As Per Request...

I was asked to revisit the comment that I parsed out in this post and make a more thorough job of it. The request came because I had glossed over a couple of paragraphs due to my boredom with the lame arguments therein. Because the request was coming from someone who found themselves disquieted by those glossed-over-by-me paragraphs I have found the motivation to finish the job. I don't want anyone to be struggling with residual discomfort from the words of an ignorant, drive-by Christian. I will pick up where I left off. The commenter's words are in italics.

God's word gives us clear principles to live by as far as dealing with those who are living in sin.

Yes, it does give us those "clear principles". The principles vary depending on whether or not the sinner is a repentant one or not. This person doesn't acknowledge that fact. Many of the claims of this commenter I have dealt with in my second post on the 5th commandment. In my post, "A Wicked Man", I deal with the problem of other Christians instructing us to stay in a relationship with an evil person, and how doing so contradicts God's own commands.

We are no better. Their sinful selfish attitude is no worse than any one of our sins. We all need the SAME Grace.

While I do not argue that we all are recipients of the same grace, I find it repugnant to pull the moral equivalence gambit when we are talking about the kinds of cruel abuses and predatory and evil behaviors of malignant narcissists. There is a chasm of difference between a sinner who recognizes their need for forgiveness and salvation and the malignant narcissist who consistently and persistently practices his life of vileness all the while acting like they need no such grace. Sorry, you can't make those two things equal and be any kind of consistent or rational. Or Biblical.

If we are truly going to deal with Narcissism in a Biblical manner then we need to use all of God's word not just parts of it to fulfill our own needs and desires.

Which is what I do...and what this commenter has not done. In the very blog post this person was commenting on he/she had overlooked strong Biblical statements which are positive commands for Christians to "walk away" from evil doers. I'm not the one picking and choosing which part of God's word to follow.

Just in case you are wondering, my mother is narcissistic. I was raised by her. Still struggling with her.

I think we can all understand why this person is "still struggling" with their narcissistic mother. That struggle will last until the old woman is laid in her grave.

But I will not adhere to un-biblical principals just to satisfy my own selfish desires to be "free of her". I want to do things God's way and help to restore her to her Saviour and our relationship to one that God wants it to be.

This is an naked accusation. By that I mean the accusation bears no proof with it. The accusation is laid, and the pretense which goes along with it is that this accusation alone proves the author's point. It does no such thing. Where is their proof that I am presenting un-biblical principals to support my so-called selfish desires? I have laid out the biblical support for my statements. Where is this persons proof? The only texts they presented demonstrably support my view, not theirs.

The next few words reveal the basis of their emotional fervor: the belief that the redemption of their mother is dependent on this person's own faith and spiritual virtue. I have already identified this as proceeding from a savior complex. Please read here and here. I know some Christians feel like they are demonstrating a lack of faith in their God's ability to save someone if they should walk away from the evil doer. This is itself unbiblical. God can save...you can't. Get over yourself, get out of the way, let God do His thing. He doesn't need you to hang in there for eternity with an evil doer in order to save the evil doer. He has specifically told you to get away from the persistent evil doer. Quit disobeying the God you are pretending to be obeying.

Dividing us is Satan's work.

This kind of categoric statement annoys me to no end. Probably because it is becoming such a popular mantra in Christianity. I mentally roll my eyes now when I hear this one. I heard it so many times from my sister that it became a standard part of her phone calls to me for years. There was "war in heaven". God Himself took up some kind of arms against the angelic rebels in order to "cast them out. See this post. Christ boldly proclaimed He is a divider when he said he "came not to send peace but a sword". Matt. 10:34-36. "I came to set at variance..." Um, looks to me like Christ himself is laying claim to being a divider. Strong words to claim that all division is "Satan's work". This person has condemned their own Savior.

