Co-dependency and the narcissist – the 'sponsee/sponsor' relationship

(For co-dependent read 'cult sponsee'. For narcissist read 'cult sponsor')

“Codependency is defined as a psychological condition or a relationship in which a person is controlled or manipulated by another who is affected with a pathological condition (typically narcissism or drug addiction); and in broader terms, it refers to the dependence on the needs of, or control of, another.[1] It also often involves placing a lower priority on one's own needs, while being excessively preoccupied with the needs of others.[2] Codependency can occur in any type of relationship, including family, work, friendship, and also romantic, peer or community relationships.[2] Codependency may also be characterized by denial, low self-esteem, excessive compliance, or control patterns.[2] Narcissists are considered to be natural magnets for the codependent.”

“Historically, the concept of codependence "comes directly out of Alcoholics Anonymous, part of a dawning realization that the problem was not solely the addict, but also the family and friends who constitute a network for the alcoholic."[3] It was subsequently broadened to cover the way "that the codependent person is fixated on another person for approval, sustenance, and so on."[3] As such, the concept overlaps with, but developed in the main independently from, the older psychoanalytic concept of the 'passive dependent personality' ... attaching himself to a stronger personality."[4]”

“Narcissists, with their ability to "get others to buy into their vision and help them make it a reality," are natural magnets for the "'co-dependent' ... [with] the tendency to put others' need before their own".[9] Sam Vaknin considered that codependents, as "the Watsons of this world, 'provide the narcissist with an obsequious, unthreatening audience ... the perfect backdrop.'"[10] Among the reciprocally locking interactions of the pair, are the way "the narcissist has an overpowering need to feel important and special, and the co-dependent has a strong need to help others feel that way. ... The narcissist overdoes self-caring and demands it from others, while the co-dependent underdoes or may even do almost no self-caring."[11]”

See also “Alcoholics Anonymous”, Ch 5, How It Works, pp. 60-62 (a near perfect description of your average cult sponsor):

“Being convinced, we were at Step Three, which is that we decided to turn our will and our life over to God as we understood Him. Just what do we mean by that, and just what do we do?

The first requirement is that we be convinced that any life run on self-will can hardly be a success. On that basis we are almost always in collision with something or somebody, even though our motives are good. Most people try to live by self-propulsion. Each person is like an actor who wants to run the whole show; is forever trying to arrange the lights, the ballet, the scenery and the rest of the players in his own way. If his arrangements would only stay put, if only people would do as he wished, the show would be great. Everybody, including himself, would be pleased. Life would be wonderful. In trying to make these arrangements our actor may sometimes be quite virtuous. He may be kind, considerate, patient, generous; even modest and self-sacrificing. On the other hand, he may be mean, egotistical, selfish and dishonest. But, as with most humans, he is more likely to have varied traits.

What usually happens? The show doesn’t come off very well. He begins to think life doesn’t treat him right. He decides to exert himself more. He becomes, on the next occasion, still more demanding or gracious, as the case may be. Still the play does not suit him. Admitting he may be somewhat at fault, he is sure that other people are more to blame. He becomes angry, indignant, self-pitying. What is his basic trouble? Is he not really a self-seeker even when trying to be kind? Is he not a victim of the delusion that he can wrest satisfaction and happiness out of this world if he only manages well? Is it not evident to all the rest of the players that these are the things he wants? And do not his actions make each of them wish to retaliate, snatching all they can get out of the show? Is he not, even in his best moments, a producer of confusion rather than harmony?

Our actor is self-centred—ego-centric, as people like to call it nowadays. He is like the retired business man who lolls in the Florida sunshine in the winter complaining of the sad state of the nation; the minister who sighs over the sins of the twentieth century; politicians and reformers who are sure all would be Utopia if the rest of the world would only behave; the outlaw safe cracker who thinks society has wronged him; and the alcoholic who has lost all and is locked up. Whatever our protestations, are not most of us concerned with ourselves, our resentments, or our self-pity?

Selfishness—self-centredness! That, we think, is the root of our troubles. Driven by a hundred forms of fear, self-delusion, self-seeking, and self-pity, we step on the toes of our fellows and they retaliate. Sometimes they hurt us, seemingly without provocation, but we invariably find that at some time in the past we have made decisions based on self which later placed us in a position to be hurt.

So our troubles, we think, are basically of our own making. They arise out of ourselves, and the alcoholic is an extreme example of self-will run riot, though he usually doesn’t think so. Above everything, we alcoholics must be rid of this selfishness. We must, or it kills us! God makes that possible. And there often seems no way of entirely getting rid of self without His aid. Many of us had moral and philosophical convictions galore, but we could not live up to them even though we would have liked to. Neither could we reduce our self-centredness much by wishing or trying on our own power. We had to have God’s help.

