Celebrating Arrogance

After Aetherfest a few weeks back, I saw The Avengers, and it was all kinds of awesome.

I mean. OMG. WTF. FTW. Really.


Enough said.

So, okay. This post is about arrogance, not creative genius. Although they sometimes seem to go hand-in-hand.

Tony Stark (Iron Man), Sherlock Holmes, and James Bond come to mind.

Also, Hal Jordan (Green Lantern), more along the lines of just arrogant before being gifted the “will.” Barney Stinson from How I Met Your Mother, definitely makes that show what it is (or, at least, what it was before I stopped watching it).

The above examples of fictional characters aren’t only arrogant, they are also womanizers, playboys (i.e., players), with the exception of Sherlock Holmes who, according to the new BBC series, is a “high-functioning sociopath.”

In the film The Avengers, Tony Stark actually says as much. In response to Captain America who shouts, “Take away the suit, and what’s left?” Mr. Stark replies, rather arrogantly,

“Genius. Billionaire. Playboy. Philanthropist.”

The first two and the last, I’ll give him. But Playboy? How is Playboy on the same level as philanthropist?

Playboy in it’s original sense, okay: a man who has a lot of time and appreciates the pleasures of the world. But the connotation is most often a womanizer or player. A lothario, a man who obsessively seduces and deceives women.

Casual sex is fine. Promiscuity is fine.

Deceiving people to serve your own selfish needs. Not fine. Exploiting women, treating them like ejaculatory tools only to devalue and discard them. Not fine.

So why do we as a culture champion these men?

One friend suggested that arrogance is often mistaken for confidence. Granted, as I just recently realized that they are two very different things indeed. The truly confident have no need to deceive or play, they are secure in themselves without the need for external validation. The arrogant, however, demonstrates haughty over-confidence to cover up a crippling self-loathing. They treat others horribly to elevate themselves.

Tony Stark may have used the term playboy in it’s more original sense, but at the same time, Tony Stark is likely a pathological narcissist. At least a recovering pathological narcissist.

He describes himself as a man who “Doesn’t play well with others,” “a living legend who kind of lives up to the legend.”

His time as a prisoner of war likely helped jolt him out of his old ways. Perhaps we’re celebrating his reformation from arrogant asshole to arrogant superhero. Overcoming his own issues. All superheroes are tragic in one way or another. They are who they are because of their pain and their fear. They rise above those things and put others before themselves. They act despite of their fear, the very definition of courage.

Now Mr. Stark saves the world. He no longer uses women, as he is in a “stablish relationship” with Ms. Potts. He has grown as a character in many ways, yet he still has the arrogant “charm.” Habit, perhaps?

Let’s take Mr. Bond. Totally arrogant. Total womanizer. He risks his life for Queen and Country again and again. Does that excuse the way he treats women?

Sherlock Holmes, genius who solves murders, does that excuse the way he treats everyone?

Perhaps it does. Perhaps we excuse bad behavior to individuals for the greater good? But in real life, it seems more likely that we excuse bad behavior for those who are attractive. We reward those who are charming and fun, regardless of the damage left in their wakes.

Barney Stinson is an example of this. He’s handsome and charming. Rich. Funny. But he’s funny because he’s on TV. Would you really want Barney as a friend? A boyfriend? Still, he is who makes that show so great. Is it because he is such an honest character? Perhaps he shows us our own absurdity in celebrating the arrogant lothario as a culture.

The old cliche “The nice guy finishes last” comes to mind. And, in reality, they do. It’s a reality I have been loathe to accept. But it has become more and more undeniable as I progress through life and through love. Still, those arrogant, narcissists I’ve known might be handsome and charming and even successful with their work helping and/or inspiring others, but they leave a string of broken hearts in their wakes without remorse or looking back. Or maybe they do feel remorse and guilt, but they hide those as well as they hide their true selves.

It has started to become quite clear that these wo/men are quite miserable. Perhaps as tragic as those superhero characters, in a less larger-than-life way. They suffer inside. Full of pain and darkness and unable to express or fill such emptiness out of their fear. They, unlike superheroes, don’t face their fears. They don’t have courage. They are cowards and they hide behind their beautiful facades.

Just think how great these talented, inspiring wo/men could be if they found their courage. Then they would truly shine. Until then, they will continue to hurt themselves and others all while pretending not to care or notice.

