 Okay so this talk that I'm going to do for you, I'm going to lay out a problem and I'm going to lay out a solution. This is bordering on being a little bit of a social taboo. I'm not really quite sure how this situation has built up to the point where you can't actually, and I'm talking about within the field of psychology, within the field of mental health, oes i ddweud y sgosion y bydd yma rydym yn ymweld y byddai'n ddiweddol. Yn y rhan o'r actiau a'r ysgrifith, hefyd, fel y rhan o'r ideae'r ideae yw'r hyn o'r gweithio yng Ngheiriad. Ond ychydig mor hynny yn ymdwyllgor, a'r ysgrifithoedd ymdweud yn ymdwyllgor, is that most narcissists are male and that therefore it makes sense that narcissistic abuse is largely something that men do to women. Men are the aggressors, women are the victim, aggressor, innocent victim. So narcissists are typically described as being male and therefore narcissistic abuse is something that men do to women. And then when you look online on the forums, on the, you know, in the cyber sphere of psychology, whether this is Facebook or Instagram or wherever you look, you will see it's mainly when narcissism is raised, it will mainly be female participants talking about men. Now I've been in this field since 2012 and the vast majority of my client base has been female. Most of the people who come to my seminars, it's women. Probably to 80 to 90%. Occasionally, and I really don't know why this is why this is the case because the research doesn't back this as an aside, just so you know, there's very, very few. There are some, but very, very few gay people showing up and talking about this relative to the number of women who are talking about experiencing this in heterosexual relationships with men. So I don't know. I mean, I've had gay clients and I've spoken to people online who've been in gay relationships. It's usually men. I get very, very few women, very, very few women coming to me and saying, oh, I've got problems with my girlfriend and it looks like this. Some men have come through but very, very few. My point about this is that the filter through which this particular psychological order is perceived currently is highly gendered and it's skewed in an odd way. Now, in the literature, very infrequently, will women be labelled as NPD? Usually, they will get a different diagnosis, though this is changing and diagnosing NPDs is a whole of the tricky thing anyway because why isn't NPD going to show up to therapy to be diagnosed if they are offered a questionnaire? Why would they answer it honestly? They're very easy to trick, by the way, the questionnaires for psychopathy and narcissism. They're available freely online, many of them, and you can trick them if you just do the questionnaire and imagine that you want to be seen as a psychopath. You will be. If you want to not be seen as a psychopath, then you won't be and similarly for narcissism. Usually women get a diagnosis of BPD, histrionic, or less frequently, antisocial personality disorder, which from now on I'm going to refer to as psychopathy to avoid confusion and people hear antisocial and they think, oh, that's somebody who's self-isolating. But actually it means somebody who anytime they're in contact with another human being, the contact is exploitative, it's poisonous, it's toxic in some way and that's why it's called antisocial. So I'll just say psychopath, we all understand what a psychopath is. Histrionic would usually be sort of determined as an extremely infantile vein reaction seeking and hypersexualised modality of functioning. BPD would typically be emotionally labile, self-destructive, fragile, also very reaction seeking, sometimes hypersexualised infantile vein as well. What else is typically borderline? There's a lot of push-pull in the relational style, push-pull relational style. Emotionally labile, self-destructive, fragile, push-pull, push-pull meaning I want you whilst you don't want me when you want me, I don't want you. I'm going to enter your space and accelerate the intimacy of our relationship if you accelerate and increase the intimacy of the relationship I feel smothered and pulled away. Why are you so indifferent to me when I'm coming towards you? Why are you pulling towards me? Oh, you're smothering me, that's push-pull. So you never really know where you are. The classic view on the internet, and I think it's partly based on the psychological world as well, unfortunately it shouldn't be this way, is a very cosmopolitan magazine, Oprah Winfrey Chat Show view of narcissistic psychopathic men. So the classic view of narcissistic psychopathic men is, in my opinion, a very dangerous, because it gives people the wrong impression of what it looks like, and very simplistic trope. It's a culture-bound trope, and it is American Psycho. I was going to say it by Chuck Palin Hewick, by Brett Eastern Ellis, American Psycho. So you're Patrick Bateman as portrayed by Christian Bale, successful, wealthy, powerful, and predatory. So I'm not going to write all that down because there's too many words. Successful, wealthy, powerful, predatory, alpha male, a guy who is an alpha in his own environment. So why is this problematic? And why is this this, just this, which is the tip of the iceberg, by the way, on this issue? Why is this problematic? This is problematic