This makes me think that you were not really reacting to Portia but instead, you were actually speaking to the people of your past, reacting to them, after all this time, saying it to them??? Might this be possible?
I think I was acknowledging this when I admitted that it is a hot-button and described how it became such a trigger - and also when I said I had learned something form the conflict. I still, like I said, question the remark and it's real meaning, however (and am still sorry to not be more graceful about it). Just because I'm reacting/over-reacting to past injury or abuse doesn't necessarily make me wrong (or right, either) - which brings me back to the thought about labelers and what they have to lose.
GFN, just asking you the question prompted me to give it more thought. I don't think my own answer was especially well-developed or cohesive when I asked you, so thanks for the opportunity/inspiration to put some flesh on the bones.
I think it's pretty clear that we both think that being labeled is limiting to the labelee. For me, just from a "justice and equality" point of view, it's contrary to those concepts indulge in labeling, and you are also right about "missing out on the good parts of people (to paraphrase)". But I have to think also about what the labeler loses aside from all those things, which are almost strictly philosophical concerns.
I not only think there's more to it than the above, I also think it realtes directly to I Voice.
Let me preface by saying that Voice, in my estimation, is developed in conjuntion with Hearing. Looking at it pragmatically and corporeally, we all notice the speech deficits of the deaf. As a rule, sounds produced by speaking deaf persons are usually reasonable approximations, but are not wholly accurate and can often be difficult for those with little experience communicating with the deaf to understand. The problem is not with the mechanics of voice, but with the limits of hearing -The lack of accurate hearing is what contributes most to the impairment of speech, in this case. (There are many other contributing factors to the impairment of physical voice that are analogous to other parts of the I Voice issue, but that's another peice of the puzzle. Sometimes people are deaf and mechanically mute at the same time, of course).
I think when we label, as I've said before, we confine others (and often ourselves) to very narrow definitions. So - if we have labeled someone as an N, or a Borderline, or an A**hole - or even a sweet person or a saint or an innocent victim, we can easily overlook the true depth of what we can gain by trying to really hear what is accurate or not in the content of their speech.
In a nutshell, just because a person is a Narcisssist, a Borderline, or an A**hole does not mean that everything they say is wrong. Sometimes, even at their most hurtful, they are as capable as anyone else of being truthful and right - even in their oberservations about us. Conversely, sweet, saintly, innocent victims, narrowly defined in the situation, can be just as wrong as they can be right. The difference is that their "wrongness" usually causes them to hurt themselves, often through lack of accurate hearing - although that can also lead them to hurt others, too.
I think labels promote deafness, in a way. It makes it easy to dismiss underlying truth and nuance in favor of superficial approximations.
If your favorite "N" says something about your character that hurts or makes you angry, it is easy, if you have been applying the label for a long time, to dismiss anything said by thinking, even sub-consciously, "Well, S/He's just an "N" and trying to hurt me, because that's what "N"s do. They never say anything of value because of this, so I'm not going to listen." This is the same sort of dismissiveness reflected in the statments about co-dependents. In effect, those statements say "Co-dependents have nothing to offer but dysfuntion. They're just a soul-sucking drain on anyone who gets involved with them, nothing more".
Sometimes, my husband is right, even if he's a complete SOB when he says it. Sometimes even my mother is right, even as she's in banshee mode or manipulating or lying about other things. It can gall the hell out of me to admit it, but that does not change a thing. When they're right, they're right. Just because they've hurt me doesn't mean "I'm never wrong, ergo, they are never right".
With that as a given, I cannot ask them to examine my feedback/themselves if I am not willing to examine theirs/myself...and I also can't
prove myself right if I have not done so, even if I feel sure that I am. I Voice is just as much about ownership of what is wrong, mistaken or lacking in us as it is about ownership of our needs, desires, rights and assets.
So - while I agree with Bunny that one can be pretty darn sure what they're dealing with without the professional diagnosis (although I'm sticking with my technical argument - agree to disagree?), and it can be really helpful to understand Narcissism or other disorders so one can make the best of the situation, I think habitual labeling limits not just the labelee, but us as well...by making us deaf to sometimes painful but important and helpful truths, surrounded as they may be by fog, evasion, distortions and even lies.
If we operate under the "Now We Are Six" assumption of Narcissism, that means we're missing out on some of the classic astute honesty that has become a maxim in our culture:
"From the Mouths of Babes".Thanks for the discussion. It is truly inspiring!
T