By the way, ya'll may find it mildly interesting that the commenter above came back to my blog yesterday afternoon. Since I wrote down all their particulars, ISP, IP address, city, state, google search words, I immediately noticed the stats when the person came back. I kept track of the info because I was curious to see if this person would be returning to my blog. Well, they did. Using the exact same search words, "biblical view of narcissism", they hopped onto my blog via the very post where I parsed out their own comment. This person then did about 10 page views spending about 35 minutes on the blog. Their "out click" was the comments on the blog post, "Breathing Example of Last Post". So this person saw not only what I had to say, but what you all had to say too. The part I find especially interesting about this is that they didn't come back with another comment. Take that to mean what you will. I have my own ideas on what that means.

Breathing Example Illustrating Last Post

I wrote a post in February titled, "From Such Turn Away". If you want to get the full impact of what is to follow I hope you'll go back and re-read my post. It is the context within which the comment I'm going to address was made. It is important to see exactly what this person chose to ignore in order to make the statements he or she did.

Assuming you've done your little homework assignment above, I'll proceed.

The person whose comment you'll be reading found my blog on 4.7.08 @ 6:48 a.m. by doing a Google search, "biblical view of narcissism". Google landed this person on the blog post above. This is the only post on my blog that this person read. They read, clicked on 'comment', did their thang and left. Obviously, this person doesn't believe that my blog presents a biblical view of narcissism. You'll soon see why.

I have gone to considerable effort to deal with the clubs that are used on Christians by Christians. I have done so with deliberation and careful examination of the texts which have been used to keep Christians under the rule of narcissists in home and church. This is probably the reason I read this comment and felt exasperated. I have debunked everything this person says in various posts on my blog. I have done so thoroughly and thoughtfully so the idea that I have to start all over again with someone like this kinda overwhelms me.

Well, I'm not gonna. No need to re-invent the wheel--especially for someone who obviously is not open to any idea other than the one dessicated and shriveled idea that is rattling around in their empty cranium. Rather than approve this comment and let it sit there on that post trying to negate the whole of my blog, I thought I would bring it front and center. Posting that comment requires an answer from me. I found myself wishing this person had bothered to stick around and go to the newest post on my blog because they would have had my answer to their reasoning. Anyway, the comment has value which is why I didn't just flush it away. It's value is related to the subtitle of my blog. This person managed to distill down into remarkably few words all the reasoning that is normally used to keep victims as victims. The toxic and poisonous thinking that causes our homes and churches to willingly host the predators among us is present in this comment:

While I agree with what you said about Narcissism being a sin problem, I think it is extremely dangerous to tell people that it is not curable. All things can be done through Christ. There is no incurable personality disorder.

I also do not agree with you telling people to leave, or get away from Narcissistic people. A child can not get away from a narcissistic parent, and a wife/husband should NOT divorce their narcissistic spouse. God hates divorce more than he hates selfishness. Satan is more than happy to divide families and marriages.

Since a narcissist does not believe they are doing anything wrong, they will not understand why you are distancing yourself from them. I believe it is cruel to cut yourself off from someone unless they can completely understand the reasons behind it and learn to change their ways so they can have fellowship with you again. (Matthew 18:15-18, Galatians 6:1, 1 Corinthians 5) If you can not follow Biblical principals in discipline with a person then distancing yourself from them is as wrong as their attitude.

God's word gives us clear principles to live by as far as dealing with those who are living in sin. We are no better. Their sinful selfish attitude is no worse than any one of our sins. We all need the SAME Grace.

If we are truly going to deal with Narcissism in a Biblical manner then we need to use all of God's word not just parts of it to fulfill our own needs and desires.

Just in case you are wondering, my mother is narcissistic. I was raised by her. Still struggling with her. But I will not adhere to un-biblical principals just to satisfy my own selfish desires to be "free of her". I want to do things God's way and help to restore her to her Saviour and our relationship to one that God wants it to be. Dividing us is Satan's work. Posted by Anonymous to Narcissists Suck at Apr 7, 2008 7:21:00 AM

We have here the absolute assertion that we can't consider a malignant narcissist incurable which is a classic demonstration of a 'savior complex'. I deal with that here. I never say that any person is beyond God's help. I only admit the reality that some people are beyond the help of us mere mortals. The Bible agrees with me on this point.