for two reasons. These tropes, these ideas are kind of archetypal. So what we can see here are culture-bound archetypes. It's never comfortable when a non-American talks about American culture, especially when he's talking predominantly to Americans. But in my humble opinion, these tropes, not this trope, this trope is an American trope, this archetype of the narcissistic psychopath. You know, I like the fact that American Psycho was played by Christian Bale because then we also get the overtones of his character in Batman, the Christopher Nolan version of Batman, that Bruce Wayne. Right the way, you know, the guy riding around in a tuxedo in the red sports car. It's a trope. It's this silly idea of what the ultimate wealthy alpha male looks like. Let's deal with the problems of this trope first. So emotionally labile, infantile, self-destructive, vain, reaction-seeking, hypersexualized, using a lot of push-pull in their relational style and fragility. So there is the proper material on borderline personality disorder, and then there's Richie's hypothesis, my hypothesis of how borderline personality disorder plays out. As I'm talking, if I remember, I'll distinguish between the two because I know some of you have studied psychology, so I'll try not to blur my own personal hypotheses with what's in the literature. The push-pull relational style, that's something that I focus on. That's when I see this, I start thinking borderline. The reason why this I think happens is because of emotional ability, and I think that actually what you have with many borderlines is a counter-dependent personality type, meaning that love is something that even though they crave it, they're terrified of it at the same time. We'll come back to that. This, as an archetype, as a trope, there are many women out there who believe that this is how to behave, that this is actually just what femininity is. There's been a bunch of memes, if you look, if you want to know where people are up to in terms of what they generally think at a culture-wide level, it's good to look at memes. It's good to follow memes on Facebook and on Instagram. There's been a bunch of memes that have come out in the last four or five years that are frequently attributed to Marilyn Monroe. A lot of them are misquotes. They're quotes that she never said that didn't come from her, that other people have ascribed to her, but you'll notice that it is this idea of talking around protecting the notion of womanhood with being infantile, vain, reaction-seeking and sometimes self-destructive and drawing a complex equivalence, drawing an equality and equality, not inequality, an equality between femininity and self-destructiveness. That's a problem with drawing an equivalence between being infantile, cute, childlike, pouting, manipulative and femininity. That's a problem because I think that this has become internalised and that femininity has become equalised with a very toxic notion of what femininity is. All of these things where you see this coming together, right, when I get a client who comes to me and they say, I don't know whether I have PTSD, complex PTSD or whether I actually have borderline. Many people who are diagnosed with borderline and histrionic personality disorder are misdiagnosed because the cluster of traits between complex post-traumatic stress disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder overlaps very, very heavily and so they get misdiagnosed. What I tell them to look out for when it's a personality disorder to me and all of these, by the way, incidentally I use the American definitions which is the diagnostic and statistical manual which I find to be the most useful. So the abusive exploitative personality types in the DSM and the American DSM are called cluster B and I use this instead of the World Health Organization or the other options because I find it the best and most useful definition. This is not in the DSM. This is my humble opinion. When you're trying to figure out whether somebody actually has a personality disorder or whether it's just a traumatised infantile response to something that occurred to them in childhood because these are the kinds of things that happen when people are sexually abused, all of them. If the sexual abuse in childhood, you're damn sure they're going to be hypersexualised for life. It's highly likely that they'll be addicted to the act of sex, the physical sensations of sex, but more that their ego is intrinsically linked to them having value as a sexually desirable object. It's a break in the self-perception in the area of sexuality and if I'm not a sexually desirable object, I'm not anything at all. It's not that I'm not lovable. It's that I cease to exist. I drop out of existence if I'm not a sexual object. If somebody actually embraces that and they've had a traumatic break with reality, you can see why clinging desperately to being a sexually desirable object becomes such a thing and can become such a hysterical attachment because without that it's death. If I'm not sexually desirable, I don't exist and in the unconscious, non-existence is equated with death. What I look for is entitlement and exploitation. I would say that if somebody demonstrates all of these but doesn't have the entitlement and isn't erotically compelled to exploit, then