This is the how and why of it. First of all, we had to quit playing God. It didn’t work. Next, we decided that hereafter in this drama of life, God was going to be our Director. He is the Principal; we are His agents. He is the Father, and we are His children. Most good ideas are simple, and this concept was the keystone of the new and triumphant arch through which we passed to freedom.“

See also Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions esp:

Step Three:

“No adult man or woman, for example, should be in too much emotional dependence upon a parent. They should have been weaned long before, and if they have not been, they should wake up to the fact.” [p. 38]

“Our whole trouble had been the misuse of willpower. We had tried to bombard our problems with it instead of attempting to bring it into agreement with God’s intention for us.” [p. 49]

Step Four:

“Nor is the quest for security always expressed in terms of money. How frequently we see a frightened human being determined to depend completely upon a stronger person for guidance and protection. This weak one, failing to meet life’s responsibilities with his own resources, never grows up. Disillusionment and helplessness are his lot. In time all his protectors either flee or die, and he is once more left alone and afraid.

We have also seen men and women who go power-mad, who devote themselves to attempting to rule their fellows. These people often throw to the winds every chance for legitimate security and a happy family life. Whenever a human being becomes a battleground for the instincts, there can be no peace.

But that is not all of the danger. Every time a person imposes his instincts unreasonably upon others, unhappiness follows. If the pursuit of wealth tramples upon people who happen to be in the way, then anger, jealousy, and revenge are likely to be aroused.

…....

When an individual’s desire for prestige becomes uncontrollable, whether in the sewing circle or at the international conference table, other people suffer and often revolt.

…....

We had to see that every time we played the big shot, we turned people against us.

…....

Of course the depressive and the power-driver are personality extremes, types with which A.A. and the whole world abound.

…....

The primary fact that we fail to recognize is our total inability to form a true partnership with another human being. Our egomania digs two disastrous pitfalls. Either we insist upon dominating the people we know, or we depend upon them far too much. If we lean too heavily on people, they will sooner or later fail us, for they are human, too, and cannot possibly meet our incessant demands. In this way our insecurity grows and festers. When we habitually try to manipulate others to our own willful desires, they revolt, and resist us heavily. Then we develop hurt feelings, a sense of persecution, and a desire to retaliate. As we redouble our efforts at control, and continue to fail, our suffering becomes acute and constant. We have not once sought to be one in a family, to be a friend among friends, to be a worker among workers, to be a useful member of society. Always we tried to struggle to the top of the heap, or to hide underneath it. This self-centred behaviour blocked a partnership relation with any one of those about us. Of true brotherhood we had small comprehension.” [pp. 43-53]

Step Twelve:

“After we come into A.A., if we go on growing, our attitudes and actions toward security—emotional security and financial security—commence to change profoundly. Our demand for emotional security, for our own way, had constantly thrown us into unworkable relations with other people. Though we were sometimes quite unconscious of this, the result always had been the same. Either we had tried to play God and dominate those about us, or we had insisted on being overdependent upon them. Where people had temporarily let us run their lives as though they were still children, we had felt very happy and secure ourselves. But when they finally resisted or ran away, we were bitterly hurt and disappointed. We blamed them, being quite unable to see that our unreasonable demands had been the cause.

When we had taken the opposite tack and had insisted, like infants ourselves, that people protect and take care of us or that the world owed us a living, then the result had been equally unfortunate. This often caused the people we had loved most to push us aside or perhaps desert us entirely. Our disillusionment had been hard to bear. We couldn’t imagine people acting that way toward us. We had failed to see that though adult in years we were still behaving childishly, trying to turn everybody—friends, wives, husbands, even the world itself—into protective parents. We had refused to learn the very hard lesson that over-dependence upon people is unsuccessful because all people are fallible, and even the best of them will sometimes let us down, especially when our demands for attention become unreasonable.

….....

If we really depended upon God, we couldn’t very well play God to our fellows nor would we feel the urge wholly to rely on human protection and care.

…......

We were still trying to find emotional security by being dominating or dependent upon others. Even when our fortunes had not ebbed that much and we nevertheless found ourselves alone in the world, we still vainly tried to be secure by some unhealthy kind of domination or dependence.

….....

True leadership, we find, depends upon able example and not upon vain displays of power or glory” [pp. 115-124]

(our emphases in bold print)

Comment: No wonder this text (together with the AA pamphlet Questions and Answers on Sponsorship) is so unpopular in cult circles! Cuts too close to the bone we think!

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

Sponsorship – or co-dependency?

Extracts from the aacultwatch forum (old): 

“........

I recently attended a meeting where the speaker, a nice guy and by no means a cult fanatic, shared incessantly about his sponsor. It was noticeable to me (perhaps because I was looking for it) that he did not mention the word God or Higher Power once. His sponsor was the source of this sobriety, so it seemed. What really surprised me about all this was that I know his sponsor, and he is not a cult clone by any reckoning. But here was a clear case of sponsor idolatry and co-dependency.