Then we're told that there is no justification for ever divorcing a malignant narcissist, and to do so is labeled as being the dividing work of Satan. We've never heard that one before, right? Not real original, but it is brought out with regularity by the narcissist's cultists.

This person then argues that we can't leave a narcissist without it being cruel because they are incapable of understanding they are wrong...and therefore incapable of understanding our reasons for leaving. Another dose of savior complex is thrown into this nugget. This reasoning goes round and round forever which leaves people with zero justification for leaving an abusive malignant narcissist (and all malignant narcissists are abusive in one way or another). This person dares to make us more cruel than the narcissist simply for leaving. Nothing the narcissist ever does will be more cruel than us leaving them. How does someone get this stupid? Unfortunately, all too easily. I dealt with the non-cruelty of going no contact here.

Next we see the presentation of some texts which we are to assume support this person's points. First, Matt. 18:15-18. I have commented on this passage here. Nothing in my post negates this text. In fact, this text tells us to make only three attempts to reach someone before we throw in the towel. It is kinda amusing that this person cites 1 Cor. 5 as their support when the last verse of this chapter finds Paul quoting the Pentateuch, "Therefore 'put away from yourselves that wicked person'." Kinda makes me giggle. This chapter contains specific admonishment for Christians to judge other Christians who engage in immoral behaviors. Somebody forgot to drink their cup of coffee before engaging in mental exercise.

The rest of the comment bores me to death so I'll not parse it except to point out that it contains the commenter's attempt to label me as selfish and working in tandem with the devil himself as a divider. No accountability is ever laid on the malignant narcissist by this person. Who is the real divider? You and I well know who it is. The malignant narcissist with his lying and slanderous tongue is usually at the root of divisions in families and churches and other social settings. I am not the divider. I point out who the real divider is...the malignant narcissist. That doesn't make me the problem simply because I have pointed out the problem.

In my opinion, this comment has value for several reasons. One of which I've already pointed out...it is a succinct distillation of the emotional abuse handed out to others by narcissist appeasers (especially of the Christian sort) to the victims of narcissism and therefore is a perfect illustration of my last two posts. It is abuse designed to minimize our experiences, to justify the narcissist, and to keep us locked forever in a macabre dance with the soul-sucker.

Next, it contains all the self-righteousness which characterizes the narcissist appeasers. This is something I have talked about in the last two posts. The narcissist appeasers always have a cloak of righteousness they wrap around themselves when approaching those of us who have finally seen the evil doer for what they are and are trying to protect ourselves and our loved ones from them. Regardless of whether the person is religious, or Christian, in profession...this self-righteousness always accompanies the narcissist appeasers. They find a way to assume a moral superiority to you and then smash you to bits. They are simply co-abusers with the narcissist and I find them every bit as dangerous...possibly more so...than the narcissist him or her self.

Last, and certainly not least, what we see demonstrated by this comment is the utter imperviousness to reason this type of person has. If you re-read the post this person was addressing you can see the amazing amount of logic and reality this person completely discounted in order to maintain their position. They may as well have concrete for a brain. This is important to note because you may find yourself trying to reason with one of these utter fools. Save your breath. And run. If allowed, a person like this will tie your hands and feet and tape your mouth in order to go on pretending the malignant narcissist is save-able and only misunderstood.