this would be post-traumatic stress or complex post-traumatic stress and it's fixable, it's healable. This is somebody who is emotionally immature because trauma freezes and they will have experienced trauma at a certain age and it's frozen their development, it's frozen their maturity, they're emotionally immature, they're emotionally completely illiterate, they don't want to deal with any of their own feelings so they're trapped in a cycle of projecting outward because they can't deal with their own feelings so they become emotionally illiterate. Illiterate, oh my God. What happens when the person who's trying to spell illiterate can't spell illiterate? Illiterate. They become emotionally illiterate. What they're going to do is they're going to keep projecting outwards. Illiterate, there we go, we've got there in the end, which leads to projection. Projection is, most people know this but I'm going to say it just in case, projection is I do not want to accept a part of myself or a feeling in myself because I find it unacceptable to my self image but it is there. So in order to deal with it, I'm going to project it outward and frequently it will be projected onto my intimate partner. Now, if there is entitlement and exploitation and all of this and all of this, I think you're talking about a full blown personality disorder that is in the cluster B. The chances of that being responsive to therapeutic intervention or negotiation or any kind of adult to adult communication is nil. I personally don't think that that can happen if we've gone there. So I don't think that what we're dealing with actually is a huge tidal wave of people becoming narcissistic personality disorder, borderline personality disorder, et cetera. I don't think that's what's happening but I do think it's nearly as bad as that because if your cultural coordinates are, all of this is my right, all of this is what makes me attractive and sexy and interesting, then the strategies that I use in life and in relationships will be based on this. So that's why that trope is dangerous. Why is this trope dangerous? The trope of Patrick Bateman, capitalist's wet dream is, what did I say, successful, success, wealth, power and his predatory. Okay, Patrick Bateman or Christopher Nolan's Bruce Wayne. Christopher Nolan chose to make Bruce Wayne a kind of a laughable character, a dope, a billionaire playboy dope in his external perception of him. Why is this a dangerous trope? Who does it else does this sound like? Or what was the most popular piece of pornography that was consumed by most women in the Western world in the last five years? 50 Shades of Grey. Who does this sound like? Christian Grey. Why is this a problem? Because you've got women probably, probably, likely over-diagnosing through the cyberspace, through the cybersphere, men in their lives as actually having a full-blown pathological personality disorder that is narcissistic and psychopathic that says that men are like Patrick Bateman. They're successful, they're wealthy, they're powerful, they're predatory, they're alpha males who drive around in red sports cars and bang everything that they can get their hands on. So they would also be hypersexual and highly promiscuous, promiscuous and unfeeling because they are psychopaths, right? But also, I want this. So this is bad and desirable, all at the same time. This alpha male is the ultimate goal and he is my worst enemy all in one. Now, why is that then an issue? Because if I am highly emotionally labile, extremely entitled and have a push-pull relational style, the chances are high because of my emotional mobility, my perceptions will be skewed. This is not, I don't think this is talked about all that much in the literature but I doubt there will be many psychologists who disagree with me that if somebody is very emotionally dysregulated, they have very poor internal boundaries, very low impulse control and their emotions are going up and down all the time, that their perceptions are going to become warped over time. And then they'll start projecting parts of themselves that they don't want outward, parts of themselves that are bad and desirable because good goals don't want Patrick Bateman or Christian Gray. That's only bad goals would want that. That's bad. I'm not allowed to want that. I'm not allowed to want what it is that I truly want. There's something wrong with this. So what happens is projection and I think what we've got is an epidemic of women diagnosing men as being the thing that they really, really should not want because of desire. So I don't want to get too psychobabbly on you, but what this would mean is if you have somebody with a very, very fragile sense of self who possibly has been sexually abused, now sexual abuse to be clear in childhood, it might be actual physical sexual abuse of varying degrees and varying levels that we don't need to get into here, but it can also be a boundary breaking, unwarranted level of sexually flavoured attention from the wrong source. That also is abuse. If a mother or a father is looking at a little girl or a little boy looking at, talking to, talking about them in a way that is inappropriate, that is boundary breaking and it causes huge problems in the personality when they grow up. It's really tricky because that person can't