Why Does He Do That? by Lundy Bancroft

I have been reading Why Does He DO That? Inside the Minds of Angry and Controlling Men by Lundy Bancroft, one of the world's foremost experts on domestic abuse, who worked 15 years with abusive men who run afoul of the legal system. I recommend it highly.

The one mention of narcissism, on p. 103, explains that the difference between any abusive man and a narcissist who abuses is a) an abusive man usually reserves his abuse for his partner while a narcissist's abuse carries over into situations that don't involve the partner; b) he (the narcissist) seems to relate everything back to himself; and c) he is outraged whenever anyone criticizes him and is incapable of considering that he could every be anything other than kind and generous. "This disorder is highly resistant to therapy and is not treatable with medication."

Lundy does point out that when pressed, abusive men will admit that their behaviors are abusive. You can't get that admission from a narcissist.

"This condition is highly compatible with abusiveness, though it is present in only a small percentage of abusive men," perhaps because narcissism is diagnosed in a very small number of people in the first place. Lundy's assertion that this condition is highly compatible with abusiveness bears out the  view that narcissists are abusers by another name, whether they realize what they are doing or not.

Lundy absolutely nails the behaviors, and gives insights into what works and what doesn't when dealing with the behaviors, and why.

He explains abuse this way: The term abuse is about power; it means that a person is taking advantage of a power imbalance to exploit or control someone else. The defining point of abuse is when the man starts to exercise power over the woman in a way that causes harm to her and creates a privileged status for him.

I was especially interested in the Why? of Why Does He DO That? 
On p. 152, Lundy describes the privileges of being an abuser:

1. The intrinsic satisfaction of power and control—a sensation that can create a potent, thrilling rush.
2. Getting his way, especially when it matters most. He rarely has to compromise, gets to do the things he enjoys, and skips the rest. He ends up with the benefits of being in an intimate relationship without the sacrifices that normally come with the territory.
3. Someone to take his problems out on.
4. Free labor from her; leisure and freedom for him. No abusive man does his share of the work in a relationship. On a deeper level the abuser seems to realize how hard his partner works, because he fights like hell not to have to share that burden.
5. Being the center of attention, with priority given to his needs.
6. Financial control.
7. Ensuring that his career, education, or other goals are prioritized
8. Public status of partner and/or father without the sacrifices
9. The approval of his friends and relatives
10. Double standards. An abusive man subtly or overtly imposes a system in which he is exempt from the rules and standards that he applies to you.

"Is it any wonder that abusive men are reluctant to change? If we want abusers to change, we will have to require them to give up the luxury of exploitation."

No Excuses Anymore

It has been 10 months since I posted about Sister Caretaker keeping Brother Twin away from FIL. Since that time, even when she took him away to live on the other side of the state for six months and there was no contact with us, he continued to feed his own agitated and endless rantings against DH (Dear Husband) that he has always been prone to, without provocation, to the extent that he spent sleepless nights and anxiety-ridden days because of it.

S.C. reports that FIL had been threatening to send my dear husband to jail for stealing from him, in order to provide me, his spendthrift wife, with the rich life to which I was accustomed before I married D.H. over 40 years ago. (My parents would both laugh at that.) He accosted the neighbor who leases our farm ground and told him he wants to see his own signature on the lease agreement. (The agreement wasn't with him.) D.H. informed the neighbor that FIL should talk instead to D.H. about it. FIL has not brought the subject up again.

I have long thought FIL had at least a series of strokes causing vascular dementia and diminishing cognition, if not old age dementia or Alzheimer's. The paranoia about others stealing from him is a common behavior of those with dementia. We once discussed having him evaluated to consider having him declared mentally incompetent, so he could not be taken advantage of by anyone, for example, asking for money. This would have meant a legal process. Just having him take the usual battery of tests would most likely reveal profound enough problems that any exploitation of him could be brought into question. Sister Caretaker set up an appointment for him when he returned home. Sister Twin was invited as well.

In taking the famous psychometric and cognitive clock-drawing screening test, he drew a clock with two numbers on one side and ten on the other. This was in addition to the oral questions and answers, which, S.C. reports, demonstrate beyond doubt that he is profoundly incompetent. S.C. now estimates his real age to be that of a three-year-old. She asked for, and they prescribed, both depression and anxiety medication for him. She has begun administering it, but it will take several weeks to see what effect it will have.

In the meantime, S.C. is finally refusing to listen to his non-stop ranting. For several years she would simply insert her earbuds and listen to music, watch a movie, or read a book while he shouted and paced in fury, his hands balled into fists of rage. But allowing it to go on unchecked has not helped, and may have added to his inability to control his emotions. Now she tells him whenever he starts that she will simply not listen to him berate her brother. He must stop. And in many instances, he does stop.