See, it isn't really about you or me. This type of person has limitless patience and hope for the evil doer. Because of that, this person has no pity or patience for the victims; this includes him or her self. I can feel a tiny bit badly for this person because they are also enslaving themselves along with others. But my compassion is limited because this person is making a volitional choice. I reject this person's right to make the choice for the rest of us when they obviously haven't any clue as to the true malignancy (i.e. evil) of narcissism. To stand on the side of saving a narcissist is to defend the narcissist's 'right' to destroy the rest of us. How is that compassion? How is that Christian? Christ came to "set the captives free". He is not a proponent of slavery or idolatry.

Both the narcissist and the narcissist's appeaser brethren are idolatrous members of the Cult of Nice. The worshipful deity is the narcissist; the lesser deity are those who keep the god fed with the flesh of humanity. The priesthood of this cult is populated with the narcissist's appeasers. They are more righteous than anyone because they are the most devoted servants of the Narcissist god. If a priest of the Cult of Nice determines that you must be fed to the narcissist god in order to keep 'unity' and 'peace'...then bye-bye to you. You are not left with any right to appeal. No recourse to justice. Your moral superiors have spoken and you must die.

For the rest of us the Cult of Nice is anything but nice.

The Pagan Priesthood of Appeasement

I want to examine a little further the narcissist appeaser otherwise identified in my last post as "The Peacemaker".

When last describing the 'peacemaker' I put it in a religious context by identifying the N-appeaser as being a member of the Cult of Nice. This cult has doctrines and faith. It punishes and proscribes 'heretics'. The 'peacemaker' himself is a self-appointed priest. His god is the narcissist.

The role of appeaser and so-called peacemaker is not a new phenomena. It has been an important role in human societies for millennia. The lengths to which a peacemaker/priest will go to appease an angry god was seen in multiplied and ancient cultures and always appeared in a religious context. Cultures which believed in a capricious, vengeful and angry god had elaborate rituals designed to appease their pagan god. Up to and including human sacrifice.

There is mild argument about the prevalence of human sacrifice in ages past, but there has been solid archaeological finds which demand we accede to the truth of its existence in some ancient pagan societies. Not all human sacrifice was associated with appeasing a pagan god, but there is proof that some human sacrifice was for that specific purpose. Most times the appeasing sacrifice was either babies, young children or teenagers. It was believed that the purity, physical perfection and innocence of the young were the most delicious kinds of gifts they could give to their gods. I can not help but believe that the vulnerability and inability of the victims to defend themselves also made children and young people attractive choices for their violent bloodshed.

You may not agree, but I see the N-appeaser as a pagan to his core. I know there are people who call proudly call themselves pagan in today's western societies and would take umbrage at my calling the N-appeaser a pagan like it is a bad thing...well, too bad. It is a bad thing. Paganism is not and never has been an elevating force in human societies. Just because some cultures have achieved some recognizable levels of sophistication by our standards doesn't disprove that pagan religions have consistently been the locus of moral vice and debauchery and have often led to the extinction of the cultures that practiced the most immoral of rites. Especially those which engaged in human sacrifice.

The narcissist-appeaser is afraid of his god. He quails at the narcissist's ability to bring down hellfire and thunderbolts on those who displease the narcissist. His fear of the narcissist's wrath is what leads the appeaser to justify his assumed role of priest and his selection of sacrifices to his N-god. He calls himself a 'peacemaker' which are the priestly vestments which imbue his demands with spiritual and moral authority. Perhaps the fear that motivates the appeaser is not so much the wrath of the narcissist, but the fear of losing the convenience which a placated narcissist will afford him. Regardless of which fear moves the appeaser, the children are usually the first to go. Yes, the able-bodied man will be seen essentially throwing his own children into the volcano to buy a limited peace (actually, a truce at best) with his capricious god. The appeaser is, at the core of his soul, a self-worshiper. It is his own comfort and convenience that inspires his behavior and defines his principles. He has something in common with the narcissist...a supremely selfish focus which puts what he wants as the imperative for everyone else to follow.