But they do notice. They do care.

Each new broken spirit left behind for which they refuse responsibility creates a deeper chasm of pain, causes them to hide further behind their mask. More and more makeup is needed to cover the expanding cracks until they no longer even know who they are themselves. They have buried themselves so deep in their own darkness, so afraid of showing the world, and themselves, who they truly are that it becomes decreasingly possible to ever break free from it.

And this deeply saddens me. Because there are so many “nice guys” full of love and acceptance that would embrace them for who they are. Who would never ask them to edit themselves. Who would stand by them while they faced their deepest, darkest fears, loving and supporting them through it.

I’m one of those nice guys. All we ask for is love and respect in return. But that, it seems, is something they are unable or unwilling to give in their current state. Some find the courage to face their fears and invest in love, but those are few and far between.

People who can find the courage to face their fears, to be honest and open, to look within and work on their issues, to invest themselves in love…those are the real superheroes.

~ by omgrey on May 30, 2012.

24 Responses to “Celebrating Arrogance”

  1. I always got the sense that Tony Stark did the charming arrogance thing as a coping mechanism. Yes, he knows he’s awesome on a surface level, but he’s always been fundamentally isolated. First by his genius and wealth, then indifferent parents, then being sent off to MIT at 13 and stuff like that. He’s probably faced hostility and fear his whole life, on top of the gold-diggers and ladder-climbers. I could see teenage Stark developing the obnoxious charm as a shield to protect himself – the charm to make people like him and keep them from hurting him, the obnoxious to intimidate the people who don’t like him and keep them from hurting him.

    • You nearly perfectly described a narcissist. It’s a façade that covers up their real self. I can see what you’re trying to say about Stark, but arrogance is different than confidence.

      Likely Stark is unable to relate to others and vice versa because of his genius intellect and wealth, and perhaps his arrogance is a shield. I can see that.

      One could say the same about Barney Stinson, his arrogance and womanizing/lothario behavior is a defense mechanism to keep him from getting hurt…but in the process, he is hurting countless others.

      Stark doesn’t, but I think before he was a prisoner of war, he did. Always a little better-than everyone else. True, richer and smarter than most others, but that’s very different than being “better than” others.

      My point is that by idolizing such behavior, we as a culture perpetuate it in those who aren’t rich and/or geniuses, because we make it “cool” to be a lothario or a player.

      There is nothing cool about exploiting and hurting other people for one’s own selfish pleasures or egoic needs.

  2. Thanks for the article 😀 I’m just sort of skimming points here (i’m at work and should be, um, working) so I’ll try to make sense.

    Anyway, as much as it probably *does* go together usually, I don’t think that to be a “Playboy” necessarily goes hand-in-hand with deceipt of your chosen sexual target. At the same time, I don’t think that separating the two necessarily means that there isn’t exploitation going on there.

    I think it’s also worth pointing out that as much as it is now received knowledge that everyone is hiding some kind of emotional torment, I’m not sure it *has* to be true either. Sometimes, some people, can just enjoy themselves.

    There needs to be a lot of close examination of how we deal with peoples possible mindstates, and it needs to happen soon, because it’s going very wrong. Not all abnormal behaviour is a disease or syndrome that needs curing (E.G. I disagree that ADHD is a thing, in the English sense, but accept that it may be in a different cultural sense. A scary culture. One that pretends that differing from the expected or the norm needs to be cured *shivers*.).

    Not everyone has baggage. There is alot of indisciminate labelling going on, and I think it will begin to obfuscate the truth of other people so much soon that we won’t be able to make decisions on how to associate with people anymore.

    Also, Nice guys may finish last, but they finish in palaces made of marble, with adoring families and riches beyond the minds ability to compare. There’s a lot to be said for off-setting instant gratification.

    Rock On.

    • Agreed about the nice guys finishing with adoring families, etc. Brilliantly put.

      I find it naive to think that not everyone has baggage. Everyone does. From childhood, both family and peers, to past relationships. People van still have a great time and fun with their “baggage.”

      My point exactly about “abnormal behavior” – everything is being pathologized, and that is problematic on one end. On the other, however, it speaks to the degree of “issues” rather than single out those with diagnostic labels. As stated in my post on “The Problem with Self-Awareness,” just because someone doesn’t have a diagnostic label doesn’t mean they don’t struggle with issues. It means they haven’t been to a psychiatrist or counselor long enough to be labeled. Diagnostic labels are problematic, for they tend to stigmatize much more than they define or help.

