, then
4:52the people claiming to have experienced
4:54it would also have to accept that they
4:57themselves now struggle with
4:59narcissistic injury.
5:01In psychoanalytic terms, that would mean
5:03acknowledging disturbances in
5:05self-esteem regulation, greater reliance
5:07on narcissistic defenses, and patterns
5:10of relating that exist on the same
5:12continuum as pathological narcissism.
5:15Differing in degree rather than in kind.
5:19I think that is technically correct, and
5:21it remains how I conceptualize
5:23narcissistic wounding in general.
5:25The difference in my view is primarily
5:28developmental.
5:29Narcissistic injury is far more
5:31consequential when it occurs repeatedly
5:34during childhood while the self is still
5:36being organized, than when similar
5:38injuries occur in adulthood in someone
5:40without significant pre-existing
5:43vulnerabilities.
5:45But I don't think most people who
5:47identify as victims of narcissistic
5:49abuse are prepared to adopt that
5:51framework because it undermines the
5:54sharp distinction between {quote}
5:56narcissists and everyone else on which
5:59the online discourse largely depends.
6:02If narcissistic injury exists on a
6:04continuum, then so does narcissistic
6:06functioning.
6:08The boundary between victim and
6:09narcissist becomes one of degree rather
6:12than kind, and I don't think the online
6:14discourse is prepared to tolerate that
6:16conclusion.
6:18As one commenter stated, there are
6:20narcissists and there are empaths.
6:22Everything else is just noise.
6:25Now, I don't agree with that statement,
6:27but I do think it captures the problem
6:29perfectly.
6:30The fact of the matter is that when
6:32people hear narcissistic abuse, they
6:34don't hear abuse that produces
6:36narcissistic injury. They hear abuse
6:39committed by a narcissist.
6:41Those are different constructs entirely,
6:43and I no longer think the term is
6:45salvageable in any respect.
6:48That realization leads directly to a
6:50broader concern.
6:51Once the term is understood in this more
6:54common way,
6:55the conceptual shift it introduces
6:57becomes much more clear.
6:59We began with an observation. Someone
7:01was mistreated. We then introduce an
7:04inference. That person believes they
7:06were mistreated by a narcissist.
7:08Finally, we fuse those two claims
7:11together. Now, the person's belief about
7:13the abuser has become part of the
7:15definition of the abuse itself.
7:18And if that's all it takes, the logic
7:20generalizes in a way that should give us
7:23all pause.
7:24Accuse anyone of being a narcissist, and
7:27suddenly their behavior becomes
7:29narcissistic abuse.
7:31Importantly, I'm not saying that people
7:33with NPD never engage in interpersonally
7:36abusive or exploitative behavior because
7:39they do. I've seen it.
7:41They can be emotionally abusive,
7:43coercive, exploitative, physically
7:45violent, sexually abusive, financially
7:48controlling, or profoundly neglectful.
7:51But their membership in a diagnostic
7:53category is not by itself a reason to
7:56create a new conceptual category of
7:59abuse.
8:00The same principle applies across all
8:02mental disorders.
8:04A person with bipolar disorder may
8:06become physically violent or sexually
8:08reckless during a manic episode.
8:11A person with severe use disorder may
8:13terrorize their family for years. A
8:16person with obsessive-compulsive
8:17disorder may become so controlling that
8:19life in their household revolves around
8:22their rituals. A person with severe
8:24depression may chronically neglect a
8:26spouse or child. In each case, the
8:29diagnosis may help us understand why the
8:32abusive behavior occurred, but it does
8:34not create a new kind of abuse. We don't
8:38speak of bipolar abuse, or alcoholism
8:41abuse, or OCD abuse, or depression
8:44abuse, because the abusive behaviors are
8:47already described by existing
8:49psychological and legal concepts.
8:52The diagnosis may be relevant to
8:53understanding the perpetrator, but it
8:55does not redefine the abuse itself.
8:59Unless used in the very specific
9:01psychoanalytic sense I described
9:03earlier. What does narcissistic abuse
9:06add that isn't better captured by the
9:08concepts we already possess?
9:11Nothing.
9:12It tells us nothing new about what
9:13happened because those behaviors already
9:16have names. And it tells us nothing
9:18about why they happened because
9:20attaching the label narcissist is not
9:22causal mechanism.
9:24Disorders don't produce behaviors in a
9:27directly causal way. They influence
9:30probabilities that certain behaviors may
9:32emerge in specific contexts. There's a
9:35further cost. Narcissistic doesn't
9:38merely label a person's experiences. It
9:41actively reorganizes them.