actually then say, well, I was sexually abused. They can only say it was kind of icky for me growing up. Mum would look at me funny when I was not wearing clothes and they can't quite figure out what it is that's gone wrong, but we're told, well, unless you are actually physically assaulted, it's not an assault. It creates problems. I suspect a very, very large number of people are walking round with this as an issue because of boundary broken, hypersexualised attention in childhood that was completely inappropriate. When the entitlement and the exploitation creeps in, the emotional ability creeps in, what can start to happen is if you look at a guy, imagine that you're a girl who has this going on inside and you look at a guy and you like him and you start to feel desire for him, but you're projecting as well. You start to project bad attributes onto him, bad and desirable because it's the same. It's the same. This idea, people say it's outdated. The ultimate man is a bad boy. The most desirable man is always going to be a bad boy. It's not outdated. It'll never be outdated. It's biological because bad in this context is only bad in a... I didn't write it down. Some psychologists are calling this a culture-bound syndrome. When I say some, there are many, many very well-respected psychologists who are saying, we need to stop calling narcissism a personality disorder. It isn't. We need to stop calling broadline, histrionic, psychopathy a personality disorder. They're saying they're not personality disorders. They're responses to trauma. It's a coping mechanism to deal with a hostile environment from childhood, not a personality disorder. There's also many people who are saying it's entirely culture-bound. These terms, that would mean the disorder only has meaning in the culture in which it's found. It has meaning in the United Kingdom. Somebody has a narcissistic personality disorder that has meaning. But in other countries and other environments, it might not have the same meaning. It might not have the same implications. That might just be the way you are, the way you're supposed to be. Bad in this context, what would bad be? Bad may only be bad in a certain cultural environment once certain cultural coordinates have changed. So what I suspect, the reason why bad and desirable and the idea of the bad boys come in is because bad implies taboo. So what's a taboo? What is it you're not allowed to do that's so bad that guys like this or girls who think that guys are like this, well maybe they're not? What is it that they're doing that is so bad, that is so attractive? That's probably a debate for a whole of the day and it's probably already been covered elsewhere in your members' area here by other people. What is it that would appeal to the hypergamic, Rolo's, not psychology's hypergamy, Rolo's hypergamy. Normal psychology or sociological, not a psychological term. In sociology, hypergamy, I'm sure that you know this, is just marrying up. What you've got there in the red pill with Rolo's hypergamy, that is a whole hypothesis that would easily be a PhD standard for a thesis because there's a lot to it. So in terms of Rolo's hypothesis of hypergamy, RHH from now on, Rolo's hypothesis of hypergamy, what is considered attractive? Well because he's using a lot of evolutionary psychology and a lot of ideas around strength and varying degrees of strength as it has been said, there needs to be a mix of alpha to beta depending on where the person who's experiencing the attraction is up to. It's probably going to be based on things that we would biologically associate with strength. So psychopathy and indifference and a lack of emotionality might be associated to somebody with a lot of options or somebody who is indifferent because they are powerful. My point here is to say this, two things really. One, trope number one, this is how many women think they should be in the world and I don't see, I see men encouraging this, I do see a lot of men encouraging this but more often than not, based on my experience with clients, this is encouraged by women. This is encouraged by traumatised mothers who put this on their daughters. They entrain this onto their daughters. When I started with my project back in 2012, my client base was only the daughters of narcissistic mothers. These are a group of women who if I said this to, they would say yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, that is my mum. That is 1000% my mum and when she tried to put this on me, I said no. And then they become, just for your interest, the daughter of a narcissistic mother, the daughter of a narcissistic mother. There are a whole website, there's a website out there called the daughters of narcissistic mothers. It's a pretty useful website if you're interested in narcissistic personality disorder. They will say that if they rejected this doctrine, this ideology, they would then be targeted. They would become the black sheep of the family and the mother would experience that as narcissistic injury. Or you reject my philosophy, you reject my ideology, my way of garnering power in the world that I'm trying to share with you. Fuck you, narcissistic rage and narcissistic punishment comes next. The daughter of a narcissistic mother will become a black sheep. There's a whole of the series of