      That said, those with severe and malignant narcissistic or psychopathic tendencies often never get labeled because they believe there is nothing “wrong” with them. They are the center of the universe. The rest of us are more like insects than equals.

      These people in particular are who I’m referencing when I talk about this subject. Predators and abusers. Emotional vampires and narcissists. Psychopaths.

      • I’m drawn to this;
        “just because someone doesn’t have a diagnostic label doesn’t mean they don’t struggle with issues. It means they haven’t been to a psychiatrist or counselor long enough to be labeled. ”

        Is that saying that labelling is an unnecessary side effect of too much time attending counselors or that only the requisite time attending a physician of this nature can uncover the true conditions? This may seem trivial but to me it’s a very distinct and important difference to me.

        and now, to redress the issue I mentioned earlier, I will read this fully, as i am not at work. Huzzah.

        Also, and this is a related but side-line question, may I ask your country of origin? sorry if that seems odd! 🙂

      • United States.

        Good question! Perhaps a little of both. A therapist/psychiatrist is necessary to diagnose and apply label, can’t be legally done without it. Issues certainly can be uncovered in therapy, but they can also be uncovered through self-exploration and introspection.

        My point is this: take two people who have similar issues, say two women (stereotypically) who have mood swings and is emotional.

        Woman A goes to a therapist/counselor & gets labeled with depression or bipolar. Perhaps she’s even medicated.

        Woman B doesn’t. She either doesn’t deal with them or try to control said emotions, or perhaps she deals with them naturally through diet & herbs.

        Both women have identical symptoms, identical life experiences.

        Woman A is stigmatized by society and unable to get health insurance due to a preexisting mental illness. Dates and friends shy away from her because they once knew a “bipolar” woman, even though each woman’s behavior was radically different.

        Woman B is just a woman. She sometimes cries. She’s sometimes happy. She may be known as “sensitive” or “intense,” but not “crazy.”

        Now take two stereotypical arrogant men who use and discard women without care or remorse. They lie and cheat and do/say whatever it takes to get their selfish needs met. They are each incapable of empathy. Same thing goes.

        One is just a player. Coveted and cool, by our society’s standards.

        The other is labeled a psychopath. A malignant narcissist.

        They’re both psychopaths by definition, but only one carries the label. In this case, the label could protect others, although it would also stigmatize the man in question.

      • Now I think we’re on the same page, good going, and thanks!

        The reason I ask your nationality is because I’m engaged in a private quest to understand what makes us (English) and you (you probably already know where you’re from) different. Sorry to Hijack this thread a little, but I feel an explanation is in order! Basically, I believe that too many people think that because you guys speak a form of english that essentially you are the same. I, on the other hand, think that a separate culture and nation is as foreign as any that doesn’t share a language. Just trying to understand clearly what those differences are so as to maybe promote understanding 😀

        Back to the article, yes, I gotcha. And as always, thanks for the view point.

        Take it easy!

      • I agree with you. Two *very* different cultures. Drastically so in many ways.

        No apology necessary. You didn’t hijack a thing. I love getting and responding to comments. 🙂

  3. i think you confuse arrogance with dickishness. Frankly, its a symptom of the sickness of our times- in order to succeed in our world today, we have to screw somebody over. Bill Gates today donates millions to charities, but he had to buy out hundreds of small businesses as Microsoft to get where he is. Sure, we give credit where credit is due to scientists, journalists, and thinkers everywhere, but compare the power dynamic here- the Nobel prize or the Pulitzer is a couple thousand bucks paid out to years, perhaps a lifetime of work. A power broker makes millions by screwing over a company just before it tanks. Think about that.

    • Well put.

      Although I’m not confusing arrogance with dickishness. They generally go hand-in-hand. Arrogance and confidence are not the same thing, however. Truly confident people do not have to be arrogant.

      I think that Stark is on the borderline between true confidence and arrogance. He’s confident in his abilities and intellect, but likely emotionally stunted because of those same things. He’s unable to relate to others, or they to him, and he’s smart enough to realize that. That’s a weakness, and he covers that up with arrogance.

