4 replies to this topic

[TheFountain]

http://www.ncbi.nlm....ubmed/18557663/

 

Prevalence, correlates, disability, and comorbidity of DSM-IV narcissistic personality disorder: results from the wave 2 national epidemiologic survey on alcohol and related conditions.

Authors

Stinson FS, et al. Show all

Journal

J Clin Psychiatry. 2008 Jul;69(7):1033-45.

Affiliation

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To present nationally representative findings on prevalence, sociodemographic correlates, disability, and comorbidity of narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) among men and women.

METHOD: Face-to-face interviews with 34,653 adults participating in the Wave 2 National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions conducted between 2004 and 2005 in the United States.

RESULTS: Prevalence of lifetime NPD was 6.2%, with rates greater for men (7.7%) than for women (4.8%). NPD was significantly more prevalent among black men and women and Hispanic women, younger adults, and separated/divorced/widowed and never married adults. NPD was associated with mental disability among men but not women. High co-occurrence rates of substance use, mood, and anxiety disorders and other personality disorders were observed. With additional comorbidity controlled for, associations with bipolar I disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, and schizotypal and borderline personality disorders remained significant, but weakened, among men and women. Similar associations were observed between NPD and specific phobia, generalized anxiety disorder, and bipolar II disorder among women and between NPD and alcohol abuse, alcohol dependence, drug dependence, and histrionic and obsessive-compulsive personality disorders among men. Dysthymic disorder was significantly and negatively associated with NPD.

CONCLUSIONS: NPD is a prevalent personality disorder in the general U.S. population and is associated with considerable disability among men, whose rates exceed those of women. NPD may not be as stable as previously recognized or described in the DSM-IV. The results highlight the need for further research from numerous perspectives to identify the unique and common genetic and environmental factors underlying the disorder-specific associations with NPD observed in this study.

 

 

--------

 

About this.

 

So this woman is trying to win an argument with me that there are "more male narcissists than female narcissists" by showing me this 'study'.

 

So far I explained to her that this is not necessarily a study, because it only contains the first step of a real study environment (I.E data collection). And that this type of survey isn't a laboratory environment, where peer review could really mean something. 

 

I think I am going about it the right way. This woman clearly has a bias against men and wants to paint us as the devil because of past experiences she has had. 

 

What else can I say to her to convince her this 'study' isn't the most valid? 

[Major Legend]

I think women and men are really completely different breeds, a combination of cultural conditioning and genetic expression. Both are extremely narcissistic/ and screwed up in their own ways:

 

Women are more affected by cultural conditioning, hence their views about what is good and acceptable for men changes across cultures. This makes sense as women need to adapt to fit into the environment to achieve the best chance for their off spring.

 

^ The need for women to be responsible for their children explain a lot of feminine traits, such as attention to detail, peripheral awareness, awareness of social conduct, they rate men and others by their "social value" and their emotional responses often follow such. This is extremely narcisstic and a lot of times it means women use emotions as a means of sociopathy (using social warfare to eliminate people she doesn't want in her circle). This hyperawareness of the environment and the people around them is great for both protecting children, themselves and in economical terms getting the best bargain she can genetically. This hyper awareness also means a woman's beliefs and mindset is easily malleable in terms of what is good "social value" depending on culture. This means whilst a woman has a strong right or wrong, these standards are easily changeable.

 

This is generally why once women fall for a man, she will literally do anything for him often unreasonably so. The woman's entire psyche is dedicated to obtaining the best value in her life. This is why a woman will rarely consider herself to be selfish, because for the people she loves she literally will sacrifice "anything" as long as she is attached to that person, however to men this behaviour is actually very narccistic as it means she is incredibly subjective about whats selfish and whats not. Sociopathy is also a lot harder to see, hence the under the radar social warfare between women.

 

Whilst with men it stays pretty the same across different cultures, e.g. attraction to young women, interest in objects. Men are predominantly hard to change, their standards remain similar despite of changing environment, unlike women men do not have good peripheral awareness, they tunnel focus, which makes a lot of sense as men's societal requirements tend to be for them to obtain mastery, whether in hunting or programming or whatever skill. The skill allows them to gain the resource to attract potential mates, since men do not bear responsibility for children and there is no way for them to figure out if the children is his, it makes sense for men to go after as many mates as possible (now I am not saying this is right, I am just talking about psyche).