problems that comes with that. She will then, that daughter of a narcissistic mother will usually try and invert all of this. She'll try and do the opposite of this, but she probably will have already been hypersexualised because her mother will have treated her like a little adult who's to garner sexual attention from men in order to have value in the world. So she will have experienced that trauma and she will already be emotionally labile. And once somebody has that emotional dysregulation, the trauma of that, they're then into skewed perception and complex post-traumatic stress disorder. The second issue is this trope of the alpha male, the bad and desirable male, who's both Patrick Bateman, oh terrible, his psychopath, that's awful. And yet all of these things kind of very comfortably overlap with the ultimate fantasy man if we assume that 50 Shades of Grey worked because this idea of a man was what the fantasy was. Successful, wealthy, powerful and predatory, an alpha male. Somebody who takes control. And the fantasy in that story is that he ties the girl up and fox her brains out. So he physically literally takes control of her. That's the bad, quote unquote bad because of cultural taboos and yet desirable root of the idea. But my point is that many men are being rubber stamped with this because of desire. I've experienced that. I've experienced being told that I am and treated as though I'm a psychopathic, powerful predatory alpha male. And I was like, honestly, I think I could do with being a bit more like that love. I'm not like that. I'm not secure enough to be like that. I'm not assertive enough to be like that. I wish I was a bit more like the guy you're treating me as, but I'm not. But it was only a year after the relationship I realized that the desire and the fight with that desire was causing that. Here we get something where it then crosses over into issues that can become legal issues that can become life destroying issues. There is an effect and I'm I only found out about this two years ago. It's very new to me. It's called projective identification now. And this is this is where we got to be careful, especially with the current movements that are going on. I wish I could spell that says identification. Identify K Tion. Identification projective identification. You all know everybody knows what projection is. If your mate says to you stop projecting, you know what he means. Projective identification when the you can see this is kind of like if you don't want to take it on as a personality disorder, you can see it as a damaged personality or somebody whose ego boundaries have been cracked. There are gaps in their ego boundaries. The relationship between reality and fantasy is weak. There are boundaries between external and internal week. And the internal boundaries between what they feel and what they think break down. That means if I feel it, I think it, it is true. I feel you're attacking me. You are attacking me. With no linguistic cognitive process that goes, I feel you're attacking me. I feel you're attacking me. I wonder if that's true. Has he ever attacked me before? What's the evidence he isn't? What's the evidence he is? It's straight from you're attacking me to you. I feel you are. So you are. Projective identification takes that one step further. If I need you to be this bad person, the Christian Grey. As far as I know, I've never, I tried to read it. I thought it was awful. I'm quite happy to read that kind of fiction, but that was bad. I don't think it does anything illegal or criminal. So he's not quite a psychopath by the classic definitions. But the Patrick Bateman character does or at least fantasises about it and the story is violent. It kills people or at least he fantasises about it and the story. So there is this criminal element to this. If I am coming from this place, if I'm a woman who's coming from this place and I desire you and I need you to be that and you're not being that, I will respond with narcissistic injury and narcissistic rage. I will bully you, I will provoke you, I will gaslight you and I will manipulate you until you start being the bad man I need you to be. This is a problem because what you're seeing sometimes and there seems to be confusion there around this issue is people who have been slowly boiled over time to the point where they're acting completely out of character. There's a new term in the cyberspace for narcissism now. It's called reactive abuse. Reactive abuse largely is defined as me winding you up until you go berserk, preferably publicly, so I can say, ha, look, you're crazy. I told you you're crazy. I told my family you're crazy. I told all your friends you're crazy. And now you're being crazy. Look at you proving my point. But it's me that boiled you slowly to that point that gaslit you so heavily that you have an explosive reaction. It's reactive abuse. I force you to react badly. This is projective identification. Do you see how awful you're being? So a narcissistically abusive man doing that to a woman wants to say you're crazy, you're paranoid, you're out of control of your emotions. So pushes and pushes and pushes until there's an explosion and he will catch it on camera or he'll make sure she does it in front of her friends so he can go, told you she was crazy. Same thing