9:43Past events are translated into evidence
9:46of narcissism.
9:48Giving the other person flowers becomes
9:50love bombing. An apology becomes
9:52hoovering. A denial becomes gaslighting.
9:55Emotional collapse becomes playing the
9:58victim.
9:59It becomes increasingly difficult to
10:01distinguish actual events from inferred
10:04intentions.
10:06The label reorganizes memory around a
10:08set of assumptions about the other
10:10person's psychology.
10:12The more experiences are reinterpreted
10:14through that lens, the more obvious the
10:16narcissism appears to become, and the
10:19more the original assumption seems
10:21confirmed.
10:22Does this mean that everyone who
10:23believes they were abused by someone
10:25with NPD is mistaken? Of course not. As
10:28I said, people with NPD can be abusive.
10:32And some people undoubtedly understand
10:34their experiences quite accurately.
10:37That's not the issue.
10:38The problem is that the narcissistic
10:40abuse framework reaches those
10:42conclusions through circular reasoning.
10:45Even a broken clock is right twice a
10:47day.
10:49A model can occasionally arrive at the
10:51correct conclusion and still be
10:53conceptually unsound if it can't tell us
10:56when its conclusions are justified and
10:58when they're not. So, when I hear a
11:00story of narcissistic abuse and I don't
11:03visibly react the way that people would
11:05expect, what's actually happening is
11:07that I'm declining to accept the
11:09smuggled-in framework.
11:11That has nothing to do with whether I'm
11:12affected by someone's suffering.
11:15I listen to excruciating stories of
11:17suffering every day. I'm a therapist.
11:20But, I don't react with outrage when I
11:22hear stories of narcissistic abuse
11:24online because I usually don't have
11:26enough information to know what actually
11:28happened. It's not that I don't care.
11:31It's that I need more information. If
11:33someone told me that they had demonic
11:36pneumonia, I wouldn't necessarily doubt
11:39that they had pneumonia.
11:40What I would question is the demonic
11:43explanation.
11:44Likewise, when someone tells me they
11:46suffered narcissistic abuse, I don't
11:48automatically doubt that they were
11:50mistreated. I question whether
11:52narcissism is the correct explanation
11:55for what happened.
11:56As a psychologist, I'm not going to
11:58treat an armchair diagnosis of someone
12:00I've never met as though it were an
12:02established fact.
12:04The irony is that many people hear this
12:06position and conclude that I'm
12:08minimizing abuse.
12:10I see it almost exactly the opposite.
12:13I think the online concept of
12:15narcissistic abuse minimizes abuse.
12:18Because it replaces careful
12:20psychological description with a
12:21catch-all narrative that feels
12:23validating, but explains almost nothing
12:26about what happened.
12:27Abuse deserves to be described as
12:30accurately as possible. Coercive control
12:33is coercive control.
12:35Emotional abuse is emotional abuse.
12:38Manipulation is manipulation. Domestic
12:41violence is domestic violence. Those are
12:44real phenomena with established
12:45definitions, identifiable mechanisms,
12:48and decades of research behind them.
12:51Lumping them all together and calling
12:53them narcissistic abuse
12:55collapses distinctions that actually
12:57matter.
12:59So, my reactions may strike some people
13:01as devoid of emotion or strangely
13:04compassionless.
13:05But, what's actually happening is that
13:07I'm trying to separate observations from
13:09interpretations and descriptions from
13:12explanations.
13:13That's how I conduct myself online, in
13:16interviews, and when responding to
13:17comments. It's not how I conduct myself
13:20in psychotherapy, because therapy has
13:22very different goals. But, it is how I
13:24think psychologists should evaluate
13:27psychological concepts.
13:29If we're going to name a new
13:31psychological construct, we should be
13:33able to say exactly what it is, how it
13:35differs from existing constructs, and
13:38what explanatory work it performs that
13:40nothing else already does better.
13:43Further, it should accomplish those ends
13:45without stigmatizing vulnerable
13:47populations and without moralizing
13:50clinical phenomena.
13:52On balance, the term narcissistic abuse
13:54confuses more than it clarifies while
13:57creating harm of its own to people who
13:59experienced legitimate abuse, to people
14:01who struggle with NPD and pathological
14:04narcissism, and to the field of
14:06psychology and our cultural discourse
14:08about these issues as a whole.
14:11Okay, so that's it for today. Until next
14:14time, take good care.
14:20>> [music]

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of My Problem With "Narcissistic Abuse" by Heal NPD, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 2,021 words across 387 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to translate the transcript into 100+ languages.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, translation to 100+ languages, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.