> There you go again, thinking about yourself. Your impulse wasn't to say, "am I doing this to my kids?" or "how will I act differently?" It was to wonder about your own nature.
Worthy of note, TLP did often harp on the fact that his view of 'narcissism' as a cultural phenomenon (I think he called it a "generational pathology") is NOT the same as the DSM definition. People are fooled into thinking every narcissist is the person with a self-inflated ego (I inferred the same from the OP, "Some of them are good enough to fool Jersey Shore candidates, while others can reach high executive positions and, in some cases, potentially win a presidential election..."). But TLP's definition was closer to someone who is completely focused on controlling others' perception of them. This could include a person who projects himself as a meek victim, but hyper-focused on relaying that image to others.
Although, this does fit quite well too: "I don't want to be with someone who doesn't care to drink tap water."
Anyway, not saying you said it was the same as the DSM definition, just adding some perspective since I read a lot of TLP and naturally compared what I read in the OP to what I remember from TLP's blog.
GP gives a hint:
> You haven't changed your behaviour at all.
TLP[1] said it best:
> There you go again, thinking about yourself. Your impulse wasn't to say, "am I doing this to my kids?" or "how will I act differently?" It was to wonder about your own nature.
1: https://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2012/10/the_story_of_narciss...