However, I realised later that the poor guy is listening to local cult members who regularly attend meetings in my area and who bang on and on about sponsorship and "my sponsor said this.. blah blah bah." This has the effect of making even non cult members feel that they have to do the same thing in order to "fit in" with the sharing. In order to appear that they are "on the program". Hence even non cult members, who are not connected to the cult by sponsorship, become affected by the cult presence and their warped message.

I heard one cult member say recently that if his sponsor said one thing and AA said another, then he would do what his sponsor said. This is how distorted things are getting in my area.  Personalities are put firmly before principles. Who your sponsor is and who he is connected to - is the all important issue of whether you are accepted in meetings or taken seriously.

Meanwhile the real message of AA, as found in the Big Book and other AA literature is lost to the newcomer.”

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS To use “comment” system simply click on the relevant tab below this article and sign in. All comments go through a moderation stage 

PPS For new aacultwatch forum see here. Have your say!

Cult dependency – How it DOESN'T Work!

“Hi ….....,

Thanks for your post mate, you have a good point. I will try to answer you as best I can.

There is a saying "The Truth will set you free". I certainly think this applies to cult involvement. The Truth is the one thing the Cult does not want to face. For example, in the Vision/Joys cult, the fact that the founder of the Cult movement in AA in this country, David B, didn’t have a sponsor, and repeatedly lied about this in his sharing right until his death. "I’m sober 22 years because I always do everything my sponsor says" he would to say to the newcomer. Well, yes, when you sponsor yourself I guess you do everything your sponsor says! lol. He used this confidence trick to lure and manipulate others into doing everything HE said. Thus the whole cult practice of sponsor-control is based upon a lie. Once you know this one fact alone, the entire Cult experience changes. At least it did for me. Self-evidently, a program founded upon a lie cannot be “spiritual”. What I encountered at Vision/Joys was psychological manipulation and bullying, not spirituality. That is a tough truth to face up to, partly because it affects my pride. "How can I have been so dumb as to fall for it" and “what a waste of my time, energy and good will”, were the questions that often went on in my mind at that time. However I learned through the study of Cults and their characteristics, and through the stories of others who had been involved in cults, that I was not alone.

Rather like alcohol or drug use, cult involvement satisfied a “need” or “emptiness” within me. It gave me a sense of euphoria (that is, “feeling good” via group approval, provided of course I followed the highly demanding cult script) and security (being part of a seemingly protective gang).

Human beings need to feel secure and feel good, especially if we are vulnerable, depressive, addicted, or have had poor or insecure upbringings. This is why a lot of disaffected young people join gangs, and is also, by the way, why a lot of younger people tend to be attracted to the cults/gangs within AA (you must have wondered why cult meetings tend to be dominated by young people and young men in particular?). However when these natural needs for security/belonging/self-worth etc become focused upon people, places and material things, then they are founded upon straw. The program of AA is a spiritual program, not a cult program. It suggests to us, simply, that what we should try to do is place an unreserved faith and trust in a Higher Power of our own understanding, not a human power, or thing. This is why reliance on groups and personalities is not spiritual at all, but psychological dependence, sometimes called co-dependency.

How can I really and inwardly be “happy joyous and free” – if my life is dependent upon the approval of a group, or a sponsor, or some other human agency? The kind of “happiness/freedom” - that a group gives me - is a fragile illusion, and is entirely fear driven. How can I be truly free if my every action has to be “permitted” by a sponsor, rather than my own conscience and faith in a Higher Power?

No, the only approval I need is from honestly consulting my own conscience. It also helps to have and develop a faith and trust in a loving Higher Power of my understanding, and a willingness to practice spiritual principles (honesty, truth, humility, patience, tolerance, love etc) in my life. These themes are repeated again and again in the Big Book and the other AA literature dealing with the steps and program of AA. AA gives me the true freedom of being able to choose my own Path in this regard. AA is not about co-dependency on a sponsor/personality/group/whatever, but reliance on a Higher Power which is, as the Big Book puts it, goodness and love. Don’t just take my word for it. Read the Book, it’s all there!

One of the sad things about cult involvement, in my experience, is that is obstructs my developing a real relationship with my own Higher Power. In cults, the Higher Power is always trumped by “sponsor” approval. Therefore, during my cult involvement, I became a slave of a man (sponsor), rather than a free child of the God my own understanding.

“The Truth will set you free…..” This is why I am currently going through David C Icons website, exposing it piece by piece, because it is full of distortions and deviations from the AA program. Although David C Icons talks glibly about “trusting a sponsor before his Higher Power”, his pride just can’t come to terms with the fact that his guru - the sponsorless David B – was an arrogant liar who was NOT to be trusted. So the advice given in the website is hypocrisy. All the other distortions and twists follow on from that.

Thanks for your stimulating post …...”.

(extract from aacultwatch forum - with permission)

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)