 

In the same way that women invest alot of time in the environment to obtain the best "trade" economically, is the same as men who invest alot of time on developing themselves so they can raise their value, mens values stay predominantly the same because female fertility could basically be judged from looks, so they don't scan their environment for social value, rather there is a focus on their own standing within the community in context. So why would this look selfish?

 

Well that means to women, men spend an awful amount of time in their own interests. Men are a lot more capable to just switching off the emotions, a necessity to obtain tunnel vision. Men also seem narcissistic because they seem to focus on themselves more on others, but it is in fact an evolutionary necessity, and something women are actually attracted to since psychopathic focus often will churn out more "social value" as men are competing for this "social value" whether they admit it or not. A man unless extremely attached will not easily sacrifice everything for a woman because it doesn't make sense for him evolutionary peaking, resource wise a man spends a lot less to give a woman a child. This psychopathic trait can look incredibly selfish, insensitive, irresponsible but often attractive to women. 

 

Children are extremely resource taxing and women are only fertile for a short period of time, which explains the huge differences between the two gender and why both genders sometimes appear like utter, insensitive, illogical assholes to each other. It is just an misunderstanding that can never be solved, because its so fundamental to the way each gender lives.

 

edit: now ALOT of this is based on societal conditioning, e.g women judge men on looks just as much. It's merely a societal conditioning that men's value is based on their money and success. 

Edited by Major Legend, 23 May 2014 - 03:43 PM.

[TheFountain]

I get very tired of the reiterative anthropological stuff about male/female cultural relations that does nothing to help anything along. 

 

I have heard everything ^^^^ that up there says 5000 times on this forum. I don't get the point of it. It doesn't help evolution along at all. 

 

It is like a "hey, men exist, women exist and yea" description that the most obvious cultural observer would look at and go "oh this, again?". 

 

Plus it has nothing to do with my original post. 

 

But hey, thanks for typing? 

[Major Legend]

CONCLUSIONS: NPD is a prevalent personality disorder in the general U.S. population and is associated with considerable disability among men, whose rates exceed those of women. NPD may not be as stable as previously recognized or described in the DSM-IV. The results highlight the need for further research from numerous perspectives to identify the unique and common genetic and environmental factors underlying the disorder-specific associations with NPD observed in this study.

 

The research you posted proves what exactly? a bunch of anecdotal experiences from one country under a simple test that's been proven and proven again to be useless, pointless and unreliable. An argument is an argument, your friend is just using research to make a point based on valid less information, its her viewpoint thats making her think this research proves anything at all.

 

A point that is argued and easily explained by my simple anthropological observations above, which follows common sense. It's not just evolutionary psychology but societal conditioning as well. My point which was unclear, as that you would find it hard to win an argument on which both sides have views they hold onto strongly based on their own gender.

 

Disorders are definitions, most people are on a spectrum. We have the studies of women being prone more to depression. So what? Have we identified any genes here? Is there anything in the research that is isolating cultural conditioning,race, wealth, education and expectations of one country from the research?

 

When you take account of all the factors this piece of research did not weed out, the percentage difference between men and women are negligible, that's not counting the fact that this is all anecdotal information at best, no research into genes, no specialised tests devised.

 

Unless you can link these research to the genetic differences between male and female, I think this piece is about the same as most observatory knowledge. Which like you say anyone can type up I guess. 

Edited by Major Legend, 23 May 2014 - 09:54 PM.

[Flex]

The Study could be also flawed. To be on the safer side You should read several Studies AND check it trough on Your own

i.e. look at the statisics and so on.

 

One example, there are some studies which states that Females tend to choose a more dominant partner during ovulation.

But in some subreddits the Females cant confirm that.

So, either its not so common or the studies are flawed.

 

Offtopic: I think when a person states that a whole group or most of them ( in this case the Males) are bad or annything else,

then You sould know for Your self that this person is far away from honest objectivity.

Therefore arguing with that person is simply worthless.

Since You cant expect a meaningful dialogue.