  4. If the jester may speak; there is the nice guy, the young man with integrity and value who finds himself rejected for the bad-boy arrogant types. Generally speaking, this is more prevalent in teens and 20 somethings. What can we say of the women who decide to break the heart of a good boyfriend for an arrogant man?

    • That’s a great question. One I hear often.

      Likely the thing that’s “more attractive” about the bad-boy is the perceived confidence, which is, more likely, arrogance. More humble people, us “nice guys” generally have less outward-appearing confidence.

      The best thing you and everyone can do for women (& men) is to point them t this blog and others like it that outs predators and clearly explains the outcome. Learn the signs. Protect yourself & invite those women you care for to do the same.

      • I have found that if one balances confidence with humbleness, one may not attract what society may consider to be the most desirable people, but one attracts the right people nonetheless. When i was in high school, the “hottest girl in school” felt trapped in that role. She stopped wearing makeup, stopped trying to date the most popular guys and went for my friend who was intelligent, interesting, punk, understated, who liked himself and who was quietly confident. She was a much happier girl for leaving behind the social role thrust upon her by her peers. She was a bit of a hero in my eyes and I told her so.

        Yes, I agree that it would be helpful for people to keep track of your blog and others and other sources by which, as you say, to learn the signs. Yes, to perceive pattern as such is intelligence. Knowing what to do about the patterns is wisdom. When it comes to relationship issues, if you hear many cases you start to pick up on the signs and the patterns. At risk of sounding reductionist or mechanistic a lot of relationship dysfunction and sexual dysfunctions are predictable. There are radio shows, for example, in which dozens of cases are dealt with, albeit in oversimplification, but it allows one to see the pattern. The same goes for patterns of abuse and addiction, and how early conditioning strongly influences love relationships later in life and so on.

        So, thank you for discussing such issues in your blog. Knowledge is power.

      • Knowledge is, indeed, power.

        Again, it seems as if you’re using the word “confidence” interchangeably with “arrogance.” I think humility is a good blend even with confidence, but arrogance is something different altogether.

        Arrogance does not equal confidence. Arrogance covers up a severe lack of confidence and self-esteem. True confidence comes with humility.

        I love that story of the high school beauty queen. Perfect.

        Yes, most relationships are extremely dysfunctional. And a lot of issues are predictable. They are cliché, in fact. It doesn’t make any less painful for the person surviving them. You’re doesn’t make it any more recognizable when one is in it. Things are always much clearer from an objective standpoint. Which is why it is beneficial for people to listen to those they trust, like friends and family, when they say there is something wrong with their boyfriend or girlfriend. When they say they’re an asshole. When they say they’re not treating them well. Because they can see what we who are blinded by love cannot see.

  5. I can’t explain why people act they way they do as far as arrogance is concerned. Why I do know is the reason why “playboys” seem more attractive has been linked to biology. Right or wrong (and I think we need to try and rise above basic biology), there is a thought that the man that has taken the most women to his bed is the one that gets looked upon as the “hero” Now, this also happens with men that don’t act arrogant, but for some reason, those that do get more attention. Perhaps because they are louder.

    It doesn’t excuse their behavior, but it might explain why society has a tendency to celebrate these people. I’m sure if the quieter less jerky men made it known how many women they had sex with and how well they treated these women, we’d raise them up too. It’s kind of an insane concept. You’d think as a group we’d have grown above this…but it’s simply not true.

    • I’m not sure. If I hear a man has had, say, 100 lovers in a few years, I am less likely to sleep with him. I don’t view sex as a game, something to be played, or taken lightly. And if a man has had even 100 lovers in 15 years, that seems rather excessive for me.

      I think you’re correct in saying that it had something to do with biology. The more people I talk to, the more people I find that have suffered pretty much a lifetime of abuse. Mostly emotional or verbal abuse, but abuse nonetheless.

      We see the arrogance of confidence, something most people lack. All at once we want to be like them, be self-assured and successful, as they at least appear to be, and we also want to be with them. We want to be with them not only because of their outward beauty and confidence, but because we sense some underlying unresolved issue. It’s cliché, no doubt, but clichés become clichés for a reason.

      Most of our brain patterns were formed before we were even six years old. That means we were only making narrative memories for about two years. Most of what’s going on in our brains were patterned before we could even make memories. So we don’t remember any of it.