Only in the most modern of times have humans separated out the religious from what we call 'secular'. The belief that there are areas of living which have nothing to do with religious practice, principle or custom would be a completely foreign belief to most of humanity for most of humanity's existence. I believe it is a mistake to look at the narcissist or his appeasers completely divorced from a religious context. The narcissist operates in the spiritual realm, i.e., what he or she does affects our spirit (and his). It is this immaterial sphere of our psyches which the narcissist uses as his playground. It is the very immaterial aspect of his behaviors which perplex us the most and which hide his agenda so effectively. The narcissist's appeaser also operates in this spiritual realm. You can measure this statement against what you feel in your spirit when the appeaser demands you sacrifice yourself, your feelings, your principles, your best interest, to the narcissist. Demoralized. Depressed. Dejected. Devalued.

My contention that the self-appointed N appeasers are nothing more than pagan priests is of especial significance to Christians. When you are confronted by an appeaser, when you are being mightily pressured by the self-righteous do-gooder who is demanding you bend over for the narcissist, please, please recognize the pagan before you.

What moral authority has the pagan over the Christian? He should have none. He is worshiping a different god than you are. If you concede to the appeasement demands of the narcissist's priesthood then you have bowed down to their Baal. True peacemakers will not sacrifice truth and moral principles for any cause. Do not confuse appeasement with peace.

The pagans who would sacrifice their children to keep the volcano from blowing or famines from occurring fooled themselves into believing they had achieved peace. At some point the volcano would erupt or the rains wouldn't come. These events proving that they had, at best, appeased their gods for a time. In a fit of unpredictable pique the gods unleashed their wrath and previous sacrifices were revealed to be a limited truce at best. All acts of appeasement toward a narcissist are limited truces. You can never placate a narcissist except for a limited time. Because of the unprincipled and immoral mental framework of a narcissist the appeasers learn to be very flexible. Morally flexible. This is why the appeasers will eventually gut their own integrity and morality if they persist in working for the narcissist. What appeases the narcissist today may enrage him tomorrow--just like the ancient pagan gods of the Incas, the Aztecs or the Druids. So the appeaser can't keep his job unless he moves the goalpost where ever the narcissist demands he put it. Morality is a constant. You can't reshape and re-frame morality to suit individual tastes or else you'll corrupt it.

The narcissist appeaser, the self-anointed and so-called peacemaker, is as immoral as his master. He is a pagan priest who will gladly slice your throat or rip your heart out of your chest if it will buy time, peace or prosperity for himself. He is as demanding and capricious as his N god; he must in order to thrive in the narcissist environment. Know it and plan accordingly.

The High Price of Peace at Any Cost

I have made reference several times to what I call the Cult of Nice. When referring to the Cult of Nice I have commented on how this 'cult' labels it a 'sin' or 'wrong' to hurt someone's feelings. Both Christians and secular types who've swallowed pop psychology seem to often subscribe to this belief. This anti-logic provides a lovely escape hatch for malignant narcissists because you can be made into a 'sinner' for calling them on their garbage, or for simply stating truth. They wave the flag of their 'hurt' feelings and it is supposed that you will then cease and desist or risk being labeled a hateful, unkind person. You're accused of being mean...which is like a cuss word to the Cultists of Nice-land. The tables get turned so fast that the victim becomes abuser in a blink of an eye in this alternate universe of anti-logic.

Those who subscribe to this kind of thinking are not being rational in any way. Which is why I tend to see this as a religious/cult-like type of thinking. It is a faith-type belief in the supremacy of feelings over principles. The Cult of Nice is a false righteousness that attempts to dismiss or disparage real justice or right-doing through name-calling. It is a useful belief system which allows you to eliminate any opposition to your behaviors or attitudes by this pretense that others are responsible for your feelings. If you are confronted with an uncomfortable or unwelcome truth you can trump that truth with your 'hurt' feelings. Then the only 'truth' that matters is that you feel hurt, angry, upset, persecuted, etc. This is a custom made system by and for narcissists and other villains.

