Abusers are often victims first. You can't really look at Musk, or any billionaire, and think, "yeah, this person is totally fine." He's not. None of them are.

Patriarchy and capitalism reward the unhealthy coping mechanism he uses to protect his ego. Patriarchy specifically asserts that those coping mechanisms are not only normal but optimal.

He's absolutely a victim of this system and in a functional one he would be given help instead of power, which is literally the opposite of what he needs to be able to recognize his problems and heal.

He is who he is because the only way he can see himself as valuable at all is if he's basically the savior of the world. Anything less than that is unacceptable garbage. Anyone who believes differently must be manipulated or destroyed.

There's no way he can ever be happy. He needs help. It's tragic that we live in a society where he can't even see how much he needs help.

None of that takes away from the behaviors he expresses. The fact that his manipulation of others comes from his insecurity doesn't take away from the manipulation, the feeling of unreality, that comes from experimenting that manipulation. Both of these things can and do exist at the same time.

[–] exocrinous@startrek.website 4 points 8 months ago

That's fair. I was using a quick and simple soundbyte to push the idea that insulting people with mental illnesses is bad. When I take a nuanced and patient approach, people usually accuse me of defending abusers and go off on a wild tangent. I've found it's important to cement people's ideas of who I am and where my criticism is coming from within the first 10 seconds of the interaction. If it takes any longer than that, they assume since I dared to disagree with them that I must be the enemy, and they project everything they disagree with onto me.

Since you're clearly appreciative of nuance, I'll use the nuanced argument with you. While Elon Musk may have NPD, it would be medical malpractice for a registered psychiatrist to make that judgement without having had a session with him. There are regulations against that sort of behaviour for good reason. It's called the Goldwater Rule. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldwater_rule

The danger of diagnosing public figures without the proper rigour is that people's idea of what a pwNPD is are informed by stereotypes, and those stereotypes inform future armchair diagnoses. It becomes an ouroboros with no actual grounding in science. That's why everyone thinks psychopaths are killers, narcissists are abusers, and obsessive-compulsives are neat freaks. These stereotypes can encourage abuse by the public of people with mental disorders.