that a man will do to a woman. Push and push and push until he explodes and catches it on camera. I'm not saying that that's what happened with Johnny Depp when he married that young girl. But his wife and his previous wife, all of his friends and all of his family and his kids said never before has he acted that way. He's never acted with explosive rage. He's never acted in a predatory or nasty way. And maybe you shouldn't comment because I don't know the full facts. But based on what I saw and the fact that she just happened to be videoing him. She just happened to catch him right as he was exploding and I think he threw a glass on a wall and cut his own hand and was screaming and swearing. Might be what we're talking about here in terms of projective identification. Now, why would somebody do that? Why would somebody do that to a guy who's in a position of power and has a good reputation just to destroy his reputation? Here we go back into the borderline. By the way, to me, this is narcissism. It's all narcissism. They don't want to say narcissism. They want to define narcissism as being a male problem and borderline as a female problem. I think I've seen just as many men who fall into broadly into the borderline category. There's a ton of men now. It's not as common, but there's a ton of men because of the way we're going culturally who act like histrionics. It was just as histrionic as women. Vane, reaction seeking, hypersexualized, acting in this highly, highly feminized way. But this is all narcissism. The only thing that I think is not narcissism is the antisocial personality disorder part because there's no false self. Everything else is the protection of a false self, a fake idea of who I want to project to the world. The psychopath doesn't give a shit. Narciss, borderlines and histrionic are vain and protective of their image. The psychopath couldn't care less. It's almost like a defining quality of the psychopath. They'll say they have low resilience. They'll say they have impulse control. They'll say they have a greater tendency to violence. But the reason for all of those things is because they don't care about a self image. So psychopathy probably isn't narcissism. The rest all are. So if you have this borderline trait, this now is Richie's theory of borderline personality disorder, not the literature. I think there is a hyper competitive instinct there that is unique to the borderline personality disorder definition of what a BPD is that is compelled to drag people down. Now, I have had female clients who've told me that they experienced this. They've told me and I think they probably would have acted in for borderline personality disorder. That privately, if they feel like somebody is above them or too good, then what they'll do is they'll work a situation, a premeditated situation to try and prove through projective identification that they're not as good as they are perceiving them to be. They are therefore borderlines do this. There's predominantly a borderline thing. The borderline will punish you for their perception of what you've done and for what you are. Being with a borderline is a very, very tricky, very, very damaging situation because you won't be able to keep up with what you're being punished for. They'll punish you for stuff that's only happened inside of their head. They'll also punish you for the vulnerability you've made them feel. I've written a lot here. Let's put it here. So if I am a borderline and I share something with you and I share, maybe I overshare because I have an impulse to generate intimacy too quickly. It's a very strong impulse amongst borderlines to try and accelerate intimacy. The next thing I'm going to experience once you're not there the next day, two hours later, is shame. You know what I'm going to conclude? I am not going to take responsibility for the fact that I feel ashamed for oversharing with you. I'm going to project that outwards and I'm going to say, you, you made me feel shame. So now what happens? Now you will be punished because I accelerated intimacy with you and you are the cause of this negative emotion here. This is an issue. The hypercompetitiveness is an issue because if, and I think in the case of the individual case of your founder of your organization 21 Studios, I think what happened there in that relationship was he was targeted because the lady in question perceived him as being higher status than her. And the whole effort of you guys all know the backstory of that was a compulsion to lay him low, to drag him down. And worse, I'm not convinced she was even conscious of it because the question would be why choose him? Of anybody you would choose, why would you choose that person? And I think it's because of this hypercompetitive instinct. Bring other people down. You see somebody higher status, it's offensive, it creates shame. You must be punished for the shame that I feel. Those of you who are psychologically literate, and I'm not being pompous, I mean, if you're a nerd who studies psychology, like if you read the research and you're big in psychology and we start talking about people being punished for shame, then you'll see that there is another flavor there. I need more room. So what do we call, what's the personality disorder that violently and inappropriately punishes