  6. I myself have been plagued by the “nice guys finish last” mentality. I’ve dated twenty somethings and women up into their early thirties and have to say it’s still prevalent no matter the age group. Some women want a man to sweep them off their feet and take care of them, but at the same time who poses no threat to them. That is to say he isn’t interested in helping them confront their inner demons but is simply good in bed and looks good naked.
    I myself have found myself in the “shoulder to cry on ” category way to often and if I try to move out of the friend zone into a relationship I more often than not get the response “I don’t want to lose you as a friend.” I suspect this comment comes from the idea that if I get into a relationship with them I will come to know more about them and may not like them anymore. I suspect they also may be unwilling to deal with some of the issues they have kept hidden from me and so this is why I hear these types of statements
    I rarely walk away from people unless they are completely self-absorbed (which has happened).
    It seems to me that “nice guys” offer a challenge many are not ready for. They will challenge preconceived notions you have about them and yourself but will also be there for you when you most need them. More often than not the “right guy” is a good friend who has stuck by their female friends through thick and thin, but women don’t want the nice guy, they want the bad boy who treats them like crap because they may feel inwardly that they don’t deserve any better. I have seen this time and again in my female friends and have experienced my own similar feelings when trying to approach women who are extraordinarily attractive. Of course it’s just outward packaging and really doesn’t reflect who they are personality wise but it seems to be something we’re all attracted to nonetheless. Men want beauty and women want confidence. Personality/values seem to take a back seat to these and seem somehow less desirable. That is until you’ve been burned a few times and you realize looks/words don’t mean much. How a person treats their you or their friends is what matters.
    For my part even though I consider myself a compassionate person I have been at times labeled an ass because I challenge people to be more than what they are. I also don’t stand idly by and let people walk all over me and am accused of being rude. I also don’t listen to idle gossip but will go to the source and confront the person about what they supposedly said/did. This is usually met with opposition and me being told I’m not their friend any longer. It bugs me how me standing up for myself or refusing to be a doormat is somehow bad, yet it happens more times than I like to think about. The bad boy doesn’t seem to care about any of this and just brushed those things off, which increases his appeal even more (oddly enough).
    I’ve had recent online friends who asked things of me (which I did) only to have them lie about it to others (or themselves) to keep from confronting a harsh truth about themselves or take responsibility for their own actions, then tell our mutual friends that I was mean to them, without giving me a chance to defend myself.

    I also see surprise on the faces of my female friends when a “bad boy” treats them the same as he treats everyone else (badly). I mean what did they think he was gonna do? It’s part of who he is that attracted the women to him in the first place and then they have the audacity to think they would be treated differently?

    It seems our society is geared towards the players (because he can’t help himself) and the bad boys (because he’s successful and confident) or the female model types (though they can be shallow). What’s even worse about this is the huge double standard I often see amongst my friends. For instance on my Facebook women will often complain about men who only see them as a “piece of meat” or want to go out with them because of how they look and not five minutes later will post a picture of some hot looking guy and proceed to drool all over him and discuss all the things they would do (sexually) to this unknown person.

    Our society seems to idolize outwards appearances rather than inward qualities and it’s this standard that very often causes broken hearts.
    Some “nice guys” also suffer from the “Knight in Shining Armor” syndrome in that they see a woman in distress (bad marriage, having financial difficulties, etc) and want to “rescue” them, but without stopping to consider how the person in question got into this mess in the first place. Did they make bad decisions, are they immature, self-absorbed? I’ll give an example and let you make up your own minds.

    I knew a female on Facebook who is Poly. She’s married (her husband isn’t Poly) and her marriage isn’t doing too well. She is in a Triad and constantly seeking more playmates, yet feels smothered by her husband (who rarely sees her) and wants to be alone most times when she’s at home. She insists that she will do as she pleases, yet admits that if he were to leave her, she could not make it financially on her own (she has a 5 year old child from a previous relationship). I never gave her much advice on her situation because frankly I knew it wouldn’t be welcome. I realized she is totally self-absorbed and is a taker (not much of a giver unless he benefits) and often gets depressed/angry when people don’t immediately react to her text messages or invitation for sex.

    Everything is on her terms and if you have an opinion it’s best to keep it to yourself (I learned the hard way on this one). I foresee her marriage ending in the next year if she doesn’t work on her home life (her husband is also the primary financial support).