There is an adjunct to the "we must never ever hurt anyone's feelings" tenet of the Cult of Nice.

It is: "peace at all costs."

If I could be allowed to surmise, I think it is safe to say that nearly every family with a malignant narcissist has at least one family member who believes in the 'peace at all costs' maxim. This self-appointed 'peacemaker' has likely held most of the other family members in line for the family narcissist by forcing these other family members to 'go along to get along'. Because the family narcissist can make life very difficult when someone crosses their will, the family peacemaker will shame other family members by telling them they are responsible for not 'upsetting' Mommy Dearest, or whomever the narcissist is in that particular family. Because when 'momma ain't happy; ain't nobody happy' is reality for that family, the peacemaker emphasizes how everyone other than Momma is responsible for not rocking the family boat.

The urge to be a peacemaker is a survival mechanism when we are talking about children and hostages. I don't think there is any fault in those who learn how to read their abuser in order to avoid their rage. I am talking about a different person. A person who is an able-bodied, full-grown adult with the ability to walk away. When this able-bodied adult requires those who aren't free to walk away to bear the abuse and injustice in silence...that is when I get seriously pissed off. When the peacemaker makes excuses for the abuser's behavior, yet won't cut any slack to the victims...I am enraged. What is particularly disgusting is the phony righteousness that the peacemaker gets to wear. Too many do-gooders act like it is some badge of honor to placate the blood-sucking monster instead of locking the beast up and throwing away the key. I speak metaphorically.

I didn't always feel this way. No, for most of my life I've lived in the Cult of Nice through the misfortune of my birth into my twisted family. It took me a very long time to be able to see the insanity of the system and extricate myself. As I write this, the example that I am reflecting on is my own father. He is a living representation of the ultimate cost of peace at any cost.

Don't picture my father as a obsequious, weak man. He is nothing of the sort. He was a man of strength and forthrightness at one time...a long time ago. This was a man who would never stand by to watch some stranger get attacked and he not intervene. With fists if need be. This was not true, though, with his own children. He seems to have had no perspective where it concerned how his wife was...and how she treated his own children. He saved his pity for her. He made allowances for her bad behavior because he believed her childhood explained (and justified) her bad behavior as an adult. Because he made these allowances for the perpetrator, he was not able to see his way clear to protect his children from the beast. Because he pitied the perp, he ended up consigning helpless children to her abuses. He loved my mother above all else. His children were unwanted and annoying appendages to his idol, my mother. He tolerated us because he loved her. This also made it easy for him to demand of us better behavior than he expected from a full-grown woman, his wife. He only 'loved' us when we were invisible or when we performed as he expected us to.

My father today is a bitter, angry, cynical man. His mind gradually poisoned by Worm Tongue against his children and extended family. I have evidence in his own writing that he has surrendered his integrity in order to keep peace with the devil. His moral compass is so broken that he feels righteous and justified to demand of me, his grown daughter, that I too capitulate to the selfish demands of his infernal wife. He sees me as the problem because I will not bend over and grab the ankles in order to 'make peace'...like he has.

Yes, indeed. The price for peace with a villain is very high indeed. It has cost my father much. He has lost every one of his extended family members. He has lost at least one daughter. All he has left is his evil wife. And, perhaps, the one daughter who greatly resembles his evil wife, my sister. Was it really worth defending the indefensible all these years? I highly doubt it. I have seen clear indications that much of the time he can't stand to be around my mother. They live separate lives. He speaks impatiently and angrily with her much of the time. There are times when he is tender and indulgent with my mother. These are rare times when she has managed to use enough of her feminine charms to soften him. He is not a happy man. He has paid out too much of his soul, though, to cash in his chips. He will stay with her to the bitter, ugly end.

Count carefully the ultimate cost of 'peace at any and all costs'. It is very steep. In the end, all you will be left with is the cold comfort of your pretended integrity and righteousness minus your soul.

Dad--Mom's evil henchman

I used to love and respect my dad. I used to think he was principled and strong. I used to think he loved me.

Much has happened, and these happenings have taught me many things. Several of which is that all of the above were illusions. Figments of my imagination. Fantasy and dreams.

Recent experience has revealed not only the present but the past. One of the saddest realities I have had to confront in my adulthood is that my father has never loved me. I won't bore you with my long list of remembrances that prove this point. I don't have to prove anything to you. I am only stating that it has been proven to me. I will sum up my realizations about my dad to you, though, just in case it may resonate in your own experience.

The only person who really matters to my dad is himself. Yes, he has worked hard for years to provide for his wife. And himself. By providing for his wife, he can claim this as proof that he loves her and has done his duty toward her. This works for her. There is little more she expects from him. Provide for her in the manner she has become accustomed to and the uneasy truce between them can be maintained. The symbiosis of their relationship explains everything to me about my dad's relationship to me. It was never about me. I have been an attachment to my mother since I was born. He would have never married my mom except that she became pregnant with me. All I have ever been to him is a representation of duty and responsibility. He did for me because it was simply the same as doing something for his wife. It kept her "happy", it met her demands, it shut her up. Which brings me to my first statement that the only person who matters to him is himself. He only pleases his wife in order to "keep the peace" so he can live his life in relative calm as well as pursue his own interests and live his own life. They live separate but parallel existences. It is a business arrangement. A little bit of mutual back-scratching, then they go about doing what they do for themselves. Both are locked in a perpetual pursuit of their own agendas. Separate agendas.

There is no human alive who doesn't fashion some code of conduct that convinces themselves they are "righteous"...i.e. that they are "moral". Some fashion their moral code according to an objective source, such as the Bible. Others just make one up as they go along and construct their code according to their subjective and perverted feelings and ideas. My dad lives by the moral code of the mobster. No matter how angry he may get at my mother, no matter how loudly he may condemn some behavior of hers to her face, no matter the long emotional estrangements from her....let some "outsider" (everyone is an outsider to those two including their children) come along and dare to contradict or attempt to hold his wife to accountability in whatever form and his mobster code of conduct is immediately visible. No one else is ever allowed to "dis" his wife. You make her unhappy and HE is unhappy. You will be yanked on as hard as possible by him in order to bring you back into line and make his wifey happy again. I see this dynamic as yet another iteration of his dedication to his principle of selfishness. If the wife is unhappy....she makes him miserable, too, because she cries, she rages, she whines, she mopes, she sinks into depression, she tortures him with her misery. He sees the only "moral" thing to do is to make her happy again whatever the human cost may be to the "outsider". No one else matters. There is no claim for redress, accountability, or justice that he will admit to be valid. The mobster code of "la familia" applies only to the two of them. The rest of us can rot in hell.

I see my father as Igor to my mother's Dr. Frankenstein. He is simply the club she wields to keep the rest of us in line. She has used him this way for as long as I can remember. I used to believe her lies about how much he loved his children, about what a strong and principled man he was, about how deserving of respect he was. Time and experience have been my teachers. He is as evil as she is. While she abused me with almost impunity, he turned his eye. He has NEVER stood up against her to protect me. Not once. When finally, as an adult, I appealed to him to hold her to account for her evil deeds just once, his refusal was absolute. This proved to me that his claim that had he known how she abused her children he would have intervened was a complete and total lie. He was being asked to intervene now, in the present, for a deed he witnessed himself and admitted for a short while she was in the wrong, and he refused to do the right thing by his family. His dedication to himself....and therefore to his wife....are set in granite. He is immovable. Not any part of his soul is moved by the importunities and pleas of his extended family. No righteous claim can find redress in his court of appeals. His integrity was surrendered to his evil wife many decades ago. He demands from the rest of us a similar surrender of integrity in the name of peace and family. It is a vile thing to behold.

I have no father.