other people for making them feel shame? It's the psychopath. It's the psychopath. My pet theory, my personal hypothesis for the spate of school shootings that you're saying the issue you've got now in America is actually a shame. The people who are doing the shootings, and I don't think I'm on my own in that. I think a few people have said that as well. The predominant emotion that drives the shootings is shame. People with poor boundaries, exploitative, entitled personality issues, possibly personality disorders. They can't own their own feelings. They don't know how to process negative emotions. They feel shame and they respond. The only thing that can wipe out this shame that I'm feeling is massive violence. Doubtlessly, in terms of gender, it's going to be men that commit massive physical violence. I think what is happening with the female psychopath is emotional violence, which would manifest as a murderous intent to destroy the previous host. So, if I have been attached to a host and they have caused me to experience shame by discovering that I'm lying about my identity, by discovering that I'm stealing money in the case of Anthony's case, by discovering that his wife was operating under a false identity as a prostitute whilst he was married to her, and then he presents her with that evidence. The end result will be shame and the emotional violence that that will cause will be murderous. And I don't think that I'm being excessively dramatic when I use that adjective. I think that the end result is the same as in mass shootings. It's to wipe out, to crush, to not to crush. It's not even, it's slightly about punishment in the sense of a narcissistic injury and narcissistic rage. I want to see you suffer, I want to punish you, but it's about, it's more to do, it's worse than that. Punishment means if I've punished you enough, then I can be satiated. Shame can't be satiated. It must be wiped out. It's the final solution. It needs to be a very, very extreme response. And I believe it is murderous. I believe that because the capacity to pick up a rock and stove your head in isn't there, or pick up a gun and shoot you isn't there, the emotional violence that will be inflicted has a murderous intent to it. And there are many men who I've coached now and I'm sure those of you who've spoken on the forums who've said the same thing, many men who've told me that it feels like she wouldn't be happy unless she gets what she wants, and ultimately it's my death. She's looking for my death, my destruction. I think there's truth to that. I suspect it's a symbolic death. It's about eradicating shame, not killing a human being, but the end result is the same. If she can cause a suicide, or you're drinking to death, or you're doing something stupid and getting yourself locked up for the rest of your life, that would eradicate the shame. I can breathe again. I can live. So the rage that this produces is huge. It's a very, very powerful instinct. Okay, so that's the problem. I'm going to very, very briefly go through with the solution. The effect on somebody, of this kind of abuse, of being with somebody who's psychopathic, who is borderline, who is histrionic and highly narcissistic, who has projectively identified you as some sort of archetype of the bad alpha male, even when you might not be very alpha male at all, but that's the project of identification at work. The effect on you as the target of this kind of abuse is really, really deleterious in terms of its effect on your personality. There is something called narcissistic abuse victim syndrome, and it's a cluster of symptoms that almost exactly matches PTSD. So, you know, as I said before, a damaged sense of self, sense of self, emotional dysregulation, inclusive of uncomfortable flashbacks. These flashbacks may be actual memories of events that you'll get when you're driving, when you wake up at two o'clock in the morning, when you're going about your daily business, you suddenly vividly remember things happening and it produces a shitstorm of uncomfortable emotion. All the flashbacks may be purely emotional, sudden feelings of overwhelming guilt, overwhelming shame, overwhelming sadness, overwhelming rage. So there are flashbacks there, damaged sense of self, emotional dysregulation, a greater propensity to use God, what is it called? Well, basically it manifests as addictions. The use of coping strategies goes up. People self-medicate, they use alcohol, they use over-the-counter drugs, they use street drugs, whatever it is. Addiction to gambling, to porn, to all kinds of things, just to not feel that pain. The side effect of all of this is going to end up with your serotonin levels going down. If the serotonin levels go down, serotonin drops. Listen, nobody has depression because their serotonin is low. That is a ridiculous, non-scientific logical fallacy. It's called comhoc ergo propto hoc, which means with this therefore, because of this. So what psychiatry has said is because serotonin is low in people with depression, they're depressed because their serotonin is ridiculous. It's childish and wrong. What happens is when all of this, when you've experienced massive trauma and you don't know how to process the overwhelming emotions and grief of that trauma, and this starts to kick off, your serotonin naturally will drop. The problem with your serotonin dropping. Now, everything I've said is mainstream, peer-reviewed research backs everything I said up. This is me taking something Jordan Peterson said. I'm running with the ball a little bit further than he did. And I'm going to do the comhoc ergo propto hoc thing again, but in a different context, with this therefore, because of this. So if the serotonin drops, what Jordan Peterson pointed out with his story of the lobstas, or he's talking about the research amongst lobstas when they climb up the social hierarchy, their serotonin levels go up and they posture. They posture big with their back straight and they go, I came up social hierarchy. I'm fucking awesome. Great. And actually when you're tested, the central nervous system boosts the serotonin, that lets the brain know I'm a fucking awesome lobster I am. Look at me when we're back straight, posturing up. The social hierarchy, the higher up you go, the more serotonin your brain rewards you with. And the lower, the lower. So if you're, this is a hypothesis, I don't know that it's true. I think that what might be happening is as you go up the social hierarchy, your serotonin levels increase, but why we have decreased levels in serotonin amongst people who are depressed is nothing to do with some biological individualized pathologized thing in them. It's because, because of their depression, they're dropping out the social hierarchy because all of this leads to social isolation. And when we're socially isolated, we drop in the social hierarchy. We're now not significant. We're not significant. We're not contributing. We're not connected. And we're not offering value. The way we tend to think about things is like, oh, you're an individual, you're a consumer, you need to receive value. It is just as important for you as a human animal to be offering value as it is to receive it. We're tribal creatures. We need each other. And to help each other and cooperate, I suspect increases serotonin levels to be connected with other humans face to face, not through the internet, but to actually sit with them and talk with them. I believe we'll increase serotonin levels as we'll contributing, as we'll being significant. Being known in your tribe, being unique, people knowing your name and knowing what you do, I think increases serotonin levels. If your serotonin levels are up, it doesn't matter whether you really are high in the social hierarchy, you're going to feel good. You're going to feel as though you are, which solipsistically is the same fucking end effect. It's been said so many times that it's a cliche. What good is it being super rich, super wealthy, super successful if you feel like a piece of shit inside? It's no good. You want to feel good. And that is a biochemical effect of, I suspect, of being higher up in the social hierarchy. The project that you have here with what you guys are doing, I think is very important because it can help overcome the effect of the trauma through inhibiting this effect, social isolation. You're in groups and you're working together towards a common goal that should give you significance, the capacity to contribute, the capacity to be connected and to offer value, offer value. If you're not feeling good, think about what you can offer. Think about how you can contribute. These offering value contributing will make you significant and it will increase your connectivity, increase connectivity, you're higher in the social hierarchy, you don't need to be at the top. If we switch from red pill and rollo definitions of alpha and beta males, which you all understand, alpha, beta females, which everybody understands, to the psychology, the evolutionary psychology, the biology psychology of alpha and beta or omega, you don't need to be at the top of the pyramid to feel good. You do need to be connected, offering value and you also personally, on your own, you must feel on a daily basis like you're making progress. So you don't need to be right at the top of the pyramid but you do need to feel like you're involved, like you're contributing and like you're somewhere on the pyramid. I think some people or a lot of people now, they feel so socially isolated, so pointless, so depressed, so anxious, so non-unique, so nonsignificant that they don't even, there isn't a pyramid, there's nothing there at all and they're desperate for tribe style, tribal connections. So this is something that you have here. My advice to you, I'm new to all this, very new to all of this, is to recognise it for what it is and to use it properly and to make sure that you're contributing so that you are still there on the social hierarchy and you're probably going to find that this is a far better way of dealing with the effects of this trauma and of dealing with the effects of low serotonin, of dealing with the effects of depression and anxiety than actually trying to get therapy or trying to take drugs for it. Okay guys, I'm sorry I couldn't be there this year. I've got my own medical issues that I'm working with but I hope you enjoyed that and I'd just like to say thank you very much for the opportunity to talk to you. Thank you to Anthony for the invitation. Thank you all for your time and for your attention and hopefully I'll speak to you again soon. Cheers.