    To me she is the epitome of a “bad girl” in that other’s feelings.wants/needs/desires take a back seat to her own yet on Facebook and other sites she is seen as such a wonderful person that everyone wants to know intimately.

    What do you think?

    • Medewty, you’d be surprised how long such an unfair, unhappy arrangement can last. Aside from the child, my brother has been in a situation similar to your description for 20+ yrs now and shows no sign of picking up his battered white armor and leaving the dragon he mistook for a damsel. I don’t think he ever will.

    • Your friend doesn’t sound poly to me. She sounds selfish and cruel. But then everyone, I suppose, has a different definition of polyamory. I go through my definition of polyamory in my earlier blog posts, but it really centers around open and honest communication, as well as integrity.

      I’ve met more people than I care to admit who call themselves Poly, but who are far, far from honest or open and have little to no integrity. So very many people refuse to take responsibility for themselves, let alone their part in a relationship.

      Your friend almost sounds narcissistic. I wouldn’t be surprised.

      As far as for looking good naked, anyone can look good naked with a little self-discipline and exercise.

      And I think you’re right, many people aren’t ready to look inward at their own demons & at their own issues. They would rather live in denial and create more pain for those with whom they interact.

  7. Oh, sweetheart, you’re talking about sociopaths as though they were human. They are not. They lack the fundamental brain structures that you or I possess and are incapable of empathy or of recognizing others as feeling beings with their own thoughts and wants. To a narcissist. You are a thing. Like a wallet or a vehicle or a piece of jewelry. You only have value when you’re useful or make them look good. In the same way you’d get rid of a car with a bad oil leak or a dress with a stain, the sociopath gets rid of his or her victims. They will not learn or grow because they’re biologically incapable. However they might get better at faking as time passes. The more effective the camouflage the more effective the predator.

    • You are absolutely right. That’s the second time in a day that someone told me I was looking at them as if they were human. That I needed to stop relating to them as if they were human. Because they are not human. They are soulless. You’re absolutely right.

      As someone with such a deep capacity for love and empathy, it’s beyond my understanding how anyone can be incapable of empathy. I mean, I intellectually know they are, but it would be like trying to convince me that they saw the sky as orange, not blue. It’d just a completely different reality.

      My husband has told me for weeks now that the auctioneer is not human, and it was confirmed by a friend of mine who met him last weekend. Empty, my empathic friend said. He was completely empty.

      I’m empathic, too, but I have yet to learn to use or trust my empath on that level. I must do so for my own sanity. I can take on other people’s pain or joy, unconsciously, since I have yet to discern where I end and they begin. And I certainly cannot *feel* another person like my friend can.

      You’re absolutely right. He is not human. He is not human. He is not human.

      He is a monster.

      One day, I will believe that. I will know that. And my love and compassion will turn to pity.

  8. […] of late, I’ve written extensively on the psychosis of  psychopaths and sociopaths. Horrifying people in reality, but they do make the most deliciously debaucherous […]

  9. […] Celebrating Arrogance […]

  10. I beg to differ. Tony Stark is not a pathological narcissist. I would argue that he is not a narcissist at all. He has several qualities that differentiate him from a narcissist.

    First off, Tony doesn’t deceive others to get what he wants. Obadiah Stain does that. Tony goes for what he wants, and his desires are often pretty shallow, but he doesn’t lie about it. If asked, he will tell you up front what his intentions are. He is confident in his abilities, he knows his reputation, and he expects that if someone comes into his circle of influence, they know what he is like. He feels no remorse about sleeping with the reporter because he figures that she knew what she was getting into.

    While he may be honest about it, that doesn’t make Stark’s treatment of women acceptable. He is a user, and his behavior is often reprehensible, but he doesn’t pretend to be something he is not.

    Stark also doesn’t blame others for his failures. When he screws up, he doesn’t blame someone else. He looks at the problem and fixes it.

    Stark also has real empathy. He really does care about Pepper Pots. He really does care about the way his weapons are used. He doesn’t want to be responsible, even indirectly, for innocents being hurt.

    Tony Stark is confident. Even overconfident. But he measures himself by high technical standards and low moral standards. The man is an ass, but he is not a bad person at heart. This is the quality that makes him a hero.

    Now Barney Stinson, that is a pathological narcissist. He really does lie and deceive to get what he wants with no thought to how his behavior effects others.


Please Share Your Thoughts...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: